Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Cleared for the Approach' started by Doug Reid, Oct 13, 2019.
How is it "interesting"?
First, it is an NDB approach still in use. The VOR is used to identify the step down fix (not FAF)but is not useable below 5000 feet, the ATIS is 141.4 , GND is 41.75. Which minimums are lower..GPS or VOR/NDB ? I did not say this was a complicated approach..but it is interesting, IMO.
I think GPS would identify the step-down fix, so minima should be the same. Regardless, I agree on "interesting." I don't think I've seen an NDB approach with an optional VOR radial stepdown before.
There is no FAF and VOR is not required.
Back in the day, this was a standard for an on-field NDB approach. Many VOR approaches looked the same. When GPS approaches came along many of them were overlays like this. The reason this one exists is because it's not an FAA approach, it's an Army designed (and maintained) approach, which is hinted by 1) the type of airport, and 2) the [USA] next to the AL-6315. Civilian FAA approaches would say "FAA" instead.
looks as if there's some typos in the frequencies.
141.xx isn't in the aviation portion of the spectrum. Maritime mobile, I believe?
Most of your Army Air Fields still use NDB approaches. Here’s copter that also uses a VOR (IAF) for the approach.
There is not a FAF...true...so does that make MORUS the MAP ? If you fly the approach with ADF and no GPS, I think VOR would be required to identify MORUS.
Do most of these airfields use radar ? I fly over this airfield all the time, but I never looked at their approach plate before today.
The NDB is the MAP. MORUS is just a step down fix.
Just because it’s published as a NDB/RNAV, doesn’t mean any uses the NDB.
It’s not a typo and it’s not maritime. The military uses low and high band VHF freqs that their radios can tune and ours can’t. Since this is a military approach the ATIS and tower don’t have to use the typical civil aviation freqs we would normally use.
The ground freq (41.75) isn’t a typo either. They’ll use the UHF (251.05) as primary but they also have FM radios for backup.
Not everyone has IFR GPS. I would suggest flying this approach with ADF and VOR only would be difficult.
There is no FAF and no timing table like shown on the “Copter “ approach plate.
The “step down fix” , MORUS, is drawn right on the end of the runway.....is this correct ?
Flying this as NBD/VOR isn't difficult - if you have an ADF. Watch the needles. VOR isn't even necessary, just lets you drop down a little further once MORUS is identified.
MORUS is 3nm from the NDB.
There's no FAF or timing table because crossing the NDB is your missed approach point.
You’d be a bit busy flying this single pilot but that’s not who this approach was designed for. This approach has probably been flown by Army Aviators for over 50 years. Pilot off the controls tunes the NDB for the course needle and the VOR on a separate needle. Once they hit the 171 “at MORUS, down to 860.” Once they cross the NDB, do the MAP. Not a very difficult for dual pilot.
Before GPS we flew lots of approaches like this.
Or even single pilot. I got to fly NDBs before most went the way of the dodo. They are dirt simple. Keep the needle from moving. Fly that heading till the needle swings around. That's it.
This approach is literally fly to the NDB, fly outbound on the 295 radial/anti-bearing, whatever you want to call it. Make procedure turn. Fly inbound on 115. Descend to xxx and fly until the needle swings around, and go missed. That's it.
I've flown many approaches like these single pilot, and no autopilot.
So when are we allowed to descend to 980 ? At MORUS ?
You're allowed to descend to 2000 outbound from the NDB prior to/through the procedure turn.
You're allowed to descend to 980 when inbound from the procedure turn.
You're allowed 860 after MORUS.
There are VOR approaches similar to this as well. (VOR 27 at KMOP)
Did your CFII never go over these with you?
As have I. Not saying it’s difficult, only you’ll be doing more tasks with this approach vs letting an autopilot fly a GPS.
Took me 10 secs to set up this approach and let the AP fly it. A hands on NDB would require a couple more brain cells.
