A Little Sentimentality--a Look Back in Time

[donkaye]

As I was preparing for a student tomorrow, I came upon an article I wrote for the MAPA Log in 1993, a year after I bought my airplane.   Have times ever changed!  I thought I had the greatest panel ever devised for a GA airplane at the time--and I did.  But compared to what I have today, it was nearly the dark ages with only the most primitive of displays.  I had praise for the MAPA Safety Foundation back then, and even now look back fondly on taking the PPP because I was introduced to Bob Goldin, my mentor instructor, and a person who single handedly changed the course of my life, although I don't think it was intentional.  Some people just have that impact, though.  Through his mentoring and encouragement to become a CFI and CFII, I changed my life's orientation from Real Estate to Aviation.  Of course Real Estate continues to be important in my life but Aviation has taken center stage.  Bob recommended me as an instructor for the PPP and I enjoyed teaching for them for eight years until the management changed with the death of Don Bymaster.  Bob was forced out due to age and after I tried to make some recommendations for improvement to the Program, I was out.  I am not a fan of politics.  Luckily, I make my own path in life.  Through flight instruction I have met so many interesting people I never would have met otherwise.

I've attached that article for anyone who wants to take the time to read it.  It's funny to see how excited I was over things that seem so trivial today.  Also, I've totally changed my opinion on the use of speed brakes, and have written on their use in another article on my website.  Time does march on.

Mooney N9148W Mooney of the Month.pdf

[MB65E]

Nice read Don!

-Matt

[flyboy0681]

If available, please post a picture of the panel from those early days of ownership, along with the current one.

[donkaye]

OK.   I don't need to comment which is which.

 

[Philip France 13]

Hello Don,

Congratulations for this great panel,

I am based in Europe and in the process to upgrade to glass my M20J,

Discussing with my avionic shop I told them i like to add to the GTN750 + GNC255 a G3X or G500txi and remove the old king DME and ADF,

He replied i would not be allowed to fly VOR/DME approaches, same for NDB approaches,

The regulation is stating that you must have the appropriate radios for the selected approaches,

How do you cope with this in US ?

Philip

[ArtVandelay]

Hello Don,
Congratulations for this great panel,
I am based in Europe and in the process to upgrade to glass my M20J,
Discussing with my avionic shop I told them i like to add to the GTN750 + GNC255 a G3X or G500txi and remove the old king DME and ADF,
He replied i would not be allowed to fly VOR/DME approaches, same for NDB approaches,
The regulation is stating that you must have the appropriate radios for the selected approaches,
How do you cope with this in US ?
Philip

In US, VOR and NDB approaches are being eliminated, small airports especially since there is no equipment to maintain with a GPS approach.

[Hank]

56 minutes ago, Philip France 13 said:

Hello Don,

Congratulations for this great panel,

I am based in Europe and in the process to upgrade to glass my M20J,

Discussing with my avionic shop I told them i like to add to the GTN750 + GNC255 a G3X or G500txi and remove the old king DME and ADF,

He replied i would not be allowed to fly VOR/DME approaches, same for NDB approaches,

The regulation is stating that you must have the appropriate radios for the selected approaches,

How do you cope with this in US ?

Philip

In the US, we substitute GPS approaches for VOR/DME and NDB approaches. Even when the ground equipment is gone, there are GPS approaches that match the old ones with waypoints that match where the beacons used to be. After a while, new GPS approaches may be built that aren't related to the old ones.

[jaylw314]

1 hour ago, Philip France 13 said:

Hello Don,

Congratulations for this great panel,

I am based in Europe and in the process to upgrade to glass my M20J,

Discussing with my avionic shop I told them i like to add to the GTN750 + GNC255 a G3X or G500txi and remove the old king DME and ADF,

He replied i would not be allowed to fly VOR/DME approaches, same for NDB approaches,

The regulation is stating that you must have the appropriate radios for the selected approaches,

How do you cope with this in US ?

Philip

I think most people here keep a DME receiver and junk the ADF.

[Andy95W]

21 minutes ago, jaylw314 said:

I think most people here keep a DME receiver and junk the ADF.

Wait, I was supposed to keep my DME?!? 

