IFR DME arc training
C J Campbell
had an instrument rating and a little under 200 hrs PIC. He told me that he
had never flown a DME arc, not even as an instrument student. His instructor
told him that he would not be asked to fly one on the check ride and that
DME arcs are never used any more. I was, uh, surprised. Anyway, I made him
fly the DME arc and he did pretty well. His only trouble was that at first
he forgot to switch the GPS/NAV switch to NAV so that he could use the VOR
to intercept his radials, heh, heh. After that little glitch he did pretty
well.
Anyway, I have never heard of an instructor saying that DME arcs are not
used any more. Anyone else run across this sort of thing?
--
Christopher J. Campbell
Certificated Flight Instructor, Instrument and Multiengine Airplane
Port Orchard, WA
Doug
radar environment, I would think they are rare. Below radar, when you have
to fly the full approach, if it has a DME arc, then you have to fly it.
I've never gotten one in actual, or even in VMC on an IFR flight plan.
Anyone gotten a DME arc when there was radar coverage available?
"C J Campbell" <christoph...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:u85fjdt...@corp.supernews.com...
John R. Copeland
---JRC---
"Doug" <anoth...@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:Srzg8.33995$0C1.2...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Ron Natalie
C J Campbell wrote:
>
> Same flight yesterday as the KLN94 post earlier. The pilot I was flying with
> had an instrument rating and a little under 200 hrs PIC. He told me that he
> had never flown a DME arc, not even as an instrument student.
If the plane didn't have a DME (and a lot of instrument trainers don't)
there isn't much you can do.
> His instructor told him that he would not be asked to fly one on the check ride
If the plane didn't have DME, it would be hard to require it to be performed
on the ride
> and that DME arcs are never used any more.
Depends where you are I guess. I think in this entire area we've only got one
or two approaches with DME arcs on them. =
Russ MacDonald
radar coverage. There has always been a better alternative.
Russ
"Doug" <anoth...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:Srzg8.33995$0C1.2...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Larry Fransson
"C J Campbell" <christoph...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote:
> Anyway, I have never heard of an instructor saying that DME arcs are not
> used any more. Anyone else run across this sort of thing?
You know as well as any of us that if you read the newsgoups long
enough, you'll find an instructor somewhere saying something screwy.
None of the aircraft I trained in had DME, so I didn't fly any DME arcs
during my instrument training. It wasn't until almost five years later
when I was checking out in a Seneca that I learned how to fly an arc.
--
Larry Fransson
Seattle, WA
C J Campbell
removed from the 172RG when I had a Garmin 430 installed in it last month.
The cost of tying the DME to the GPS (apparently required if it exists) was
too much. So I no longer have a plane with DME to train with. I guess all
the DME arcs will have to be flown with GPS.
"Ron Natalie" <r...@sensor.com> wrote in message
news:3C82C983...@sensor.com...
Hilton
> Anyone gotten a DME arc when there was radar coverage available?
Sure, the Watsonville VOR-DMA-A approach off the Salinas VOR (near Monterey
CA) has a DME arc flown at 3200'. It's (almost) always, fly XYZ heading,
climb and maintain 3200', intercept the 8 DME arc, ...
I've flown it in IMC conditions.
Hilton
Craig Prouse
BTDT. Random vectors onto a DME arc. It's real barrel of laughs, trying to
figure out on the fly how far to turn. There's a provision to handle that
on the KLN 89B GPS -- probably the most obscure feature of the box.
Craig
Mark Kolber
<christoph...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote:
>Anyway, I have never heard of an instructor saying that DME arcs are not
>used any more. Anyone else run across this sort of thing?
CFIs who don't know what they're talking about? Never ran into it! <g>
I did my instrument training in CT. Plane with no DME and no DME arcs
nearby, so they weren't taught. Common drawback in most flight
training is "teaching to the checkride." If it's not going to be on
the ride, it's not taught.
