Aviation & Pilots Forums, discuss topics that interest Pilots and Aviation Enthusiasts. Looking for information on how to become a pilot? Check out our Free online pilot exams and flight training resources section.
Colonel wrote:
After passing the FAF inbound, turn to the
final approach track and hold that. Ignore
any crosswind.
The problem with that is that you could be quite far off course if there is a significant crosswind, especially if you're doing the approach at 90kts, and it might be enough to fail a flight test. Have you ever taken a photograph of the needles at MDA when there's a strong crosswind and you're doing a significant turn at the FAF? If not, you might want to try it.
Oh well, time for Crunchie to lecture me
about how I did it all wrong, flying for
decades before he came to Canada ::)
I was flying for a decade before I moved to Canada, not that it really matters. How many years does someone have to have lived in Canada to have an opinion about something related to aviation?
The problem with that is that you could be quite far off course if there is a significant crosswind,
Well I will disagree with that. We calculated for a FAF at 4 to 5 miles which is pretty standard you would need 50 kts at 90 degrees to blow you out of the corridor. Now a 50 kt wind is pretty evident so common sense should give you a clue. Because the key to the NDB approach is crossing the beacon with a very accurate and crisp station passage the winds should be pretty much known. Even if you didn't clue into the 50 knots across after 1 minute in bound after turning to the approach heading you are pretty clued out if you can't pick up your drift. You can't make a rule and expect it to cover all situations. The thought process needs to always be active. Who is doing the flying. You or the aeroplane.
What we don't need is these discussions being sidetracked by people with limited experience in the subject being discussed.
In fact I am seriously thinking of quitting these forums and leaving it to the experts who just won't quit letting us know how much they know compared to those of us who spent a life time flying for a living.
I started this to point out that ADF approaches have been used ever since the Radio Range stations were replaced by the ADF.
By the way the Radio Range was a very reliable and safe method of navigating and doing IMC approaches.
The ADF made it so much less difficult to locate the bearing of a station...
Liquid Charlie wrote:Well I will disagree with that. We calculated for a FAF at 4 to 5 miles which is pretty standard you would need 50 kts at 90 degrees to blow you out of the corridor.
I was talking about the flight test. Maximum error is 10 degrees. With a 25kt crosswind at 90kts you'll be off the inbound track by 15 degrees, which is a fail. You'll probably still be within the protected area, but it's still a pretty shitty approach IMHO and you might have to do some circling.
Liquid Charlie wrote:
So if I'm reading this right. You do not correct for wind on an NDB approach -- wow --
I do. It was the Colonel who said he teaches students to ignore crosswind, which is why this discussion started. I think it's a bad idea to not correct for wind.
It's like picking pepper out of fly shit. I don't think anyone in their right mind would say disregard wind on an NDB approach but a fact I have proven likely several hundred times the best thing you can do at beacon inbound is go to the approach track heading and hold it. 95% of the time no correction will be needed as long as you had a good station passage. Don't kid yourself back in the day shooting NDB approached to ILS minimums was not unheard of in the flat lands of Canada.
I bet not many people are taught to actually land the airplane any more simulating zero zero L.C.
We have to be careful in these discussions arguing with people who don't really know jack shit about these subjects, because if you do it long enough everyone will think you are no better than them. :)
