Hi,

It seems that the VOR and ADF pointers are not visible when the navigation display is in Approach mode on the 747/400.
Is that true?

This seems a bit strange, but is there a reason for this?

Thanks in advance for your input.

Olivier

Quoting Oli (Thread starter): It seems that the VOR and ADF pointers are not visible when the navigation display is in Approach mode on the 747/400. Is that true?

They are pilot selectable....and you can only select the one on each side, you don't have the ability to look at all 4 needles on one ND. However, that raises the question, do you even need them????










Everyplace I've flown the 400, you don't need to see them, especially if you have GPS updating.

Quoting mmo (Reply 1): However, that raises the question, do you even need them????

With GPS/RNAV I'm not sure of any approach I can think of where you would need to have the NDB tuned in. I remember there was some debate amongst instructors 10+ years ago whether we could use a GPS in lieu of "ADF REQUIRED." (I was always in favor since the advent of WAAS etc.)


Now I wonder this. If you are flying an RNAV approach, can you also tune in the ILS? We had a Polar 744 (no other type/carrier combo had this issue) come in a couple times over the past week that had issues picking up the ILS so they elected to shoot the RNAV instead. The other 4 or 5 aircraft on final were tracking the ILS (including another 744).

Quoting atct (Reply 2): can you also tune in the ILS?

Again, why would you want to? I don't think you can because you would have to hit the ILS button (arm the approach) which would take it out or RNAV/VNAV

Quoting mmo (Reply 3): Again, why would you want to? I don't think you can because you would have to hit the ILS button (arm the approach) which would take it out or RNAV/VNAV

Not true, you could still tune the ILS and have the PFD show the diamonds without arming the approach mode and slaving the FD to the ILS. It's just for added guidance, as long as you still fly it like an RNAV approach with the proper DH/MDA.

Quoting bueb0g (Reply 4): It's just for added guidance, as long as you still fly it like an RNAV approach with the proper DH/MDA.

Why would you want the additional guidance? As long as it's on the magenta line you are where you should be. Also, the vertical guidance might not match up with the g/s transmitter. It's been about 5 years since I've flown the 400....things are somewhat foggy....

Quoting mmo (Reply 5): Why would you want the additional guidance? As long as it's on the magenta line you are where you should be.

Well it's obviously not necessary but I know pilots who prefer to have a backup. Just like the way you do a DME check during a low viz ILS approach to make sure that your indications are indeed accurate, you may well want to have tuned the ILS to assure the accuracy of your GPS navigation. Just because you're on the megenta line doesn't mean you're necessarily on course, it just means the a/c thinks you are. However, if the ILS were active and usable I'd expect any crew would default to using that rather than flying a GPS approach.

Quoting mmo (Reply 5): Also, the vertical guidance might not match up with the g/s transmitter.

The G/S should be more accurate than the aircraft's internal/GPS vertical guidance anyway so you might want a backup, esp if there's high ground and low viz. Of course again, in that situation, it makes much more sense to fly an ILS approach and use GPS guidance and DME checks as the backup...

But still, the point remains that you can have a GPS approach with the ILS diamonds on the PFD. Personally, I know pilots who when practicing visual or raw data approaches and thus have their ILS indications and FD turned off, will have the other pilot's PFD turned into the ILS and have the diamonds showing, so the PM can more effectively monitor the flightpath and make sure the PF, who is flying a visual approach, doesn't get too far off the preferred centreline and GS.

Quoting mmo (Reply 1): However, that raises the question, do you even need them????

There are still quite a few ILS approaches on which the fix (es) are VOR orADF-based... and the missed approach trajectory is in many airports based on beacons or VORs
So yes, one needs them.

Quoting bueb0g (Reply 4): ot true, you could still tune the ILS and have the PFD show the diamonds without arming the approach mode and slaving the FD to the ILS. It's just for added guidance, as long as you still fly it like an RNAV approach with the proper DH/MDA.

  

Quoting mmo (Reply 1): Everyplace I've flown the 400, you don't need to see them, especially if you have GPS updating.

You're a very trusty man.

Quoting bueb0g (Reply 6): Just because you're on the megenta line doesn't mean you're necessarily on course, it just means the a/c thinks you are.

Actually, if you have GPS updating, you will be right where you are supposed to be (Excluding non WGS-84 areas).

Quoting bueb0g (Reply 6): However, if the ILS were active and usable I'd expect any crew would default to using that rather than flying a GPS approach.

I agree 1000% and would not even hesitate to do the ILS especially if the weather were close to minimums.....that's a "no brainer".

Quoting bueb0g (Reply 6): The G/S should be more accurate than the aircraft's internal/GPS vertical guidance anyway so you might want a backup, esp if there's high ground and low viz.

