ADF Approaches, gone or is anyone still flying them?

[JohnB]

Howdy. I am upgrading my avionics, and my ADF (which I used to use as a radio) went out and I was thinking of removing it, as I couldn't find any approaches in California that still had an operational one. Im wondering about others experience, as I used to have great fun flying these (although i don't think I would ever voluntarily use these in actual imc) and the only airport I could find with ONLY an ADF approach was Ensenada, MX which is a very cool approach by the way. Curious about other parts of the country if anyone still has them nearby without a GPS overlay and does anyone use them, or out of the country, is it still useful to have?

Ive heard that there are a few approaches where ADF is required on an ILS, but not the primary source of navigation and I heard that the FAA has made most if not all of those have a GPS position overlay. Would like to know if everyone has just removed their ADF, or does anyone still use it for flying to smaller or out of the US airports?

[gsengle]

If you have an approach approved GPS I'd certainly remove it. GPS I believe always counts for those waypoints... Can someone remember the detail reg on that?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[1964-M20E]

If it is TU then I would remove it unless it is absolutely necessary to get somewhere frequently you go.  I liked having one in my former plane but I do not miss it.  I've even been without a glide slope, just plan accordingly, but that is changing soon.

 

 

[Marauder]

There are still places in the world where they use them. Not so much here. There is one NDB near me but I never flew it.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

[tony]

If you have a modern WAAS GPS, and given AC 91-108;  why would you waste the panel space with an ADF?  Unless of course you wanted to listen to the Braves game......

[ArtVandelay]

I thought I read the FAA is removing a bunch of ADF and VOR approaches early next year.

Edit: found it, Feb 4, 2016...March 31, 2016, about 250

[Wistarmo]

Been flying IFR 25 years and never shot an NDB approach. In both aircraft I have owned I replaced the NDB with a back-up artificial horizon. 

[kris_adams]

yeah, I removed my old ADF about 4 years ago.  If needed I use my 430 to identify them.  Glad to have the 5 pounds of useful load.

[Bob_Belville]

I had to fly NDB approaches in my home field back in the '80s but there's (almost?) no need for an ADF in the lower 48 now. FWIW, I got about $900 for the KR 87 I removed for the new panel 3 years ago. It went to Canada where they are still in use. 

[yvesg]

They are also removing them in Canada but slowly.... things move slow in the cold!

Yves

[kortopates]

There are a handful of NDB IAP's that won't be around much longer but with a WAAS GPS you will never need to fly one in the US. And although there is no GPS overlay of Mexico's NDB IAPs, which one would you rather rely on in IMC? Thought so

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[carusoam]

ILS and Localizer approaches into KMMU Morristown, NJ use an ADF (CAT) for the missed approach procedure.  No ADF means these approaches are un-able.

having a pair of Independent GTNs is a good solution.  The ADF is just another waypoint. The second GTN is In case the first one goes on hiatus...

I did my IR training at KMMU.  We dialed in the ADF back then...

Best regards,

-a-

[Marauder]

Here is the last one that I know of in my neck of the woods.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[JohnB]

6 hours ago, Kris_Adams said:

yeah, I removed my old ADF about 4 years ago.  If needed I use my 430 to identify them.  Glad to have the 5 pounds of useful load.

Wow... did you remove your ADF antenna as well or just the receiver and indicator?

3 hours ago, kortopates said:

 

There are a handful of NDB IAP's that won't be around much longer but with a WAAS GPS you will never need to fly one in the US. And although there is no GPS overlay of Mexico's NDB IAPs, which one would you rather rely on in IMC? Thought so

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes... good point Paul., I was wondering if there are airports with only an NDB approach, and so far, dont see any in the US. Mexico yes? But you're right, wouldn't ever want to fly an NDB in real IMC, and even worse in Mexico!

2 hours ago, Marauder said:

Here is the last one that I know of in my neck of the woods.

 

Wow.. that looks like a fun approach! Looking up, this airport has a GPS and an RNAV approach, so wouldn't be necessary. but may be fun

6 hours ago, teejayevans said:

 

I thought I read the FAA is removing a bunch of ADF and VOR approaches early next year.

