Today's use of VORs and NDB / DME

[N449aa 10]

Hi all

 

I recently learned a lot about VOR, DME and NDB. After the theory, I took my NGX, switched the display to the VOR view and made a full flight in Alaska from A to B only with VOR/NDB/DME Navigation, including a VOR/DME Landing. It was like flying blind in the first, and you really have to focus on the situational awareness. But after a while, it was quite fun as you are really challenged to reach your destination. The most difficult thing is to know when you have to start the turn to reach the new radial without overshooting.

 

So despite this was very fun, challenging and educational, I know that this is not the way you doi it in a plane like the 737 NG, where you have an ND etc.

 

My Questions:

Why is there still a whole VOR Display installed with ADF system and all related stuff?

 

Is there any pilot in the world, who still flies like that with a modern plane?

 

Also, why are there still VOR Approaches, although you are able today to navigate through VORs without needing to know that it is a VOR? I mean, I can fly a VOR approach with using the VORs as simple waypoints displayed in the ND.

 

Of course one fact is probably, that these are remains from the old aviation world. For example, I found out that all regular waypoints are still handled by the Airplanes Computers as intersection points of several Radials of VORS. So the Computers still only know VORs(which is quite outdated in my opinion), but that doesn't explain why the Pilot's interface still gives the possibility to fly like 60 years ago without ND.

 

I hope you guys have some great Facts to share. I really want to understand why the VOR's still play such a centkey role in today's aviation.

 

Best Regards

 

Kevin

[Airfighter 150]

Here is the answer:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3kREPMzMLk

[machine2035 176]

Hi all

 

I recently learned a lot about VOR, DME and NDB. After the theory, I took my NGX, switched the display to the VOR view and made a full flight in Alaska from A to B only with VOR/NDB/DME Navigation, including a VOR/DME Landing. It was like flying blind in the first, and you really have to focus on the situational awareness. But after a while, it was quite fun as you are really challenged to reach your destination. The most difficult thing is to know when you have to start the turn to reach the new radial without overshooting.

 

So despite this was very fun, challenging and educational, I know that this is not the way you doi it in a plane like the 737 NG, where you have an ND etc.

 

My Questions:

Why is there still a whole VOR Display installed with ADF system and all related stuff?

 

Is there any pilot in the world, who still flies like that with a modern plane?

 

Also, why are there still VOR Approaches, although you are able today to navigate through VORs without needing to know that it is a VOR? I mean, I can fly a VOR approach with using the VORs as simple waypoints displayed in the ND.

 

Of course one fact is probably, that these are remains from the old aviation world. For example, I found out that all regular waypoints are still handled by the Airplanes Computers as intersection points of several Radials of VORS. So the Computers still only know VORs(which is quite outdated in my opinion), but that doesn't explain why the Pilot's interface still gives the possibility to fly like 60 years ago without ND.

 

I hope you guys have some great Facts to share. I really want to understand why the VOR's still play such a centkey role in today's aviation.

 

Best Regards

 

Kevin

Hi Kevin,

 

I agree with you that it's fun to fly with conventional navaids and raw data, afterall the best real flying is when you're in a 172 using a RMI and a fixed card ADF to shoot an NDB approach - Good and challenging fun!

 

In regards to "Why is there still ADF and VOR displays etc", well when shooting an NDB, VOR etc. approach, it is a requirement to have that raw data displayed and to be monitored. While you may have the approach in your FMC navigation database, and are flying it in LNAV/VNAV (or IAN if the aircraft is fitted with this feature), unless you have approvals from the safety regulator of that country, you must monitor the 'raw-data' of that approach while flying it (i.e. Identifying the NDB isn't OOS and it's identified correctly - either by listening to its morse code or checking that its identified correctly on your PFD/ND).

 

In regards to why there are still VOR's, well they are still there, but there is some decommissioning going on in parts of the world. I would just like the make the point that many countries are starting to de-commission conventional navigational aid facilities, in particular NDB's.