I don't know about but I am doing a missed approach. If you are cleared for a RNAV approach and lose the vertical guidance I'm not going to even think about trying to get the G/S from the ILS.....you have not been cleared for that approach. You have no option but to do a missed.

Quoting bueb0g (Reply 6): Personally, I know pilots who when practicing visual or raw data approaches and thus have their ILS indications and FD turned off, will have the other pilot's PFD turned into the ILS and have the diamonds showing, so the PM can more effectively monitor the flightpath and make sure the PF, who is flying a visual approach, doesn't get too far off the preferred centreline and GS.

That's a very different story. If you are doing visual approaches your options are wide open. That is not what is being discussed. Perhaps you could tell me how you do a raw data with the ILS data turned off?????

Quoting Pihero (Reply 7): There are still quite a few ILS approaches on which the fix (es) are VOR orADF-based... and the missed approach trajectory is in many airports based on beacons or VORs So yes, one needs them.

I understand what you are saying, however, technically, that is incorrect, assuming you have GPS updating. With GPS updating, the fix is generated on the screen at the exact position it is on the ground. In fact, I worked for an all 320 operator who did not have ADF receivers installed...we did NDB approaches with an overlay. The current 777/787 I fly do not have ADFs installed. We go all over the world using GPS updating on the IRS. It's like hard tuning nav-aids on departure "in case you need them". The Boeing and IIRC Airbus will auto tune them in the order they are needed...so no need to tune them. In fact, if you read the FCOM and FCTM it is specifically pointed out NOT to manually tune them! If you lose your IRS/GPS/DME/DME updating you have more pressing things to worry about than the navaids...you always have a vector. If you are "old school" like I am, it takes quite a bit to get your head around the concept.... I can assure you it is very valid.

I suppose if Airbus has no verbage concerning navaid selection, then it falls into the "technique" category.

[Edited 2014-12-01 06:44:17]

Quoting mmo (Reply 8): I don't know about but I am doing a missed approach. If you are cleared for a RNAV approach and lose the vertical guidance I'm not going to even think about trying to get the G/S from the ILS.....you have not been cleared for that approach. You have no option but to do a missed.

The point I was making was you can check your vertical profile against the ILS G/S to make sure there is no significant error in your glidepath, not that you should revert to using your backup if the primary fails. So actually we are making the same point. If there is a significant divergence between your VNAV vertical guidance and the ILS G/S, then something is wrong and you should go around. Rather like flying an ILS approach, doing a DME check, finding something doesn't match and going around.

Quoting mmo (Reply 8): That's a very different story. If you are doing visual approaches your options are wide open. That is not what is being discussed.

It was just an example of having certain aspects of your displays set up for an approach you're not technically conducting but using it as a backup/check, i.e having your ILS tuned even while doing an RNAV or visual approach.

Quoting mmo (Reply 8): Perhaps you could tell me how you do a raw data with the ILS data turned off?????

Sorry for not being clear. I meant doing a visual approach with the other pilot's ILS data turned on, or a raw data approach with the other pilot's FD turned on. Both examples of being fed data for an approach you're not actually flying, but having it there as a backup/error check.

Quoting bueb0g (Reply 9): The point I was making was you can check your vertical profile against the ILS G/S to make sure there is no significant error in your glidepath, not that you should revert to using your backup if the primary fails. So actually we are making the same point.

I know what you meant, however, I don't think you know what I am getting at. The RNAV approach (LNAV/VNAV or Managed/Selected in Airbus world) should be able to fly as published. The vertical profile is part of profile and as such the system will self check the inputs in order to be in tolerance for the approach. If you can fly the profile, then fine...the RNAV approach is going fine. Otherwise, you execute a missed approach. Having more information on the PFD is not always a good thing. I have seen pilots, mainly inexperienced, just totally get themselves into a hole because they had information they didn't know how to interpret. I guess, I subscribe to the fact, you can fly a RNAV approach into a field where that is the only approach. What do you do then????

If you are that concerned then use the most precise approach that is available...

Again, I am just giving you my opinion based on my experience...I don't think there is any right or wrong answer...

Quoting bueb0g (Reply 6): The G/S should be more accurate than the aircraft's internal/GPS vertical guidance anyway

I actually think it's the other way around.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 7): ADF-based...

Quoting mmo (Reply 8): we did NDB approaches with an overlay.

He answered what I was thinking. I know at ExpressJet they had to do a GPS overlay of the NDB Approach.

Quoting mmo (Reply 8): You have no option but to do a missed.

I agree. Can someone say Korean Air 801? "Oh hey, look, a glideslope"..I'm paraphrasing but you get the idea.

[Edited 2014-12-01 23:08:13]

Quoting atct (Reply 11): Quoting bueb0g (Reply 6): The G/S should be more accurate than the aircraft's internal/GPS vertical guidance anyway I actually think it's the other way around.