Plenty of DME arcs here in Colorado and NM, usually providing an
alternative to vectors. Probably given as often as any other type of
full approach and in the same circumstances. In some cases, they are
the shortest approach to an airport surrounded by mountains where
radar coverage will be spotty.
-
Mark Kolber
APA, Denver, Colorado
www.midlifeflight.com
=========
email? replace "spamaway" with "mkolber
Jack Cunniff
>Same flight yesterday as the KLN94 post earlier. The pilot I was flying with
>had an instrument rating and a little under 200 hrs PIC. He told me that he
>had never flown a DME arc, not even as an instrument student. His instructor
>told him that he would not be asked to fly one on the check ride and that
>DME arcs are never used any more. I was, uh, surprised. Anyway, I made him
>fly the DME arc and he did pretty well. His only trouble was that at first
>he forgot to switch the GPS/NAV switch to NAV so that he could use the VOR
>to intercept his radials, heh, heh. After that little glitch he did pretty
>well.
>Anyway, I have never heard of an instructor saying that DME arcs are not
>used any more. Anyone else run across this sort of thing?
Mine said that they still exist, but that in his nine thousand hours, he'd
never had to fly one.
With him, I flew a practice arc around a VOR, and did an NDB approach the
same day, both because I said that I wanted to do it, and learn it from
someone that still knew how to teach it.
I know that I want a panel-mount, approach-certified GPS. Until then, I'm
not going to regret having the other toys in my arsenal.
-Jack
Doug
you come to the arc, it is ALWAYS a 90 degree turn to get on the arc.
"Craig Prouse" <cra...@apple.com> wrote in message
news:B8A86A09.4493A%cra...@apple.com...
RTL
living at night, so you start looking for anything different to break the
routine!! I have been given them when the radar was on the fritz and the
controller was concerned it might die before they got me established.
Regards,
Russ
Dane Spearing
"C J Campbell" <christoph...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
> I guess all the DME arcs will have to be flown with GPS.
I've always wondered about the legality of this. Is it legal to use a
GPS in place of a DME to fly DME arcs (or other approach situations that
require DME?) And if so, is an IFR Approach certified GPS required, or
will an enroute certified unit do? (e.g. - my UPS-AT GX55)
In addition, doesn't slant range (or lack thereof) start to become an
issue if using a GPS rather than a DME?
-- Dane
Craig Prouse
>> trying to figure out on the fly how far to turn.
>> There's a provision to handle that on the KLN 89B GPS --
>> probably the most obscure feature of the box.
> Doug at anoth...@earthlink.net wrote on 3/4/02 7:33 AM:
> If you are flying towards the center of the arc (usually the VOR), when
> you come to the arc, it is ALWAYS a 90 degree turn to get on the arc.
Yes, Doug, if you're flying a radial towards the center of the arc (or away
from it for that matter), it's all very straightforward. As I was saying,
it's a little bit different when you're being radar vectored onto the arc at
some random angle.
Craig
les_I...@waitforit.com
wrote:
Why is it diferent?
When you reach the arc distance, you turn to a heading 90 degrees to
the radial you are on.
Tim Bengtson
>
> les_I...@waitforit.com wrote:
>
> > When you reach the arc distance, you turn to a heading 90 degrees to
> > the radial you are on.
>
> arc. If your controller is very clever and nice, he might vector you
> directly onto the arc such that no turn at all is required.
Oh, sorry. I misinterpreted Les's statement to mean that you always
need to make a 90 degree turn, which is not true.
Tim
Tim Bengtson
> When you reach the arc distance, you turn to a heading 90 degrees to
> the radial you are on.
No, not necessarily. It depends on your heading when you intersect the
arc. If your controller is very clever and nice, he might vector you
directly onto the arc such that no turn at all is required.
Tim
Craig Prouse
AM:
>> Yes, Doug, if you're flying a radial towards the center of the arc (or away
>> from it for that matter), it's all very straightforward. As I was saying,
>> it's a little bit different when you're being radar vectored onto the arc at
>> some random angle.