[ArtVandelay]

I think most people here keep a DME receiver and junk the ADF.

My DME was a KNS80…I couldn’t get rid of it fast enough.

[kortopates]

i think the main differences for Phillip is that here in the US what we can do that Philip can not do in Europe are:
1) mainly, substitute GPS distance for DME distance
2) of less consequence, we can fly a VOR or NDB approach using GPS as our primary nav as long as we can monitor the raw signal data, such as using a bearing pointer on a glass HSI. But of course it does still require having VOR radios and that won’t be going away for a long time since the VOR MON is our backup to a widespread GPS outage.
Very few NDB approaches still exist in the continental US. So most of us have ditched the heavy ADF along time ago with even less need to keep DME.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jaylw314]

2 hours ago, kortopates said:

i think the main differences for Phillip is that here in the US what we can do that Philip can not do in Europe are:
1) mainly, substitute GPS distance for DME distance
2) of less consequence, we can fly a VOR or NDB approach using GPS as our primary nav as long as we can monitor the raw signal data, such as using a bearing pointer on a glass HSI. But of course it does still require having VOR radios and that won’t be going away for a long time since the VOR MON is our backup to a widespread GPS outage.
Very few NDB approaches still exist in the continental US. So most of us have ditched the heavy ADF along time ago with even less need to keep DME.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If the final approach course has DME waypoints that have no alternate location (like another intersecting VOR), you still need that DME for that final approach segment, right?

For that matter, I do recall there are a couple IAP's that have you follow a DME arc for the final approach segment, and assume those would require DME as well.

Edit: oooooh, I found my answer, anything used for LATERAL guidance on the FAS must be monitored, so you can junk the DME even on the FAS (unless you're flying that weird FAS arc approach).  TIL!

Edited September 7, 2021 by jaylw314

[MooneyMitch]

9 minutes ago, jaylw314 said:

If the final approach course has DME waypoints that have no alternate location (like another intersecting VOR), you still need that DME for that final approach segment, right?

For that matter, I do recall there are a couple IAP's that have you follow a DME arc for the final approach segment, and assume those would require DME as well.

[Hank]

5 hours ago, jaylw314 said:

I think most people here keep a DME receiver and junk the ADF.

I've never flown with a functional DME, and the Mooney did not have one when I bought it in 2007 . . . . GPS, baby! 

[201Mooniac]

Great to read how you felt  about the plane and panel back then.  It shows that you still love the plane and certainly love the panel :-)

[Mooney in Oz]

An enjoyable read, Don.

Thanks for sharing.

[kortopates]

4 hours ago, jaylw314 said:

If the final approach course has DME waypoints that have no alternate location (like another intersecting VOR), you still need that DME for that final approach segment, right?

For that matter, I do recall there are a couple IAP's that have you follow a DME arc for the final approach segment, and assume those would require DME as well.

Edit: oooooh, I found my answer, anything used for LATERAL guidance on the FAS must be monitored, so you can junk the DME even on the FAS (unless you're flying that weird FAS arc approach).  TIL!

DME arcs can easily be flown with the GPS!

I assume you don't yet have a IFR GPS navigator in your panel. When you load any of these types of approaches, your GPS navigator is capable of giving lateral left/right course correction along the arc (the GPS distance it gives you is actually the length along the arc - not the arc radius!) DME fixes that aren't database waypoints will be listed as lettered waypoints in the procedure (Jeppesen has a system for naming these). 

In addition to using a database procedure to fly an Arc where the box gives you guidance on how to navigate and even intercept the arc (which is so super easy to fly), you can also use GPS DME Subsitution to fly an arc for which there is no database procedure. My favorite example that I give my students is the Martin DME Arc approach. It has no database procedure so muct be flown manually and perfectly acceptable to do so with GPS using the DME facility as the active waypoint. This procedure's FAF is an ARC - not a straight line and the missed is another Arc! Checkout the KMTN VOR 15 - its a very unique approach and so much fun!  

Edited September 8, 2021 by kortopates

[N201MKTurbo]

Try the HI-ILS or LOC RWY 21 at Roswell NM.