No, it's not. Just compare the landing minima at your airport. The GPS-based ones are not very different from a VOR minimum.

Quoting bueb0g (Reply 6): Just because you're on the megenta line doesn't mean you're necessarily on course, it just means the a/c thinks you are. However, if the ILS were active and usable I'd expect any crew would default to using that rather than flying a GPS approach.

That's general SOPs on most airlines, yes.

Quoting mmo (Reply 8): I understand what you are saying, however, technically, that is incorrect, assuming you have GPS updating. With GPS updating, the fix is generated on the screen at the exact position it is on the ground.

I'd really like to see YOUR SZOPs in this matter.
Thjere is a general appreciation (!!) of the " Children of the Magenta Line " and it's certainly not very complimentary... they end generally in the chief pilot or the senior training captain's office.

Quoting mmo (Reply 8): I worked for an all 320 operator who did not have ADF receivers installed...we did NDB approaches with an overla

That's not possible, legally or operationally.
On 'buses, an ADF let-down becomes a "selected" RNAV approach, buit with the ADF tuned-in and the needle(s) apparent... Any deviation of more than 5 degrees... go around.
And if the airport has an official NDB approach for that runway, the overlay method is forbiidden.
I have never heard of aircraft being sold without ADFs installed. removing them seems an awful lot of impossibility.

Quoting mmo (Reply 8): If you lose your IRS/GPS/DME/DME updating you have more pressing things to worry about than the navaids..

Like what ?

Quoting mmo (Reply 8): .you always have a vector.

In the middle of an ocean you don't, and on quite a few secondary airports, there is no radar control, let alone guidance.

Quoting atct (Reply 11): I know at ExpressJet they had to do a GPS overlay of the NDB Approach.

With the limitations above.

Quoting mmo (Reply 10): Having more information on the PFD is not always a good thing. I have seen pilots, mainly inexperienced, just totally get themselves into a hole because they had information they didn't know how to interpret. I guess,

The problem is that the crew should have made the choice before initiating the approach : the approach fix is on - say - ADF1... etc... the missed approach on VOR2... etc... Where is the excessive info ? Just airmanship and SOPs.

Quoting mmo (Reply 10): I subscribe to the fact, you can fly a RNAV approach into a field where that is the only approach. What do you do then????

I do not know of one single airport like that. Not one.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 12): In the middle of an ocean you don't, and on quite a few secondary airports, there is no radar control, let alone guidance.

In the middle of the ocean, if you have VOR or ADF tuned in it will do nothing but display dashes.....there are no stations within range. I have flown into quite a few primary airports where there is no radar and believe me in a thunderstorm, the ADF is worthless, I'd rather have the GPS updating as it is much more reliable and accurate.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 12): Quoting mmo (Reply 10): I subscribe to the fact, you can fly a RNAV approach into a field where that is the only approach. What do you do then???? I do not know of one single airport like that. Not one.

And there is not the possibility that a VOR only station could suffer the failure of a VOR?

Quoting Pihero (Reply 12): I'd really like to see YOUR SZOPs in this matter. Thjere is a general appreciation (!!) of the " Children of the Magenta Line " and it's certainly not very complimentary... they end generally in the chief pilot or the senior training captain's office.

While I understand what you are saying, you still have to have situational awareness. Again, having the pointers point to/from the navaid is fine, for me personally, I'd rather have it displayed on the ND. If it's on the ND with GPS updating, I know for a fact the station is exactly where it is shown.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 12): That's not possible, legally or operationally. On 'buses, an ADF let-down becomes a "selected" RNAV approach, buit with the ADF tuned-in and the needle(s) apparent... Any deviation of more than 5 degrees... go around.

Again, I am familiar with the selected/selected-managed/managed and so on. However, if you have ever flown an NDB approach in Africa with thunderstorms and adhered to the 5degrees....you would never get in! The GPS updating and using an overlay takes all of that out.
You will get a message if the GPS update is bad, so, for me, I'd rather rely on the GPS updating rather then the bearing pointer swing 20L/R in a thunderstorm.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 12): I have never heard of aircraft being sold without ADFs installed. removing them seems an awful lot of impossibility.

I can name quite a few low cost carriers who do not take the ADF.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 12): That's not possible, legally or operationally.

Perhaps in the world you operate in. However, the FAA deems it's legal, several mid-east CAAs have allowed, the CAAS has made it legal. In fact, the US is in the process of decommissioning all ADFs.....that's how reliable they are for approaches.


I would say to look at the Airbus FCOM or the instructor's handbook about hard tuning nav-aids on a published departure or arrival...the same on a missed....

Are you real ?

Quoting mmo (Reply 13): do not know of one single airport like that. Not one. And there is not the possibility that a VOR only station could suffer the failure of a VOR?