>>
>> Craig
> Why is it diferent?
>
> When you reach the arc distance, you turn to a heading 90 degrees to
> the radial you are on.
Yeah, it's not rocket science, but "the radial you are on" may be changing
continuously and quite rapidly as you approach the arc, and you really don't
know exactly where you're going to intercept the arc until you get there.
So rather than just tracking a course for several miles and then turning 90
degrees to a heading calculated minutes in advance, we have to do mental
gymnastics right at the point of arc intercept. We do DME arcs somewhat
rarely, vectors to DME arcs are even rarer yet, and if we're flying the
approach associated with the arc as a GPS approach, we have to remember and
apply the special trick with the GPS that allows us to do that.
It's a little bit different.
les_I...@waitforit.com
Even under the ideaized situation you describe, you will
nevertheless be on a heading 90 degrees to the radial you are on.
Not that it would ever happen anyway, except by pure happenstance. No
controller is going to waste his valuable time.
Craig Prouse
"Dane Spearing" <speari...@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:spearingdane-799D...@pith.uoregon.edu...
> I've always wondered about the legality of this. Is it legal to use a
> GPS in place of a DME to fly DME arcs (or other approach situations that
> require DME?) And if so, is an IFR Approach certified GPS required, or
> will an enroute certified unit do? (e.g. - my UPS-AT GX55)
Ref: AIM 1-1-21. (f)(5)(b)
> In addition, doesn't slant range (or lack thereof) start to become an
> issue if using a GPS rather than a DME?
DME slant range is only a factor to the extent your altitude (squared) is
significant with respect to GPS distance (squared). If you're flying an 8
DME arc at 3000' above the station, the difference is 0.2%. This is below
the resolution of DME.
Craig
Doug
terminal or approach. Most are approach. The certified IFR GPS can be used
in lieu of DME, ADF and used to identify "marker beacon" waypoints it the
waypoint is in the database. The previous items are "pieces" of an approach.
The IFR GPS cannot be used in lieu of the "primary" approach navigation
equipment such as VOR, Localizer, or NDB.
Basically with an IFR GPS and a VOR/GS you can do any type of approach
EXCEPT an NDB approach. That is VOR, VOR/DME, Localizer, ILS. If the box is
approach certified, GPS approaches as well are doable.
"Dane Spearing" <speari...@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:spearingdane-799D...@pith.uoregon.edu...
Tim Howell
> Anyway, I have never heard of an instructor saying that DME arcs are not
> used any more. Anyone else run across this sort of thing?
I haven't done them yet, and my checkride is in two weeks. A couple of
nights ago I reminded my instructor that we hadn't flown any yet;
they're on the list of things to try tomorrow. =)
--TWH
McGregor
1) You'll never get a hold in actual.
2) VORs are going away.
3) You don't need to know DPs or STARS, just put "No SIDS No STARS" in the
remarks section.
and now...
4) You'll never have to fly a DME arc.
Miller
"C J Campbell" <christoph...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:u85fjdt...@corp.supernews.com...
Casey Webster
tells you how far away you are from a navigational aid (VOR/DME, VORTAC,
TACAN, etc).
The DME arc this tread talks about is a maneuver where you basically fly a
course that partially circles a navaid at a specified distance. For
instance, if you draw a dot on a peice of paper, then draw a big circle
around it, and label the distance from the dot to the circle as 15 nm. Now
pick an arc on the circle (say 270 degrees to 360 degrees), flying that arc
is what you would do in a DME arc maneuver. (dot on the pic represents the
navaid used for DME reference)
"Miller" <gkmi...@dreamscape.com> wrote in message
news:u88hr6s...@corp.supernews.com...
les_I...@waitforit.com
If you are hearing this stuff in training, you should run, not walk,
to new training.