 

It won't be long where we see non-precision approaches such as the NDB and VOR approach, be replaced with more accurate and precision (bolded on purpose) GPS approaches (such as WAAS, GLS etc.) which utilise ground based stations to confirm the integrity of the GPS data being recieved by the unit. These ground based units happen to be a whole lot cheaper than installing a localiser/glideslope (however once you add up the cost of making all aircraft compliant, it probably turns out to be overall as economical as installing a localiser/glideslop setup).

 

While a real NG skipper might not fly around with the ND on VOR mode, don't let that stop you doing so in the sim...Afterall it is a game B)

[g_precentralis 191]

Well, the ground equipment exist, so why not to use it. In aircraft, it's the very same equipment installed for ILS, so why not use it for VOR nav too? In my view it's not outdated at all, it's reliable, it's safe, in fact most of my training I flown using radionavigation. It doesn't require any management, typing into FMC, just set freq and crs, quick ident and you are good to go. I could pay more for G1000 but that would be waste of money.

Airline pilots use it as overlay during approach, as backup or as main navigation. FMC can fail, and if there is not backup system you would end up flying visually. Even if everything is ok, it's much easier to set freq and course and fly than to setup FMC for approach.

 

Anyway, I don't expect decommission of radio nav antennas anytime soon in my part of the world. There are just few rnav equipped GA aircraft here, so that would kill GA aviation.

[mgh 89]

In addition to GPS, modern FMS use as many sensors as they can, such as VORs, in order to determine and validate their exact position.

[Don t moderate me this way 882]

What about (partial) failures in onboard avionics, displays and the electric system? You want to have alternatives and some sort of redundancy in those cases.

[Avantime 81]

"Why is there still a whole VOR Display installed with ADF system and all related stuff?"

 

 

Not sure what you mean, I haven't done any NDB approaches with the NGX but I assume you use the RMI/ND needles to navigate, although MAP mode gives you more situational awareness.

 

"Is there any pilot in the world, who still flies like that with a modern plane?"

For VOR/ILS approaches some operators require one of the 2 NDs to display raw data. That's what VOR/ILS HSI ND modes are for. With MAP mode unexpected map shifts are a possibility if the GPS or INS systems somehow screw up. This usually only happens with non-GPS equipped aircraft e.g. DME-DME or INS-only RNAV, or cowboys flying half-broken aircraft into dodgy places.

 

Also some places like China do not use the WGS84 reference datum for waypoints, so some places there could be a difference between the waypoint on the chart and the one on the ND. In that case always cross-check with navaid raw data.

 

And then there are people in the 'developing world' who fly old airplanes, sometimes with non-certified handheld Garmins....

 

"Also, why are there still VOR Approaches, although you are able today to navigate through VORs without needing to know that it is a VOR? I mean, I can fly a VOR approach with using the VORs as simple waypoints displayed in the ND."

Non-precision approaches like VOR and NDB approaches are used in case the ILS becomes inoperative, e.g. SFO when that Asiana 777 crashed. Some ILS can remain broken for years, even decades because the local government doesn't care about aviation safety. IIRC the ILS in Tripoli hasn't worked for 20+ years, during the Gaddafi era.

 

If you navigate 'primarily' using VOR then the VOR must be correctly identified (morse code ident) and HSI raw data must be displayed in at least 1 ND. Technically however you can use waypoints in MAP mode as a 'secondary' source of reference - using the other ND. In enroute navigation however most VOR-VOR airways are also RNAV capable so most people just fly RNAV GPS primary instead and rely on MAP mode only.

[scandinavian13 5,192]

 

 

Why is there still a whole VOR Display installed with ADF system and all related stuff?

 

In case all of the other magic fails, you can go back to how most people (up until now-ish) learned how to navigate while IFR.

 

What happens if your IRUs and GPS fails?  No more pretty nav display data.  What are you gonna do now?

 

 

 

Is there any pilot in the world, who still flies like that with a modern plane?