Yes, in this case tell me: What will you do, then ?
Imagine an all-new RNAV approach ?
(See the chief pilot again )

Quoting mmo (Reply 13): I can name quite a few low cost carriers who do not take the ADF.

Please do and prove it.

Quoting mmo (Reply 13): the FAA deems it's legal, several mid-east CAAs have allowed, the CAAS has made it legal. In fact, the US is in the process of decommissioning all ADFs.....that's how reliable they are for approaches.

Apparently, Dubai is not one of them and neither is Bahrain, AFAIK.

Quoting mmo (Reply 13): would say to look at the Airbus FCOM or the instructor's handbook about hard tuning nav-aids on a published departure or arrival...the same on a missed....

Yes. Show it to me, as my FCOM, FCTM precisely write :
On a non-(precision approach ..... "Force Nav aid tuning"

Most GNSS approaches have a mandatory limitation : " VOR / DME required"

You know what ?
I think you should go back to your books and review the limitations of a GPS-based NAV equipment... and the SOPs to its utilisation.
In the mean time, I will not fly the airline of the country you wear the flag of in your profile : It is unsafe.

Quoting mmo (Reply 13): Again, I am familiar with the selected/selected-managed/managed and so on.

There are no such things as *selected-selected* or *managed-managed* and there is no *and so on*.
It's either *selected* or it's *managed*... Period...
Another misunderstood course ?

I do think it's pretty funny you chose to only answer some of my points....But, whatever, I'll give it a go.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 14): Another misunderstood course ?

Let's see it's been just about 13 years since I was in an Airbus. And I have ram dumped most of the Airbus stuff as it is tends to be counter intuitive. rdon me for not having the same excellent memory that apparently you do.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 14): Most GNSS approaches have a mandatory limitation : " VOR / DME required"

Now we are talking something different. That was not what the original discussion was about.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 14): Quoting mmo (Reply 13): do not know of one single airport like that. Not one. And there is not the possibility that a VOR only station could suffer the failure of a VOR? Yes, in this case tell me: What will you do, then ? Imagine an all-new RNAV approach ? (See the chief pilot again )

You do realize you cut and pasted some of your own response into your reply, making is appear as if I wrote that. You made an all encompassing statement to the effect there is not one single airport where there is only a GPS approach. I learned a long time ago, never to make all encompassing statements such as ALL, EVERY....I am sure if I had enough time I could find an airport somewhere. But in actual practice, most airports that have commercial operations will have approaches that offer much lower minimums than a GPS approach. Your statement was somewhat meaningless and a good "red herring".

Quoting Pihero (Reply 14): Apparently, Dubai is not one of them and neither is Bahrain, AFAIK

In reviewing my posting, I never did say they were......

Quoting Pihero (Reply 14): You know what ? I think you should go back to your books and review the limitations of a GPS-based NAV equipment... and the SOPs to its utilisation. In the mean time, I will not fly the airline of the country you wear the flag of in your profile : It is unsafe.

Here is a little something for you to digest:

During non-localizer based approaches where the FMC is used for course or path tracking (VOR, TACAN, NDB, RNAV, GPS etc.), monitoring raw data is recommended, if available. Although continuous monitoring of raw data during approaches is not required, ground based navigation aid(s) should be checked for correct navigation no later than final approach.

During single FMC, or single DME or single GPS operation, in the event thesingle operational FMC, DME, or GPS fails during the FMC approach, there must be a non-FMC means of navigation available for a missed approach such as VOR/NDB raw data and/or radar, and there must be a non - FMC approach available. Failure of the remaining single DME need not be considered if GPS updating is being used.

And a further reinforcement on what I said....note the emphasis on "procedure tuning".

The preferred method for VOR or localizer tuning and final approach course selection is procedure tuning. This can be confirmed by observing the displayed frequency, identifier and course on the PFD or ND. The VOR automatically tunes for a VOR approach after passing the first waypoint on the approach procedure. Automatic procedure tuning also reduces crew workload in the terminal area by automatically tuning the missed approach VOR if a different one is required and aids the crew by reducing heads down time when last minute approach and/or runway changes are required.

Sorry, but I will not respond to your final statement (read dig). I could certainly have fun if I wanted to. Again, I'm still waiting for the response about flying across the pond and having your VOR/ADF displayed, or the NDB approach in a thunderstorm with /- 5 degrees on the bearing pointer....It's sure goin

[Edited 2014-12-02 12:32:47]

[Edited 2014-12-02 12:33:25]

Quoting Pihero (Reply 12): I have never heard of aircraft being sold without ADFs installed.

mmo is correct in this regard.

Not sure about Airbus but it is possible to buy a Boeing aircraft without ADFs and it has been the case for at least 5 years.

