Single Nav/Comm in IMC?

lancie00

lancie00

Line Up and Wait
Joined
May 12, 2016
Messages
864
Display Name
Display name:
lancie00
Here's the mission:
I'm a PPL looking to get my IFR. I don't travel a lot but as the kids grow up, I would like to do more. Our plane has old Terra radios that still work most of the time but are basically boat anchors.

My question:
Does anyone ever fly in IMC with just a single Nav/Comm or single GPS? There's absolutely no way I could afford both right now along with ADSB out, audio panel and indicators.

If I put in a single nav/comm with glideslope I know it would be enough for training but is it enough for "light" IFR?
 
I’ve flown lots of times with a single COMM/VOR/GS. It definitely makes you think ahead more but it’s doable.
 
It's not a deal breaker.


Biggest factor is who you pick for your CFII

Choose a experienced guy.
 
lancie00 said:
...If I put in a single nav/comm with glideslope I know it would be enough for training but is it enough for "light" IFR?
Click to expand...
Sure. Until some piece of it craps out.
 
I've "tried" it a few times... VOR/ILS only, even... no GPS. It's a higher workload, but do-able. Identifying radial crossings on approaches is "entertaining" to say the least.
 
I would rather fly with a GPS,than a radio with Vor/ ILS. But either is do able in light IFR conditions. Have done both,just requires a much more attentive attitude.
 
A friend who did ALL of his IR training in a 152 with a single Nav/com said it was really hectic. The plus side, he said, was that he spent so much time tuning and twisting his scan was excellent.
 
Can do easy, and legally! Not the ideal situation however, but can do. As others have said, higher workload and you're up the creek if it craps out on you.
 
Last edited:
I did my first Instrument ride in an UH-1H with a single Nav radio and single com radio, plus a NDB and one CDI. Intersection holds, VOR, NDB, ILS, and PAR approaches. High workload but doable. Nothing like the bad ole days.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
Doable. I did a lot of it in my training. Plane had two but my CFII was sadistic. He loved holding at intersections with just one. Don't know what you mean by 'light' IFR. I'd think about what your options are if you lose the one you have. Ceilings? Flatlands? Mountainous? Radar coverage? Radio backup?
 
Sure, but it's just safer with two radios. I'm fine with a GPS/NAV/COM #1 and NAV/COM #2. If the better unit, generally the GPS does happen to go South, then you still have the #2 NAV/COM (better if it also has glideslope). In addition, most of us are now using an external device such as GDL39 or Stratus with Garmin Pilot or Foreflight, etc. and so we have a VFR back-up GPS in that regard. Regardless, these will get you there and down just fine, though if #1 goes down, you'd likely be vectored towards the closest airway to continue your flight. I've trained a few people with 2 NAV/COMs with glideslope and DME and a Pad device. It's a non-event.
 
Very doable, depending on your definition of "light IFR" i always had a backup plan for the failure of NAV, com, or both. Today, an iPad with GPS would work quite well. My backups usually involved precision DR.

If your instructor wants you to do lots of intersection holds with one NAV, ask him where it says you can fly without positive course guidance. ;)

Have fun!
 
Last edited:
As others have said it’s doable...

But that doesn’t make it smart. I absolutely can’t imagine taking my family around in IMC tracking VOR’s.

A good waas gps and autopilot will exponentially reduce your workload in single pilot IFR. They are included in my personal minimums to fly my wife and 3 kids around in the clouds.

I don’t like to think about the thousands I’ve spent on the IFD 550 or dual Garmin G5’s. Adsb in/out / etc... but I feel good knowing that each of those items increases my safety / situational awareness.

Yes you can legally file and fly with the minimum equipment while having an iPad / foreflight on the yoke to provide your best SA. It does help. Still wouldn’t trust my family’s lives on the iPad. It’s a tertiary backup in my plane.

You’ll have to decide your own personal minimums.
 
arkvet said:
I absolutely can’t imagine taking my family around in IMC tracking VOR’s..
Click to expand...

Wellll now, seems I and many others have flown safely with nothing more than VOR tracking. Hell even the EMB-120 and ATR-72 I flew at the airline was VOR only. Oh, and all those passengers are still alive , when I left them they were anyway, and me too.
 
Personally, in the modern days of portable gps and iPads, I’m fine with IFR using a single Nav, but wouldn’t want to file and fly IFR with a single comm. In most cases, handheld radios won’t cut it if you lose the installed radio in the goo.
 
mscard88 said:
Wellll now, seems I and many others have flown safely with nothing more than VOR tracking. Hell even the EMB-120 and ATR-72 I flew at the airline was VOR only. Oh, and all those passengers are still alive , when I left them they were anyway, and me too.
Click to expand...
In my mind, it's the difference between self-reliance and requiring someone else' help when things go bad.
 
mscard88 said:
Wellll now, seems I and many others have flown safely with nothing more than VOR tracking. Hell even the EMB-120 and ATR-72 I flew at the airline was VOR only. Oh, and all those passengers are still alive , when I left them they were anyway, and me too.
Click to expand...

I’m sure you certainly have and many many pilots have done so for years. My emphasis was heavy on personal minimums.

I don’t know your experience as a pilot. There’s no doubt a huge difference in us weekend warriors and part 135 operators. I would expect a pro pilot to be able to fly approaches with minimum equipment and do it well. Many of those pilots learned and perfected those skills before a gps was even available.