[Will.iam]

3 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

Try the HI-ILS or LOC RWY 21 at Roswell NM.

Otherwise known as the widow maker. Flying it in a sub 250 kt airplane is easy compared to trying to do it in a beech 400 jet. If you didn’t configure gear down early, the speedbrakes were not enough and you would bust airspeed or altitude limit and hook your sortie flying that arrival, thus the nickname given to the approach. 

[Will.iam]

42 minutes ago, kortopates said:

DME arcs can easily be flown with the GPS!

I assume you don't yet have a IFR GPS navigator in your panel. When you load any of these types of approaches, your GPS navigator is capable of giving lateral left/right course correction along the arc (the GPS distance it gives you is actually the length along the arc - not the arc radius!) DME fixes that aren't database waypoints will be listed as lettered waypoints in the procedure (Jeppesen has a system for naming these). 

In addition to using a database procedure to fly an Arc where the box gives you guidance on how to navigate and even intercept the arc (which is so super easy to fly), you can also use GPS DME Subsitution to fly an arc for which there is no database procedure. My favorite example that I give my students is the Martin DME Arc approach. It has no database procedure so muct be flown manually and perfectly acceptable to do so with GPS using the DME facility as the active waypoint. This procedure's FAF is an ARC - not a straight line and the missed is another Arc! Checkout the KMTN VOR 15 - its a very unique approach and so much fun!  

That approach is radical. Makes me want to fly up there just so i can fly it!

[jaylw314]

2 hours ago, kortopates said:

DME arcs can easily be flown with the GPS!

I assume you don't yet have a IFR GPS navigator in your panel. When you load any of these types of approaches, your GPS navigator is capable of giving lateral left/right course correction along the arc (the GPS distance it gives you is actually the length along the arc - not the arc radius!) DME fixes that aren't database waypoints will be listed as lettered waypoints in the procedure (Jeppesen has a system for naming these). 

In addition to using a database procedure to fly an Arc where the box gives you guidance on how to navigate and even intercept the arc (which is so super easy to fly), you can also use GPS DME Subsitution to fly an arc for which there is no database procedure. My favorite example that I give my students is the Martin DME Arc approach. It has no database procedure so muct be flown manually and perfectly acceptable to do so with GPS using the DME facility as the active waypoint. This procedure's FAF is an ARC - not a straight line and the missed is another Arc! Checkout the KMTN VOR 15 - its a very unique approach and so much fun!  

I've got a 530W, and yes, that shows the arcs on approach segments.  I understand the GPS can substitute for the DME arcs in general.  The part the I don't get is how you can fly the KMTN VOR 15 approach, using GPS only, when the final approach segment requires lateral guidance from the DME?  I mean, it's clearly not the VOR that's giving you lateral guidance, so it must be the DME, right?  And I would interpret that you can use GPS, but you need to monitor the DME for the FAS?

Edited September 8, 2021 by jaylw314

[kortopates]

I've got a 530W, and yes, that shows the arcs on approach segments.  I understand the GPS can substitute for the DME arcs in general.  The part the I don't get is how you can fly the KMTN VOR 15 approach, using GPS only, when the final approach segment requires lateral guidance from the DME?  I mean, it's clearly not the VOR that's giving you lateral guidance, so it must be the DME, right?  And I would interpret that you can use GPS, but you need to monitor the DME for the FAS?

DME doesn't provide "lateral" guidance - only distance.  The AIM's reference to Lateral Guidance, such as in AIM 1-2-3 discussing use of RNAV ststems on Conventional approaches discusses lateral guidance in the context of using VOR and NDB guidance, and of course does say the raw signal must be montitored on the final approach course. But this doesn't apply to DME which does not give lateral guidance  - just distance.  A VOR and NDB  lateral guidance signal is different from using distance information alone for lateral guidance. Edited September 8, 2021 by kortopates

[Mooney Dog]

20 hours ago, Philip France 13 said:

remove the old king DME and ADF

if i recall correctly, in Europe, the rules regarding using GPS as DME are different. Thats most likely why your AP said that.

 

As many people have replied, in the states, we can use gps in lieu of dme and adf. Though good luck finding an adf approach in the states.