A friend operates a 737BBJ without ADFs in Saudi.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 12): The GPS-based ones are not very different from a VOR minimum.

Actually we have LPV approaches that are, in some cases, lower than Cat I ILS's. The major physical difference between a Cat I and Cat II / III ILS is the backup equipment. Back-up Generator's for the transmitters, lights, etc. There may be some other differences but in reality is the "back-up" or "what if" is what makes a Cat II / III ILS. (this is on the physical, not training side) LPV, I have heard, from some FAA engineers, as well as demonstrated in the airplane, is just as, if not more, accurate than a standard ILS signal. The ILS signal can be compromised (or changed) by things like tide, changes in magnetic fields, etc.

Quoting mmo (Reply 15): . Again, I'm still waiting for the response about flying across the pond and having your VOR/ADF displayed, or the NDB approach in a thunderstorm with /- 5 degrees on the bearing pointer....It's sure goin

1/- if chips are really down, you can have your ADF tuned to a radio station... long range. ( but see point 3 below... )

2/- ADF approach in a thunderstorm ?

2.1/ - You shouldn't be there ... Wait or divert.
2.2 /- You have absolutely no right to build your own RNAV approach . That's about the maximum violation you could do.
As I said you are unsafe !

3/- the above was about your statement : " If you lose your IRS/GPS/DME/DME updating you have more pressing things to worry about than the navaids...you always have a vector."
To which I replied :"like what ?",; especially in the middle of an ocean. What pressing things woulod hit you then ?
No response, although it is quite a straightforward procedure ( I thought so ). You still have your FMC / IRS navigation available. ( What would be the limitations on your RNP in this case, btw ? )

Quoting mmo (Reply 15): Quoting Pihero (Reply 14): Another misunderstood course ? Let's see it's been just about 13 years since I was in an Airbus. And I have ram dumped most of the Airbus stuff as it is tends to be counter intuitive. rdon me for not having the same excellent memory that apparently you do.

The usual excuse. If you have forgotten or you don't know, you don't write about it. you don't play guru.
Basic intellectual honesty.

Quoting ChaosTheory (Reply 16): A friend operates a 737BBJ without ADFs in Saudi.

It - he - operates under different regs. Show me an airliner without ADF / ADF switching / ADF tuning. ( I looked on a few cockpit pics and have found not one case).
I also have a few of these Gulf airlines FCTM. They all have a chapter on non-ILS approaches, including VOR and NDB ones.

Quoting mmo (Reply 15): You made an all encompassing statement to the effect there is not one single airport where there is only a GPS approach. I learned a long time ago, never to make all encompassing statements such as ALL, EVERY....I am sure if I had enough time I could find an airport somewhere. But in actual practice, most airports that have commercial operations will have approaches that offer much lower minimums than a GPS approach.

Then show me that lonesome approach plate... ( Btw that's an encompassing statement you made )
As for approaches that offer lower - much lower minimums - than a GPS approach - let's call it by its real name of GNSS - they include VOR/D or VOR only approaches : as soon as there is some relief, the MDAs go up tremendously.
See in this instance NCE where the GNSS approach has a minimum of 2000 ft whereas the Vor/D has a 600 ft MDA.
That should tell you that GPS is certainly not the panacea for erverything.
AS for a few airports like CDG, the GNSDS is not even published in the SIA official : the plates are only for approved airlines ( probably in order to prevent an uinauthorized idiot for attempting it ) with MDAs higher than the VOR plates !

Quoting atct (Reply 17): Actually we have LPV approaches that are, in some cases, lower than Cat I ILS's.

That's outside the scope of this discussion.
WASS / EGNOS equipped aircraft are still very rare in airline fleets outside the US and Ops managers, training pilots and the certifying authorities are very wary of its implementation. EASA, to, my knowledge hasn't given one approval to an European airline.
In the US, AFAIK, only Part 91 operators fly this procedure.

I recall during an ICAO conference in Bangkok a few years ago (discussing BOBCAT amongst other items) where one of the speakers highlighted the move away from the use of NDBs-ADFs and how he thought they'd be gone the way of the dodo in a decade.

Unfortunately, that will mean no more dropping in on the cricket commentary.  

Quoting Pihero (Reply 18): Show me an airliner without ADF / ADF switching / ADF tuning.

I've looked at the options catalog for when PK placed their most recent 77W order in Feb 2012. ADFs are part of the selectable equipment list so it would appear 777s are available without them too. PK did however choose to have their fleet furnished with ADFs. When I'm back in JED, I'll have a look through the procurement paperwork to see if the same is true for 787/777/A320 /A330 we operate/ordered.

