NDB entry?

Seems like it's indicating a PT at the north end of the chart there. I'd turn outbound at the NDB and fly the PT to get back inbound and descend to 4400 if I was doing this no-radar, though exactly what you're describing would probably end up pretty sloppy if I tried to execute it myself using basic instruments and ADF alone.
 
Cal Goat said:
Seems like it's indicating a PT at the north end of the chart there. I'd turn outbound at the NDB and fly the PT to get back inbound and descend to 4400 if I was doing this no-radar, though exactly what you're describing would probably end up pretty sloppy if I tried to execute it myself using basic instruments and ADF alone.
Click to expand...

that's what I mean. if I come from the East side, by the time I realize I passed the NDB (assuming no gps or anything else) my turn northbound would have me pretty far off course. This is how we executed it but when we did I couldn't help but think we were doing something wrong.

At least coming from the East you overshoot into the protected side (the side the PT goes)

What about coming from the west, what would be the procedure there?
 
The PT is a plain vanilla barbed PT to the north. So 260° to the NDB and then outbound 347° for the PT to reverse course. I'm not sure what you mean by a hold (the only holding pattern on the chart is the missed approach hold to the south of the airport) but assuming Canadian rules on PTs are the same as US (probably are on this point), so long as you stay on the protected side, the form of course reversal is up to you.
 
I don't know, I wouldn't even attempt it in a non-radar environment unless my life depended on it. If we're talking strictly NDBs only, I'd try to get a cross radial fix from another nearby NDB (or VOR?) to figure when I'm about hit the NDB.
 
elmetal said:
that's what I mean. if I come from the East side, by the time I realize I passed the NDB (assuming no gps or anything else) my turn northbound would have me pretty far off course. This is how we executed it but when we did I couldn't help but think we were doing something wrong.

At least coming from the East you overshoot into the protected side (the side the PT goes)

What about coming from the west, what would be the procedure there?
Click to expand...

The same. It's a fairly standard NDB approach set up like hundreds in the US (before they star disappearing altogether). There's more than enough protected airspace for the NDB needle to swing and then make the turn to intercept the outbound leg of the PT.
 
rframe said:
Fly to NDB, turn right to about 017 to intercept 347 bearing outbound, you can descent to 4400 outbound too once on the bearing... no need to wait for the PT back inbound.

Basically the same as a vanilla VOR-A with the navaid away from the field. (like this http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1308/00235VA.PDF)
Click to expand...

But you can fly the PT anywhere within the 10 miles, it's not like it's taking you way out of the way or adding much more time or complexity to the procedure. There are a lot of variables you could plug into the equation, but if I were flying my old Navajo freighter in solid IMC, I think I might opt for the PT just to give myself a tad bit more time to get stabilized on the inbound course. Alternatively, I suppose you could just request longer legs in the hold.
 
Cal Goat said:
But you can fly the PT anywhere within the 10 miles, it's not like it's taking you way out of the way or adding much more time or complexity to the procedure. There are a lot of variables you could plug into the equation, but if I were flying my old Navajo freighter in solid IMC, I think I might opt for the PT just to give myself a tad bit more time to get stabilized on the inbound course. Alternatively, I suppose you could just request longer legs in the hold.
Click to expand...

yeah, at the end of the PT (turning back inbound) we were about 9nm from the NDB so it gave us plenty of time to get setup.
 
elmetal said:
yeah, at the end of the PT (turning back inbound) we were about 9nm from the NDB so it gave us plenty of time to get setup.
Click to expand...


If you're flying it in a 172 and only need to lose minimal altitude to descend to 4400 (or whatever it was), then yeah, you could drop it and configure in one turn of the hold. But some airplanes are more of a hassle to slow down and configure and so taking the extra minute or 3 to fly a procedure turn can really stabilize the whole event.

BTW, this whole thread makes me believe how valuable a handheld GPS device can be for scenarios just like this. How far am I from the NDB? I'm THIS far.
 
Cal Goat said:
BTW, this whole thread makes me believe how valuable a handheld GPS device can be for scenarios just like this. How far am I from the NDB? I'm THIS far.
Click to expand...

exactly!

We were in an Aztec but since it was a practice (VFR) approach we were already at 4400 coming in so it was no big deal with the altitude.

I had the GPS on to monitor distance from NDB and it makes everything so much easier.
 
Cal Goat said:
Ancient navigation devices that freight pilots pretend to love in order to seem more macho.
Click to expand...

Evil devices they (NDBs) are. My only failed checkride is a result of a botched partial panel NDB approach.

Away with them all I say!
 
Apophis said:
Evil devices they (NDBs) are. My only failed checkride is a result of a botched partial panel NDB approach.

Away with them all I say!
Click to expand...


I haven't flown one in reality or practice since my IFR checkride. Although I passed, as we were flying the approach, the examiner asked me "Are you flying an NDB approach?"
Me: "Yeah."
Him: "Shouldn't you be listening to the ID?"
Me: "Uh, oh yeah!" :confused:
 
Cal Goat said:
I haven't flown one in reality or practice since my IFR checkride. Although I passed, as we were flying the approach, the examiner asked me "Are you flying an NDB approach?"
Me: "Yeah."
Him: "Shouldn't you be listening to the ID?"
Me: "Uh, oh yeah!" :confused:
Click to expand...

You flew at AMF right? We had a few routes with airports that were NDB or GPS, and only like 30% of the airplanes had gps.
 
Apophis said:
Evil devices they (NDBs) are. My only failed checkride is a result of a botched partial panel NDB approach.
Click to expand...

Me too! :)

I still kinda like NDB's for their raw simplicity though, I dunno... Something about an AM radio antenna stuck in the ground and a pointer in the cockpit that just seems good to me.
 
z987k said:
You flew at AMF right? We had a few routes with airports that were NDB or GPS, and only like 30% of the airplanes had gps.
Click to expand...


Yep. But they didn't even train us to fly NDB approaches in the sim when I went through which was odd because I ended up flying into Yreka/Siskyou many times and that occasionally required flying an NDB/GPS approach http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1308/00882NGA.PDF (also funny because we were required to have a GPS approach sign off before we could fly said approach, but nobody ever bothered to finish my training for that). Fortunately, I never had to use that approach to get into either airport.

Interestingly, it appears the Montague NDB is still in commission. I'm actually quite shocked to see that.
 
AMF202 was not for the faint hearted in the winter, I almost miss it lol. Too bad the current company doesn't allow NDB approaches per OpSpecs.

It was working as of a couple months ago. We picked up Steven Seagal in KSIY and the NDB was working like a champ, it was VFR though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top