I’m a 250 hour ppl that is close to an IFR check ride. It would be a joke for me to suggest that I could fly my kx155 (#2 Nav/com) as comfortably as my IFD 550 with synthetic vision. I think the added SA and ease of use of my panel will increase my safety and comfort level substantially.

To each their own.
 
arkvet said:
It would be a joke for me to suggest that I could fly my kx155 (#2 Nav/com) as comfortably as my IFD 550 with synthetic vision. I think the added SA and ease of use of my panel will increase my safety and comfort level substantially.

To each their own.
Click to expand...

Actually you can or it wouldn't be approved for IFR. As long as you comply with the VOR airway minimum altitudes you'll be safe. Sure what you fly with provides more information, which is good, but that doesn't mean VOR navigation is any less unsafe. That's all I'm trying to say. In the jet I used to fly with FMS, if that failed then we'd resort to flying airways using the VORs. But I completely understand your wanting to be comfortable, but please understand the VOR and what it can do for you, if only as a backup.
 
mscard88 said:
Actually you can or it wouldn't be approved for IFR. As long as you comply with the VOR airway minimum altitudes you'll be safe. Sure what you fly with provides more information, which is good, but that doesn't mean VOR navigation is any less unsafe. That's all I'm trying to say. In the jet I used to fly with FMS, if that failed then we'd resort to flying airways using the VORs. But I completely understand your wanting to be comfortable, but please understand the VOR and what it can do for you, if only as a backup.
Click to expand...

We’re in complete agreement here. We’re just likely on different ends of the spectrum when it comes to experience. I can certainly fly approaches with my kx155. I have trained for that to be my only Nav available and can do it every time. But that doesn’t mean that I would elect/choose for that to be my #1 option given the other options available today.
 
The flames will start, but. . .back yourself up with an iPad and Foreflight, or similar combination. You'll have situational awareness while gacking with freq changes on the nav radio. If the tablet goes tango uniform, you're still legal, and can go look for some place to park it. .
 
I am a 515-hour PPL with 3 hours actual. My plane has a GTN750 and GNC255. I like having two glideslopes and would not fly IFR with my wife with only a single nav/com. Yes it is legal, but for me it doesn't seem prudent.
 
I think this question (as Ark said) is a great example of personal minimums, not so much a blanket statement about "safe". I too am an instrument student, and I'd never want a single point of avionics failure to put me in a bad position. I think if I were flying in IMC, I'd require at least:

1) two VOR and one DME,
2) or one GPS and one VOR.

Then also a backup in the form of an iPad w/ EFB. It's worth noting that without the DME -or- the second VOR -or- the GPS, you have absolutely no way to instantaneously determine position. That's unacceptable to me.
 
mscard88 said:
Actually you can or it wouldn't be approved for IFR. As long as you comply with the VOR airway minimum altitudes you'll be safe. Sure what you fly with provides more information, which is good, but that doesn't mean VOR navigation is any less unsafe. That's all I'm trying to say. In the jet I used to fly with FMS, if that failed then we'd resort to flying airways using the VORs. But I completely understand your wanting to be comfortable, but please understand the VOR and what it can do for you, if only as a backup.
Click to expand...
I agree with Mark also. Most IFR flights I have had were intermittent IFR or going up through an overcast to VFR on top. My definition of light IFR. Single flip flop radios are certainly better than single frequency adjusted radios and that is what I learned on (Narco Mk12), definitely doable. But for solid IFR it sure is nice with the IFD 540 and the King 155 as a back up and ForeFlight on the I-Pad. My autopilot is not trustworthy so it gets busy but I still go without the autopilot.
 
IFR with just a -255a and a handful of 'reference only' GPS boxes and one AHRS is good enough for me to fly my wife around. And vice versa.

Non-WAAS GPS going into the plane, though, so we can land at the home field and not the nearby ILS field (Once was enough for both of us for that adventure).
 
I could fly all of the real-world IFR flights I have flown with a single GPS and a single Comm. But I would not spend money on avionics for IFR use that do not include at least one WAAS approach-certified GPS, one VOR/LOC/GS receiver, and two Comm radios.

Here is my rationale for that minimum list:

I need to be able to fly LPV approaches. My home airport has two GPS-based RNAV approaches, one for each end of the paved runway. One of them is LPV-only with a 334' DH while the other one has circling minimums of 629' AGL. If the wind strongly favors the LPV-only side of the runway and the ceiling is between 400' and 600', I don't want to be stuck flying a tailwind approach.

I want to be able to fly an ILS if needed. My home field doesn't have an ILS but the nearby airport with an ILS has a 200' DH, so having the ability to fly an ILS might make the difference between landing at my alternate airport and running out of fuel in the clouds.

I do not want to have to ask to go off-frequency to get the weather. That's why I want the second Comm.
 
George Mohr said:
Never seen this, which airport?
Click to expand...
S25 RNAV RWY 12. It's a fun approach because it has a steep 4-degree glideslope. Only one degree more than an ILS may not sound like much, but in the air it is quite noticeable, especially if there is an inversion and you are on the approach with a tailwind trying to shed energy.
 
My club's 172R had dual navcom in name only. Just had to let approach control know when you need to switch for weather. And, get in the habit of writing freqs down before you switch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top