VOR Decommisioning

[Ravioli]

I searched briefly first and didn't see this:

Does the VOR Decommissioning impact ILS/LOC approaches?

Seems that for my flying a non-was GPS and a an SL-30 are fine. My clubmates are all about getting to TWO was gps's and constantly repeat the VOR decommissioning mantra.

What's the scope of the decommissioning?

Thanks!

 

[MAKG1]

GAWD I wish people would stop perpetuating myths.

Some VORs are being decommissioned. No, VORs are not going away. Some redundant terrestrial approaches are being removed. In all cases announced to date, there is at least one more at the same field.

Two GPSs does not help some failure modes, such as interference.

 

[PPC1052]

2GPSs seems like a ridiculous waste of money.

 

[bnt83]

Lol! Two GPS? Like what GPS?

TWO GTN650 which have a VOR and GS in it?

Two 430w which has a VOR and GS in it?



I would look at the map and check how many ILS (that you can legally use) are in your area. Then decide how important it is to you.

 

[bnt83]

2GPSs seems like a ridiculous waste of money.

The newer stand-alone GPS costs just about as much as the GPS/COM/VOR/GS versions.

 

[Ravioli]

GAWD I wish people would stop perpetuating myths.

Some VORs are being decommissioned. No, VORs are not going away. Some redundant terrestrial approaches are being removed. In all cases announced to date, there is at least one more at the same field.

Two GPSs does not help some failure modes, such as interference.

As the purpose of my thread is mythbusting (and money saving) I want to hear more your comments and hopefully references.

I used the word Mantra on purpose!

 

[Ted]

2GPSs seems like a ridiculous waste of money.

Seeing some combination of 430/530/650/750 totaling two installed units is pretty common in higher end planes that are used as "go places" traveling machines. It's not any more of a waste of money than any other item that you have two of. If one fails, you have a backup backup. If you lose your 430 while on an IFR flight in the soup and now are reduced to flying /U with a single nav/com and your only effective approach option is an ILS, that may not be very helpful. At the time we added the 430W to the 310, I was doing a lot of flying in remote parts of Canada without any navaids. It was GPS or nothing. So, losing a GPS in that situation would really be a pain.

Additionally, in the case of most GPSs people are installing these days, they often can double as MFDs for some of the other data that these aircraft typically have. So for example, in the 310 (which is equipped with a 530W and 430W), I am often using the traffic page on the 430W, which displays the ADS-B traffic. Sometimes I also will use the 430W for CONUS ADS-B radar downloads as opposed to regional.

If you're just doing VFR buzz bombing, then I agree, it's a waste of money. But at that point, it's hard to justify any GPS outside of an iPad.

 

[James331]

One of the selling points when I got my plane was the 530/430, all the working IFR
planes I've seen have dual GPS NAV/Comms.

 

[PPC1052]

Seeing some combination of 430/530/650/750 totaling two installed units is pretty common in higher end planes that are used as "go places" traveling machines. It's not any more of a waste of money than any other item that you have two of. If one fails, you have a backup backup. If you lose your 430 while on an IFR flight in the soup and now are reduced to flying /U with a single nav/com and your only effective approach option is an ILS, that may not be very helpful. At the time we added the 430W to the 310, I was doing a lot of flying in remote parts of Canada without any navaids. It was GPS or nothing. So, losing a GPS in that situation would really be a pain.

Additionally, in the case of most GPSs people are installing these days, they often can double as MFDs for some of the other data that these aircraft typically have. So for example, in the 310 (which is equipped with a 530W and 430W), I am often using the traffic page on the 430W, which displays the ADS-B traffic. Sometimes I also will use the 430W for CONUS ADS-B radar downloads as opposed to regional.

If you're just doing VFR buzz bombing, then I agree, it's a waste of money. But at that point, it's hard to justify any GPS outside of an iPad.

I appreciate your perspective. The only thing I would challenge is that two VOR/LOC receivers with dual CDIs are more useful than just as a back-up because you use two to identify your exact location without having to switch the same receiver back and forth between two frequencies, and allow you to have two separate segments of the course active at the same time so that when you turn at an intersection, all you have to do just look at the other CDI. But I understand your points about the additional functionality you get with the different pages.

 

[gasfiltered]

I appreciate your perspective. The only thing I would challenge is that two VOR/LOC receivers with dual CDIs are more useful than just as a back-up because you use two to identify your exact location without having to switch the same receiver back and forth between two frequencies, and allow you to have two separate segments of the course active at the same time so that when you turn at an intersection, all you have to do just look at the other CDI. But I understand your points about the additional functionality you get with the different pages.