Short of posting airline purchasing agreements and other proprietary materials, I'm not sure I can do anything else to convince you, nor am I going to bother.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 18): It - he - operates under different regs. Show me an airliner without ADF / ADF switching / ADF tuning. ( I looked on a few cockpit pics and have found not one case). I also have a few of these Gulf airlines FCTM. They all have a chapter on non-ILS approaches, including VOR and NDB ones.

American Airlines 737's do (or did) operate the aircraft with no ADF fitted. No airline in Europe does though (as you correctly point out), and in the UK it is illegal for any aircraft to operate in CAS without a working ADF set.

It's all academinc anyway, the fact is that NDB's are on the endangered list worldwide. The US is decommissioning them at a rapid rate and Europe will follow suit in due course, the UK has already started switching off some of them. In fact, I would predict that in 15 years ILS's will be a dying breed in favour of WAAS based LPV approaches at most airports.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 18): 2.2 /- You have absolutely no right to build your own RNAV approach . That's about the maximum violation you could do. As I said you are unsafe !

Please tell me where I said anything about building your own RNAV approach? I DID NOT WRITE such a thing! Anyone who knows anything about aviation knows you can't input/modify anything from the FAF to MAP. You seem to like to twist what was written or only quote partial statements.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 18): 2/- ADF approach in a thunderstorm ?

Really! Obviously you have never flown in Afirca. A TB could be 30 miles away and still effect the NDB. I defy you to tell me the NDB will not be moving all over the place and you will be lucky to get +/- 20 degrees!

Quoting Pihero (Reply 18): 3/- the above was about your statement : " If you lose your IRS/GPS/DME/DME updating you have more pressing things to worry about than the navaids...you always have a vector." To which I replied :"like what ?",; especially in the middle of an ocean. What pressing things woulod hit you then ? No response, although it is quite a straightforward procedure ( I thought so ). You still have your FMC / IRS navigation available. ( What would be the limitations on your RNP in this case, btw ? )

I was referring to the obsessive compulsion I see pilots doing with hard tuning the nav aids for the departure. Again, the FMC will step through the relevant navaids to ensure you have what you need to ensure positional awareness. Not that a ND does the same thing. My comment was based on that. If you were to lose your entire nav system, you are not going anyplace, perhaps you would continue, I don't know, but I would return and land. you can get vectors for that. But again, if you are over the pacific and lose everything, I don't know how having havaids ardtuned will help you. I am still waiting for that explanation.

Again, you like to "cherry pick" on statements I have made, only quoting partial bits of the statement. While I agree not having a ADF can impact listening to the radio, but you certainly don't need one. As has been pointed out the days of the NDB are few and far between.

Quoting atct (Reply 2): With GPS/RNAV I'm not sure of any approach I can think of where you would need to have the NDB tuned in. I remember there was some debate amongst instructors 10+ years ago whether we could use a GPS in lieu of "ADF REQUIRED." (I was always in favor since the advent of WAAS etc.) Now I wonder this. If you are flying an RNAV approach, can you also tune in the ILS? We had a Polar 744 (no other type/carrier combo had this issue) come in a couple times over the past week that had issues picking up the ILS so they elected to shoot the RNAV instead. The other 4 or 5 aircraft on final were tracking the ILS (including another 744).

The ILS to 7R gets really wacky sometimes. No idea why. There was even a NOTAM about the problem for awhile a year or two ago. Sometimes there would be random full scale localizer deflections or just no signal at all.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 19): In the US, AFAIK, only Part 91 operators fly this procedure.

Cathay Pacific, Horizon Airlines, Alaska Airlines, Polar (Atlas Group), Asiana, Korean Air all fly these approaches under Part 121. From my little corner of the world (ANC) it seems like Cathay is the carrier that flies the RNAV approach the most. I would guess that 1 in 20 asks for the RNAV over the ILS (I'm assuming more to stay up on it for proficiency than any other reason). I can't recall offhand if I have given other carriers the RNAV but I have to because the ILS to 7R was out for a few months last year. So during snow removal, the only approach option was the RNAV 7R or hold for 7L to re-open for a Cat 1 ILS. This was during low, IMC operations with heavy snow. RVR2000 type stuff etc.

I'm not arguing what they do elsewhere as my experience as a pilot is in a Pt. 91 King Air and bush planes. My ATC experience is from a little VFR tower in Pennsylvania ( BVI ATCT), IAH ATCT, and Anchorage. I just know what our operators do up here.

I have lunch with a retired FAA Navaid Engineer (Electrical Engineer, not maintenance guy) and I'll ask him his opinion and pass it on when I can.

[Edited 2014-12-02 23:52:21]

(Edited for spelling)

[Edited 2014-12-02 23:53:10]

Quoting KAUSpilot (Reply 23): The ILS to 7R gets really wacky sometimes. No idea why. There was even a NOTAM about the problem for awhile a year or two ago. Sometimes there would be random full scale localizer deflections or just no signal at all.