Edit: found it, Feb 4, 2016...March 31, 2016, about 250

All HUGELY helpful everyone. Gracias!! Ok unless I really want an AM radio, ADF is going bye bye. Thanks again!

[Marauder]

6 hours ago, Kris_Adams said: yeah, I removed my old ADF about 4 years ago.  If needed I use my 430 to identify them.  Glad to have the 5 pounds of useful load.

Wow... did you remove your ADF antenna as well or just the receiver and indicator?

3 hours ago, kortopates said:  

There are a handful of NDB IAP's that won't be around much longer but with a WAAS GPS you will never need to fly one in the US. And although there is no GPS overlay of Mexico's NDB IAPs, which one would you rather rely on in IMC? Thought so

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes... good point Paul., I was wondering if there are airports with only an NDB approach, and so far, dont see any in the US. Mexico yes? But you're right, wouldn't ever want to fly an NDB in real IMC, and even worse in Mexico!

2 hours ago, Marauder said: Here is the last one that I know of in my neck of the woods.

 

Wow.. that looks like a fun approach! Looking up, this airport has a GPS and an RNAV approach, so wouldn't be necessary. but may be fun

6 hours ago, teejayevans said:  

I thought I read the FAA is removing a bunch of ADF and VOR approaches early next year.

Edit: found it, Feb 4, 2016...March 31, 2016, about 250

All HUGELY helpful everyone. Gracias!! Ok unless I really want an AM radio, ADF is going bye bye. Thanks again!

I think it is a legacy that is only still around because the LOM for the ILS at KILG is still there. You're right, there are GPS approaches there and I practice them all the time.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

[midlifeflyer]

1 hour ago, Marauder said:

I think it is a legacy that is only still around because the LOM for the ILS at KILG is still there. You're right, there are GPS approaches there and I practice them all the time.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

..and even they are disappearing. the compass locator  is unnecessary for the OM for an ILS. It might be necessary for such things as  the PT or the missed, but even there, I've seen quite a few recent replacements of what were single ILS/LOC plates with ILS/LOC Z and Y plates with one saying "Radar Required" and the other "GPS Required."

[Marauder]

1 hour ago, Marauder said: I think it is a legacy that is only still around because the LOM for the ILS at KILG is still there. You're right, there are GPS approaches there and I practice them all the time.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

..and even they are disappearing. the compass locator  is unnecessary for the OM for an ILS. It might be necessary for such things as  the PT or the missed, but even there, I've seen quite a few recent replacements of what were single ILS/LOC plates with ILS/LOC Z and Y plates with one saying "Radar Required" and the other "GPS Required."

That is exactly what it is being used for:

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[M20F]

10 hours ago, carusoam said:

ILS and Localizer approaches into KMMU Morristown, NJ use an ADF (CAT) for the missed approach procedure.  No ADF means these approaches are un-able.

 

GPS can and does supplant anything you need an ADF for both practically and legally.  You would put the fix CAT in your GPS, set OBS, and hit OBS (on a Garmin product anyways) and fly the hold.  No need to have an ADF in the plane to fly that approach legally or otherwise.

I can understand the number of people saying they would never want to fly a NDB in IMC because the options today are so much better.  Not so long ago though the only way into a lot of airports was through an NDB approach and I never found them to be any worse/better than a VOR/VOR-A approach.  Certainly not a precision approach but not a bad option.

[midlifeflyer]

1 hour ago, Marauder said:

That is exactly what it is being used for:

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yes, but as M20F said, for that, IFR GPS is a replacement. That's why those approaches are being changed as the compass locators are decommissioned,which is taking place pretty much whenever one needs any maintenance.

The only restriction on the use of GPS to replace ADF (or VOR) is for lateral guidance on the final approach course of an NDB or VOR approach.

