Hi Alan
I would therefore interpret this to mean that if you have not got NDB
then you can't fly a GPS approach as your have no fall back.
This link is to he current Staverton GPS chart. It states that missed
approach procedure is only available with the NDB.
http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/pamslight/pdf/4e415453/EG/C/EN/Charts/AD/EG_AD_2_EGBJ_8-2_en
Glad to hear the NDB has gone for airways I sold my twin four years ago
and when we rebuilt the panel in 2001 you still needed a fan marker
receiver and display!
Personally for any serious IFR work I want 2 or more of everything - and
that includes engines.
Regards
Pete
On 06/09/14 12:40, Dpy01 wrote:
>
> Peter,
>
> In my experience the missed approach procedure is set up as a means of
> 'escape'
as a result of the Hazard Analysis on the approach as well as a means to 'going
around' should minimums not be met.
>
> If the primary approach system, ground or aircraft equipment, fails then the
missed approach procedure would be a secondary means of addressing that failure.
>
> In other words on an ILS approach if the ILS fails then the missed approach
> would
be either of NDB or VOR.
>
> I could go on all day on explaining but it is essentially that premise which
often means that you will see a GPS approach with an alternate NDB or VOR missed
approach procedure.
>
> I've not seen a missed approach on a GPS, or radar, yet but I would expect one
at some time but I think that it would be secondary to another primary approach.
>
> The current equipment list for CAT flights does not require an NDB for Airways
in the UK, this was dropped a few years ago, however they are required to carry
equipment required to undertake the published missed approach procedure.
>
> As I've always flown aircraft fitted with all the requirements, including NDB,
I've never looked at the regulations closer. With the prospect of a Europa
possible
being suitable the only thing I know is what is in the public domain via
the LAA at the moment and I have no doubt the next step will be a technical
leaflet providing the necessary guidance in accordance with the ANO as and when
the LAA finalise the work with the CAA.
>
> Alan
> G-OBJT
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>> On 6 Sep 2014, at 10:31, Pete Lawless <pete@lawless.info> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi Alan
>>
>> Did you notice in the 800 plus pages if you still need an ADF to fly a GPS
>> approach?
It certainly was the case at Staverton that you could fly down to limits
with a GPS but needed to use the ADF to go round the hold at 3,000 feet.
>>
>> Pete
>>
>>> On 06/09/14 10:06, Alan Carter wrote:
>>>
>>> Good point Peter.
>>> I think if you have certified aeroplanes with certified instruments and
>>> avionic
flying along with permit aircraft on airways without certified equipment
would make some people very unhappy, especially having spend 10s of thousands
of pounds on there equipment, my guess it will on similar lines to what the
IMC rating allows you to do which is quite reasonable, for the average light
aircraft
pilot .
>>> In my chats with the CAA apparently you can do the whole coarse under the
>>> hood
without ever entering or experiencing real cloud.
>>>
>>> Alan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=430095#430095
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
|