Yeah we had minor issues when they moved the VOR from Fire Island over to the airport. The major problem was that half of the operators had updated their FMS with the Magvar change and the others (Honeywell FMS's I think if I recall correctly) did not. So whoever had this certain FMS (on 767-300's, 747-400's I believe), not on all of them mind ya, it would disagree with the ILS signal so it would go all wacky. I'm not a software guy so I am sure I am royally messing up this explanation but that is what I gathered from our meetings with UPS. It seemed to be Korean Air and UPS. Now, in the past couple weeks, Polar has started having some random issues. I sent a message to a buddy who is an old time mechanic over there as I highly suspect it's just one airplane.

atct
(I do airport construction and radar stuff mostly on the union side, I don't get involved with all that math / mumbo-jumbo navaid discussion!)

And back to the original question, Oli:

According to the manual it is not true. The VOR and ADF pointers should work in navigation display approach mode (again according to the manual), as long as you have them selected on the EFIS control panel. It says they work in any mode except "plan". I have never tested this out. Maybe I will in a few days when I work again (we stay in "map" mode 99.99% of the time).

"3 VOR/ADF Switches
Display VOR or ADF information on the respective ND.
VOR – displays VOR pointer, VOR frequency or identification and associated DME
information in all modes except PLAN.
OFF – removes VOR and ADF displays.
ADF – displays ADF pointer and frequency or identification in all modes except
PLAN."

Quoting mmo (Reply 15): You do realize you cut and pasted some of your own response into your reply, making is appear as if I wrote that.

Rubbish. The A.net quote feature works very well.
I cited your words verbatim.

Quoting atct (Reply 24): Quoting Pihero (Reply 19): In the US, AFAIK, only Part 91 operators fly this procedure. Cathay Pacific, Horizon Airlines, Alaska Airlines, Polar (Atlas Group), Asiana, Korean Air all fly these approaches under Part 121.

We're are stillo talking about LPV, aren't we ?
I did not know that. I'm not surprised about CX doing it as they are, IMO, the most pro-active and best training I know of (I have stolen a few times their words ).
Anyway, I think that in the not-too-distant future WAAS / EGNOS / Differential GPS approaches will be the norm... but VORs and DMEs will still be present.
SESAR is doing a lot of research on the subject and their fiture Nav plan / ATC rework will be based on such trajectories.
But it still the future.

Quoting mmo (Reply 22): Please tell me where I said anything about building your own RNAV approach?

You hinted - and strongly so here :

Quoting mmo (Reply 15): the NDB approach in a thunderstorm with /- 5 degrees on the bearing pointer....It's sure goin

As most airports in Africa haven't got an RNAV approach, I must conclude that in order to land you have to build your own RNAV trajectory.
If your airline has an official overlay in your aircraft data base for all these NDB approaches, I will apologize.

Quoting ChaosTheory (Reply 20): Short of posting airline purchasing agreements and other proprietary materials, I'm not sure I can do anything else to convince you, nor am I going to bother.

It's quite simple, really. Just provide one pic of a flight deck instrument panel / Nav selection that doesn't include an ADF choice... or a placarded switch. I honestly didn't find one.
If it's customer option at Boeing, fine if the carrier only flies in the US.
An airline doing world-wide network needs the ADF.

This discussion is really pointless regarding the OP question.
It's about airmanship and SOPs... with a very basic but important philosophy of flight management :
One group believes the GPS is the miraculous panacea for flight, The modern ND can't do anything wrong and the *magenta line* is God's best and only creation...
Another group believes that validating and crosschecking any Nav info is a very sensible way of maintaining flight safety. To rely on the automatics to do the job for you is IMHO foolish and dangerous. And the *magenta line*, although nice and cool-looking in an FS toy could be a death trap born of complacency.

Quoting KAUSpilot (Reply 26): And back to the original question, Oli: According to the manual it is not true. The VOR and ADF pointers should work in navigation display approach mode (again according to the manual), as long as you have them selected on the EFIS control panel.

     

Quoting KAUSpilot (Reply 26): we stay in "map" mode 99.99% of the time)

     
The ILS /APPR info is on the PFD. We keep NAV data on the ND. We only use Rose on a VOR or NDB approach.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 12): I have never heard of aircraft being sold without ADFs installed.

There are a lot of A380s around with no ADF installed.

Cheers,

Michi

Quoting Pihero (Reply 27): You hinted - and strongly so here : Quoting mmo (Reply 15): the NDB approach in a thunderstorm with /- 5 degrees on the bearing pointer....It's sure goin As most airports in Africa haven't got an RNAV approach, I must conclude that in order to land you have to build your own RNAV trajectory. If your airline has an official overlay in your aircraft data base for all these NDB approaches, I will apologize

You may have interpreted what I wrote as a hint, but every place I have flown the procedure was to use an overlay. Why would I even attempt to build my own approach? And just to clarify, I never stated, wrote or implied it was a RNAV approach.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 27): Rubbish. The A.net quote feature works very well. I cited your words verbatim.