 

Yes.  Get a nasty day at JFK where they're forced to land on the 13s, but not bad enough to force the ILS to the 13s*, and you're gonna get the VOR 13L/R (which does have a GPS overlay, but still.  There are better examples out there - that's the only example I could think of at the moment

 

*They avoid ILS13L at JFK like the plague, because 13s at JFK forces 13s at LGA, which forces EWR and TEB to timeshare for departures and arrivals), you're 

 

 

 

Also, why are there still VOR Approaches, although you are able today to navigate through VORs without needing to know that it is a VOR? I mean, I can fly a VOR approach with using the VORs as simple waypoints displayed in the ND.

 

Big shiny metal things aren't the only planes out there.

 

This awkward gem was /A until only a couple years ago (when it went to /G, but is now /nothing because some idiot forgot his lessons on density altitude and weight)

 

(aftermath of forgetting to calc DA at a 3000'+ field, with two of your full-sized buddies in the plane...)

[machine2035 176]

*They avoid ILS13L at JFK like the plague, because 13s at JFK forces 13s at LGA, which forces EWR and TEB to timeshare for departures and arrivals)

It must be a headache during a runway change at any airport in N90.

 

They all seem to have a huge knock on effect at every airport in the TRACON. I still giggle every time I see the way aircraft are vectored onto the 13's when coming from the west (via LENDY from memory, all the way past the airport and then back around, when they could be just gone straight in...obviously conflicting with the tonnes of airports within N90),

[FLEX1978 373]

I think everyone has summed it perfectly, especially the point about flying with raw data. Pilot monitoring should always be backing up the approach with raw data, it's all well having big shiny LCD displays but what happens when you get a map shift, ADIRU failure etc? You revert to basic navigation.

 

Whilst I am not a purist when it comes to FS, everyone is free to fly how they want.. Still I wonder if many simmers just fly the magenta line & what they would do if they lost the FMC & both ND's during an approach at night in IMC.

[scandinavian13 5,192]

 

 

They all seem to have a huge knock on effect at every airport in the TRACON. I still giggle every time I see the way aircraft are vectored onto the 13's when coming from the west (via LENDY from memory, all the way past the airport and then back around, when they could be just gone straight in...obviously conflicting with the tonnes of airports within N90),

 

Yep.

 

Over EWR's streams, over LGA's streams, and then clear of the JFK departure streams, and finally hooked in for the awkward late turns from the VOR or visual.

[Somebody_Else 7]

Here in the UK we are in the process of decommissioning the en-route NDBs a bunch where switched off in 2011, though for some reason, I've been to lazy not to read up on, they seemed to have stalled.

 

We have SIDS (EGBB,EGNX) that are based/end on NDBs but as the conversation has gone it is rather ridiculous as they are very outdated and in modern airliners it's becoming harder and harder to find the ADF in the first place!

 

Now, I don't think we'd be in a hurry to decommission VOR's. They are the basis of intersections, holds, landing procedures etc etc. ATM is very slow on the uptake of new technology and has to cater for the minimal navigation requirements. I think it will be a long time before GPS becomes a minimal requirement.

[N449aa 10]

Many thanks for all those great answers. The Raw data use really explains a lot. I realise that we are not too far away from the old way of flying, despite having modern NDs and stuff...

 

It is a pleasure to read all your anwers. Very helpful!

 

ROB: Many FS pilots would be lost I think at night with those failures. But hey: do you remember the famous AF447? The best example for so many weaknesses in todays aviation world.

[Somebody_Else 7]

But hey: do you remember the famous AF447? The best example for so many weaknesses in todays aviation world.

 

Well that's an interesting thing to bring up, the indication was only wrong for a short time due the icing of the pitot tube and the a/p dropping out due to airspeed inconsistencies..it was the what happened afterwards that resulted in the very sad outcome.

 

Though this along with other high profile incidents (737-8 at EHAM, the 777 at SFO etc) should be pointing out the huge issue of humans & machines working together. Work needs to be done to guard people from these kind of events happening again.

[Boatinman 1]

Nonradar