MORUS is not at the end of the runway, nor does it really have anything to do with the end of the runway.
It's simply the intersection of the radial from the VOR and heading from the NDB. We know from the plate it's 3nm from the NDB.
As has already been said, you don't need timing charts, as the NDB is the MAP.
Here's some procedures that will make your head spin.
And we use to fly these without the benefit of GPS or an ND, all steam gauge.
Yep, the FAA pretty much ditched all the overlay ("or GPS") approaches years ago. Airports got their own straight GPS approaches instead.
As pointed out, since there was no real "redesign" of the approach for GPS overlays, higher GPS minima were not uncommon.
This is a standard NDB approach with HFF on the field. The only part not standard is MORUS. There is no timing table because you are not flying from HFF, standard stuff. Having MORUS only allows you to lose 120 in about a 1/2 mile to make a normal landing. About 300 fpm for 30 seconds.
This one doesn’t have higher minimums when flown by GPS. It has higher minimums if you can’t identify MORUS, which can be done using either VOR or GPS
Sure I knew when to start a descent....but I bet you had to look it up ...right ?
Just because I ask a question does not mean I don’t know the answer ..
Well, if by “look it up” you mean reading the approach chart, I’d guess you’re right.
If by “look it up” you mean Ed has forgotten how to fly a basic instrument approach, I’d guess you’re wrong.
All the information is provided on the chart. If YOU had to look it up it means you don’t know how to read all the approach charts.
It’s a very simple Approach. These types of approaches are about as easy as it gets. No FAF to identify. No need to watch the clock to identify the Missed Approach Point. Nothing to do but fly the Procedure turn and then land or miss. Identifying the Missed Approach Point is as easy as it gets. The ADF needle reverses direction. If you want the 860 foot MDA instead of 980 you do have another task. Identify SDZ, dial in 159 with OBS and watch the needle. Doing it with GPS is even simpler. Load and activate the Approach. Fly the Procedure Turn. Your GPS navigator tells you how far from HFF you are so you can stay within 10 miles. It tells you when you are over MORUS and then HFF. The Missed Approach Procedure is as simple as it gets. You are already effectively in the Missed Approach Hold. Just make the outbound turn and climb.
Maybe the guy is a simmer, we've had a few of those. Or just not instrument rated yet.
Just level set, please? No slight intended. I'd just like to know....
Are you a pilot, or a sim guy?
If a pilot, are you instrument rated? Current? Proficient?
I asked the question because
1 it's tough to find an NDB approach to fly nowadays (I'm not sure where the closest one to me is and I'm too lazy to go look) so maybe you never saw one - but nothing screamed "interesting" to me about it.
2 it's a pretty simple and straightforward approach even if not ever planning to fly an NDB approach. There are similar VOR approaches.
3 you seemed surprised that some information wasn't on the chart - and it wouldn't be due to the construction of the approach.
so based on 2 and 3 it seems/ed like your CFII is shortchanging/ed you on instruction - unless you aren't IR or very early in training in which case, ask away.
I didn't look anything up, but I also fly in the system, and have seen a fair share of/ flown quite a few different approaches. Though I'm sure someone could throw an approach on here where I would have to do more than just give a cursory glance at it to know where I'm supposed to have the airplane.
An even easier NDB. Just avoid the rockets on final (plan view).
The criteria are still in FAA TERPs: On-Airport VOR/No FAF and On-Airport NDB/No FAF. Classic designs from the beginning of instrument flight.
Agree, but new instrument pilots nowadays don't see too many of these No FAF approaches since so many have been decommissioned and few (none?) have been added in the last decade. When I got my instrument rating in 2002 they were still very common.
Eh? Where does it say anything about MORUS reception? You only get to use the lower minima when you are using NDB+VOR.
And why does adding VOR get you lower minimums?
He didn’t say anything about “reception.” He said “identify.” GPS is an authorized substitute for an Intersection, which MORUS is.