[jlunseth]

I have an ADF and I spent a couple hundred this summer replacing the "lens" because the digits were messed up. I have tried flying some practice NDB approaches with it, but the plane is just too fast.  If I come at the approach from an angle approaching 90 degrees, I can't get the plane turned around and on the outbound course in time to realistically fly the approach.  I have a GPS so don't mess with those approaches anymore.  Besides, the minimums are generally too high for the approaches to be very useful.  Just a way of ducking under the cloud cover, assuming the cloud cover is up around 1,000-1,500, which is about what you will get for minimums with the NDB approaches.

But I do use the ADF for a few other things.  For one thing, there are still airports in MN where you can only get the weather over the NDB.  KGYL which is near me, has an NDB 31 approach and the weather is available over the NDB.  I can get the weather via XM, but there is too much delay built in and I have never resolved the question of whether using the XM reported METAR complies with the regs to fly the approach, because of that delay.  So I just use the ADF.

There also are a few approaches around here where the NDB is the IAF, the ILS 31 at KAXN is that way as I recall.  I know you can use the GPS to locate the NDB IAF.

The third reason I use it for is just situational awareness as I am flying along at cruise.  Actually, there are still quite a few NDB's in service in the upper Midwest, Iowa in particular.  I just dial them in for something to do as I cruise along, and watch for the 90 degree passage.  Bear in mind, the KFC200 is flying the plane at 21K on a course established by the 430AW and the GPSS, and I also have my position on Foreflight on the iPad, so being able to follow the NDB's is not really a high priority, more like something to do.  I just always have a VOR and an NDB dialed in, just in case.  "Just in case" has never happened though.

The most significant use of the ADF for me is that it has a built in flight timer, and a button on the panel to push to zero it out on takeoff.  That is my primary IFR flight timer.  Not that I have ever had to use the timer either, I just do it in case of a true lost comm event, which has never happened to me under IFR. 

[DonMuncy]

1 hour ago, M20F said:

I can understand the number of people saying they would never want to fly a NDB in IMC because the options today are so much better.  Not so long ago though the only way into a lot of airports was through an NDB approach and I never found them to be any worse/better than a VOR/VOR-A approach.  Certainly not a precision approach but not a bad option.

NDBs are only a problem with cross winds. On a VOR, you can always see whether you are on course or not. With an NDB, you can only see where the airport is. With winds, on an NDB, unless done properly, you will fly a curve to get there. The stronger the wind, the bigger the curve.

[kpaul]

4 minutes ago, jlunseth said:

I have tried flying some practice NDB approaches with it, but the plane is just too fast.  If I come at the approach from an angle approaching 90 degrees, I can't get the plane turned around and on the outbound course in time to realistically fly the approach.

How fast is your airplane?  I have flown numerous NDB approaches in both the C-130 and PC-12, and unless I am mistaken both aircraft are significantly faster.  Even at 150 KIAS you should have no problems flying a full procedure NDB from any approach direction.  All that being said, given the choice, I would fly any other approach rather than a NDB.

[kpaul]

7 minutes ago, DonMuncy said:

NDBs are only a problem with cross winds. On a VOR, you can always see whether you are on course or not. With an NDB, you can only see where the airport is. With winds, on an NDB, unless done properly, you will fly a curve to get there. The stronger the wind, the bigger the curve.

That's homing, not flying the approach course, you should never fly a curve, unless on an arc.  Head always falls/tail always rises. Set a heading to get on course and use small corrections to counter the wind and set the wind corrected heading.

[DonMuncy]

Yes, that is flying it properly. What is "Head always falls/tail always rises." I haven't heard that one.

[M20F]

21 minutes ago, DonMuncy said:

NDBs are only a problem with cross winds. On a VOR, you can always see whether you are on course or not. With an NDB, you can only see where the airport is. With winds, on an NDB, unless done properly, you will fly a curve to get there. The stronger the wind, the bigger the curve.

That is what I felt was the best quality of NDB approaches from a pure training perspective.  Those who learned them fundamentally understood exactly how wind works on a plane and how to compensate for it.  There is not a great replacement training tool to really show wind like NDB's.. Pilots today certainly learn wind and how to correct for it, but the NDB was such a great tool for it.