What you actually did was truncate the sentence or paragraph that you were quoting.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 27): One group believes the GPS is the miraculous panacea for flight, The modern ND can't do anything wrong and the *magenta line* is God's best and only creation... Another group believes that validating and crosschecking any Nav info is a very sensible way of maintaining flight safety. To rely on the automatics to do the job for you is IMHO foolish and dangerous. And the *magenta line*, although nice and cool-looking in an FS toy could be a death trap born of complacency.

I will assume that is not an attack on me. However, I side with Ronald Reagan on this issue. "Trust but verify." You seem to think that everyone falls into only 2 groups. I don't fall into the group that you have characterized. However, I am a realist and the transformation that technology has made in the cockpit is one that I am willing to embrace. But, I will still keep my flying skills honed as best as I can, I will hand fly the aircraft when possible and do a visual at ever opportunity I get.

Quoting mmo (Reply 29): I will assume that is not an attack on me. However, I side with Ronald Reagan on this issue. "Trust but verify." You seem to think that everyone falls into only 2 groups.

What you have written here does not conform to that, however. You appear to believe that a GPS updating is completely accurate and infallible, and any attempt to cross check or back up your position is unnecessary bordering on dangerous information overload.

Quoting michi (Reply 28): There are a lot of A380s around with no ADF installed.

I had a look at the A.net data base and it seems you're right : The LH cockpit bpictures do not show a possible NDB display on the EFIS panel.
The rest odf the pics : Qantas, AF, Thai have it.
I did not know it was possible.
Thanks for the info.

Quoting mmo (Reply 29): . I don't fall into the group that you have characterized

I'm glad you said that ; but there are some statements you made that had me worried :

Quoting mmo (Reply 5): Why would you want the additional guidance? As long as it's on the magenta line you are where you should be.

Are you ?

Quoting mmo (Reply 1): Everyplace I've flown the 400, you don't need to see them, especially if you have GPS updating.

I remember quite a few map displays jump on the 744, especially out of continental China into HKG.

Quoting mmo (Reply 8): With GPS updating, the fix is generated on the screen at the exact position it is on the ground.

Is it really ?

Quoting mmo (Reply 10): The vertical profile is part of profile and as such the system will self check the inputs in order to be in tolerance for the approach

self check... no monitoring ?

...etc...

Is the VOR/ ILS Mode Even Deferrable?. Sounds like you had an Antenna or Coax going bad.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 31): I remember quite a few map displays jump on the 744, especially out of continental China into HKG.

And that was in 1989 with the introduction of the 400....it had to do with the DME/DME updating from VOR/DME stations in China. They were using the incorrect coordinates not WGS 84 compatible. Nothing to do with GPS updating..it wasn't even around when the 400 was introduced.

Quoting bueb0g (Reply 30): What you have written here does not conform to that, however. You appear to believe that a GPS updating is completely accurate and infallible, and any attempt to cross check or back up your position is unnecessary bordering on dangerous information overload.

Again, that is your interpretation and it is incorrect. Do you understand RNP/ANP? I know how GPS updating does work and what it's limitations are. No system is 100% accurate 100% of the time. That is why you have RNP/ANP, but even with no GPS update the IRS will continue to operate at around 0.1 ANP....which is pretty good. Much better than the VOR accuracy which is 1degree.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 31): Are you ?

Quoting Pihero (Reply 31): Is it really ?

Again, the accuracy of the 777/787 is such the ANP is down to 0.1NM only because it can not measure it any lower and 0.0 is not considered a valid accuracy because of the inherent errors. In reality, the ANP of a GPS/IRS/FMC system is on the order of tens of meters not hundreds of meters. So, unless the navaid has moved, it will be where it is on the ND and the track you are actually flying will be represented on the ND by the magenta line. If you fall out of the RNP, you will get alerted....

Quoting Pihero (Reply 31): self check... no monitoring ?

Again, those are your words not mine....If you are asking if I monitor, the answer is yes....I can take the TDZ height and work 3:1 pretty good...after 40 years of experience you get pretty good at it.

None of CXs 747ERFs or 748Fs have ADFs installed and the most recent 777s no longer have them either. The 772s will be getting them removed after a major hardware upgrade, so imagine eventually all of CXs Boeing fleet will no longer have them. I also believe the latest A330s have no ADFs.

PS I tested this out today in the airplane and the bearing pointers do in fact work in approach mode, as indicated by the manuals.