Dave Butler
> So rather than just tracking a course for several miles and then turning 90
> degrees to a heading calculated minutes in advance, we have to do mental
> gymnastics right at the point of arc intercept.
Mental gymnastics == turn the OBS to center the CDI, read
the desired course under the ninety degree index on the OBS.
Craig Prouse
Mental gymnastics == remember the sequence of knob twists and button presses
to command the GPS to recompute a new IAF (arc intercept point) based on the
present vector.
Off the top of your head, without referring to your GPS manual, explain how
to do that.
Dave Butler
In the GPS-equipped plane that I fly most often, there is
also a VOR receiver. I would have the VOR receiver tuned to
the ground facility. I assume you don't need an explanation
of how to do that.
Flying a DME arc with the UPS GX-50 that I use most often I
am using it pretty much as a DME. It doesn't give course
guidance along the arc. I understand there are later
software versions of the GX-50 that do provide course
guidance along the arc.
I can certainly appreciate the difficulty of remembering or
doing anything out of the ordinary with an approach-approved
GPS. Doing a pre-planned approach is simple. Changing plans
on the fly is always an invitation to confusion.
Your question invites another one. It seems to me there are
two ways to get established on an approach. "Vectors to a
DME arc" isn't one of them. You either get a clearance to
navigate to an IAF, or you get vectors to the *final
approach course*.
Maybe one of the ATC guys can speak about the legitimacy of
vectors to an arc (notwithstanding that weird approach into
MTN where the final is a DME arc). Is "vectors to an arc" a
standard ATC procedure?
Dave
John Stephens
Well don't worry too much about it. The first DME arc that I ever did was
on my instrument checkride. The DE wasn't particularly surprised when I
said "This should be interesting; I've never done one." Her response was
"They're easy -- try it." So I did, and it was, and we both had a good
laugh about it. However, I new (at least in theory) how to do one -- one
benefit of reading a couple of good IFR training texts.
--
John Stephens (remove spaces for legal email address)
s t e p h e n s @ p o b o x . c o m
Richard Kaplan
news:<u85fjdt...@corp.supernews.com>...
> had never flown a DME arc, not even as an instrument student. His instructor
> told him that he would not be asked to fly one on the check ride and that
> DME arcs are never used any more. I was, uh, surprised. Anyway, I made him
If you doubt that DME arcs are still used, take a look at the
VOR/DME 15 approach into Martin State Airport (MTN) in Baltimore, MD.
The whole approach is nothing but a DME arc.
This is a *great* approach for instrument training!
---
Richard Kaplan, CFII
rka...@umrpc.com
www.umrpc.com/p210
keithmo
backcourse approach procedure, they have a DME arc on a *departure*
procedure. See
http://download.aopa.org/iap/20020221/nw1of1/ykm_loc_dme_bc_b.pdf and
http://download.aopa.org/iap/20020221/nw1of1/ykm_gromo_two_departure.pdf for
the gory details. I don't know how often these procedures are actually
flown, but they're sure fun in the simulator.
KM
Frank Stutzman
Be sure to note that the localizer backcourse approach uses dme off of the
YKM VOR. Great learning experience for those students who like to cheat
on such approaches by using their fancy GPS (mea culpa).
I fly those approaches every time I go to Yakima, which is fairly often. On
the other hand, I go to Yakima only to practice approaches. :-/
--
Frank Stutzman
Bonanza N494B
Hood River, OR
gross_arrow
> am using it pretty much as a DME. It doesn't give course
> guidance along the arc. I understand there are later
> software versions of the GX-50 that do provide course
> guidance along the arc.
>
dave --
i'm having difficulty imagining a gx-50 that doesn't have the 'arc assist'
feature for the following reasons:
1. i have a fairly early gx-50 in my training aircraft (c-150) that does
have this feature.