Dual certified GPS will have two CDIs so you can have two data pages showing both GPS track and traffic/wx on the screens AND simultaneously track two different VORs on the CDIs.

 

[Ted]

I appreciate your perspective. The only thing I would challenge is that two VOR/LOC receivers with dual CDIs are more useful than just as a back-up because you use two to identify your exact location without having to switch the same receiver back and forth between two frequencies, and allow you to have two separate segments of the course active at the same time so that when you turn at an intersection, all you have to do just look at the other CDI. But I understand your points about the additional functionality you get with the different pages.

I think what you're referring to would be a panel like my Aztec had, which was a KLN94 (independent GPS) with dual nav/coms. In that case, I agree, the failure mode of the GPS is nicer since you're down to dual nav/coms, and each should have its own CDI (usually the GPS and #1 Nav share a CDI or HSI). I actually somewhat went for this setup intentionally when I had it put in 7 or so years ago. Aside from being cheap, I liked the fact that the separate components made for more pleasant failure modes. I could lose the #1 Nav/Com without losing the GPS, or vice versa.

In the case of a dual 430/530/650/750 setup, each unit is a GPS/Nav/Comm in one box. Each unit will output to at least a CDI for a certified IFR installation. And since many of these setups now are being paired with a G500/600 or an Aspen, you not only have an HSI, but you also have RMI needles that can point to the bearing for either GPS waypoint, or to a VOR, and provide DME information (if so equipped). In the 310 which has an Aspen, losing the 530W would be fairly seamless from a flying perspective - all the waypoints are already in the 430 (via auto crossfill), switch the Aspen to GPS2, keep flying. Much different from going GPS D-> to "Crap, now I need to look at my low en routes and actually figure out airways to get where I'm going."

 

[James331]

The normal layout for dual boxes is to have the map screen up on top, flight plan mode on the bottom using cross fill

 

[bobmrg]

www.faa.gov/air_traffic/flight_info/aeronav/acf/media/presentatio...

At some time in the future, when the Minimum Operating Network (MON) is in place, GPS will be designated as the primary means of navigation and the MON will be for emergency use only...in case of GPS system failure. Standard Service Volume will increase to 77nm at 5000 feet agl, insuring that anyone flying at that altitude or higher will have a VOR within 100nm. It might not be the VOR you want, or if you get vectored to an IAF for an ILS that does not serve your destination airport, tough...this is an emergency, remember? The idea is to get all IFR flights on the ground until the GPS failure is resolved.

So there will be VORs and there will be ILSs, just not so many of them.

Bob Gardner

 

[Ravioli]

Throwing this in... Why dual WAAS GPS/NAV/COM? Won't we move to nothing but WAAS GPS/COM since the nav side is going the way of LORAN?

And also, why backup WAAS? It doesn't serve the ADB device, and precision GPS approaches aren't all that needed in failure mode.

 

[azure]

Throwing this in... Why dual WAAS GPS/NAV/COM? Won't we move to nothing but WAAS GPS/COM since the nav side is going the way of LORAN?

Except that the nav side is NOT going the way of loran... loran was shut off completely, but there is going to be a Minimum Operational Network (MON) of VOR transmitters. Although it will be primarily for emergency use, I still wouldn't want to be without a nav receiver.

 

[James331]

Throwing this in... Why dual WAAS GPS/NAV/COM? Won't we move to nothing but WAAS GPS/COM since the nav side is going the way of LORAN?

And also, why backup WAAS? It doesn't serve the ADB device, and precision GPS approaches aren't all that needed in failure mode.

That's not happening.

Go into any large airport and you'll see even with a ton of RNAVs the ILS is still the top choice and first advertised approach.

FYI GPS does F' up and as a late night IMC ice flying pilot I'd never put all my eggs in one basket.

 

[Ravioli]

That's not happening.

Go into any large airport and you'll see even with a ton of RNAVs the ILS is still the top choice and first advertised approach.

FYI GPS does F' up and as a late night IMC ice flying pilot I'd never put all my eggs in one basket.

Again thanks.. This works AGAINST my friends who want dual magenta lines and talk crap about the lowly SL-30

 

[Ted]

Throwing this in... Why dual WAAS GPS/NAV/COM? Won't we move to nothing but WAAS GPS/COM since the nav side is going the way of LORAN?

And also, why backup WAAS? It doesn't serve the ADB device, and precision GPS approaches aren't all that needed in failure mode.

As has been stated, there are several reasons why you still want to use the ground-based navaids.

As for WAAS, well, most new boxes have WAAS. So, if you put a new box in, that's what you'll have. Also, the databases are different, so they won't crossfill.

Now if you have a 430 and then decide to add a 650 or 750 (both of which are WAAS), then that would be another option.