2. i have a much earlier nms-2001 in my other aircraft (installed 1996)
that was pre gx-50, and it also has this feature.
i'm not trying to be argumentative, just wondering if perhaps you missed
this feature -- go to the 'nav' page and rotate the outer (large) knob and
see if it isn't there. (full instructions on how to operate it are on page
47 & 48 of my manual, which was copyright 1999).
it's true that it doesn't affect the cdi, but it puts the desired heading
(which is constantly changing, of course) on the nav page along with
the distance. makes arc's pretty easy to do. (not that they are all that
difficult to do the way you have been doing them).
finally, there is a guy that used to post frequently on these groups who
worked for ii-morrow (before ups bought them out). i think his name
was robert grove. he was very knowledgable, and could answer this
for sure. (i don't know if he still works there or not).
hth,
g_a
Dave Butler
>
> i'm having difficulty imagining a gx-50 that doesn't have the 'arc assist'
> feature for the following reasons:
>
Yes, the GX-50 I use has the arc-assist feature. I
understand from a friend who has seen another friend's newer
installation that it has a feature that allows following the
CDI around the arc. It's possible he just misunderstood what
he was seeing. I guess I wasn't counting the arc-assist
feature as course guidance.
Dave
--
Dave Butler, software engineer 919-392-4367
AJ
any arc criteria as it applied to DPs. JPH where are you? Help me out
here.
oneatcer
"keithmo" <kei...@earthl1nk.net> wrote in message
news:D_hh8.40244$0C1.3...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Terps Dude
onea...@satx.rr.com says...
AJ,
It doesn't exist yet nor does the criteria to develop arcing
transitions. These procedures are sure to have waivers to criteria or
at least they should.
Tb
Roger Halstead
"Dave Butler" <dgbu...@cisco.com> wrote in message
news:3C84D9AC...@cisco.com...
All the ones I've seen, show "feeder" turns based on VOR radials which give
the pilot a bit of lead time to make the turn, rather than going all the way
to intercept.
Each of them told you exactly when to start the inbound turn. Besides, on a
10 mile DME Arc Id want to start turning as soon as the indicator came alive
if looking at a 90 degree intercept.. A 15 mile Arc gives a bit more time.
--
Roger (K8RI EN73)
WWW.RogerHalstead.com
N833R, World's Oldest Debonair? S#CD-2
Roger Halstead
"gross_arrow" <gross...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cb365b61.02030...@posting.google.com...
> Dave Butler <dgbu...@cisco.com> wrote in message
news:<3C851F01...@cisco.com>...
> > Craig Prouse wrote:
> > >
> > > Dave Butler at dgbu...@cisco.com wrote on 3/5/02 6:43 AM:
> >
> > Flying a DME arc with the UPS GX-50 that I use most often I
> > am using it pretty much as a DME. It doesn't give course
> > guidance along the arc. I understand there are later
> > software versions of the GX-50 that do provide course
> > guidance along the arc.
You don't really need course guidance ...
Treat it like a VOR...That is 10-12, or 15 miles off your wing time and keep
it there. IF you have an OBS set it to put the VOR off the wingtip, or
simulated VOR in the caseof GPS. move the OBS 3 degrees and make a course
correction 3 degrees toward the center of the circle so you are 87 degrees,
instead of 90. When the needle centers, reset it another 3 degrees. If you
are getting closer, don't make the course correction the next time and then
only use two degrees correction.
You can also use 5 degrees on the OBS...works the same way. Just watch the
DME, or simulated DME readout and adjust the course to keep the desired
distance.
It's been so long, I've forgotten the degrees we used, but 3 degrees, or
five degrees will work. Just remember to allow for wind ...
--
Roger (K8RI EN73)
WWW.RogerHalstead.com
N833R, World's Oldest Debonair? S#CD-2
> >
Roger Halstead
"Roger Halstead" <rdha...@tm.net> wrote in message
news:8BAh8.52$CA.1...@monger.newsread.com...
>
>
> --
> Roger (K8RI EN73)
> WWW.RogerHalstead.com
> N833R, World's Oldest Debonair? S#CD-2
>
> "Tim Howell" <howe...@adelphia.net> wrote in message
> news:1f8jb77.nwk...@flrtn-4-m1-161.vnnyca.adelphia.net...
> They still have them...whether the DE will want one? Is there one at the
> airport where the test will take place? If so...You might want to at least
> fly one.
> They are not at all difficult to do...Not once you've done a couple.
>
> They had one where I took the test a few years back and I didn't have to
fly
> that one.
I gotta quit staying up so late...
I better clarify as I did have to fly a segment of an arc, but I did not
have to fly the approach, nor did I actually fly the entry to the arc, or
make the turn into the ILS from the ARC.
He had me start "an" arc from what ever distance we were and as I held it
through 10 degrees or so with a very strong cross wind and he was happy.
So,technically I didn't fly a DME Arc, but I had to demonstrate I knew how.
--
Roger (K8RI EN73)
WWW.RogerHalstead.com
N833R, World's Oldest Debonair? S#CD-2
>
> The DE asked me about DME Arcs and if I'd ever flown one. I did and I
> had...The one at the airport where he was based.
>
>
> --
> Roger (K8RI EN73)
> WWW.RogerHalstead.com
> N833R, World's Oldest Debonair? S#CD-2
>
> >
> > --TWH
>
>
Craig Prouse
> You don't really need course guidance ...
> Treat it like a VOR...
Consider the approach that appeared earlier in the thread for example: the
Watsonville, CA (KWVI) VOR/DME or GPS-A. You can fly this approach a couple
of ways.
You can fly it as a VOR/DME approach. You tune SNS VOR into your NAV radios
and select them for presentation on your NAV heads, set the active GPS
waypoint to SNS, and invoke OBS mode to inhibit normal waypoint sequencing.
Then you fly it like any other VOR/DME approach except your DME distance is
shown on your GPS. It's a plain vanilla VOR/DME approach with a DME arc.
You can also fly it as a GPS approach. You select the GPS-A approach at
KWVI, and the box demands an IAF. You respond "D264Hi" because that is
obviously code for, "I expect the 8 DME arc to the north." Now the GPS
realizes that even though the IAF is on the R-264 radial, you are not; you
are on the R-275 radial so it computes a temporary waypoint on the R-275
radial and provides course guidance along the radial to that waypoint. But,
no, you're not tracking the R-275 radial; you are on vectors. So you wait
until you finally get your approach clearance and when you're sure you know
that your present vector is the one that you're actually going to use to
intercept the arc, you pull out the inner knob, scroll to select the arc
intercept waypoint in the flight plan, press ">CLR" to ask the GPS to
recompute the IAF for the present vector, "ENT" to confirm, and only then do
you ensure that you have course guidance around the arc. This guidance is
integral to flying the GPS-A approach because the GPS isn't displaying DME
distance to the VOR, it's displaying distance to the next waypoint along the
approach.
There's one other way you could try to fly it, I suppose. Use the GPS in
OBS mode to simulate the VOR. You give up course guidance around the arc,
but it's worse than that. Problem is, at the MAP, if you're off by one dot,
you're off by a mile. If you do it with a regular VOR, if you're only off
by one dot, you're only off by 4000'. (If you do it correctly as a GPS
approach, if you're off by one dot, you're off by less than 400'!) It's my
interpretation that this is not an approved use of an approach GPS,
precisely because the accuracy of a GPS in enroute mode is less than that of
a VOR if the VOR is sufficiently close to the airport. You simply aren't
guaranteed the protection afforded by TERPs criteria due to the different
CDI sensitivities.
So that's my take on it. You can fly a VOR/DME approach using a VOR and GPS
in lieu of DME, or you can fly a real GPS approach, but I wouldn't attempt
to use GPS in lieu of VOR. Furthermore, if you fly it as a GPS approach,
accepting course guidance around the arc is not optional. Comments?
Craig