Instrument landing system localizer off?
-
only Rwy 20R has an ILS
so if you’re trying to follow the ILS for RWY20L, it will be off as it’s meant to be on 20R
that’s the only ILS for Seosan, all other runways are tacan non precision approaches -
you know, it might help to put the nav mode switch to the ILS position, this is what I have found that I was not doing, otherwise the ILS works just fine, just wanted to post this just in case anyone else makes the same mistake.
-
“put the nav mode switch to the ILS position, this is what I have found that I was not doing”
I’m really baffled here… seems to me… you don’t even see the localizer and GS bars in the HUD till you move that switch??
What aircraft did you fly in the Military? -
Yes, that is true, the nav mode switch must be placed to the nav ILS position in order to bring up the glideslope and localizer, if it is for instance left in the tacan position the aircraft radio will be tuned to recieve signals from tacan stations be they air or ground and the glide slope bars will not display therefore causing the pilot to do what is called a non precision approach, I have never flown an aircraft in the military I am just familiar with how the navigational system operates on an aircraft.
-
You can also switch the “Instr Mode” knob to the ILS/TCN and have indications of the LOC and GS! The difference between ILS/TCN and ILS/NAV is the infos about the navigation aid at HSI (bearing/DME), means if you will have infos for a TACAN station or for a GPS waypoint (steerpoint). But the functionality of your ILS is exactly the same at ILS/TCN and ILS/NAV ;).
Nikos. -
Well… glad to see you have it sorted…
I was a Tacan Technician (ground side) in the Marines… so have a special interest in that field. Also worked on Ground Controlled Approach radar systems, so after many years of seeing the view from an ATC controller as he/she guided a pilot down the cone, its a joy to experience the aircraft side of things, so I spend alot of time setting up ILS approaches… just for the fun of itEdit
Thanks for that neystratiou… will definitively play with both of those settings… -
I like the ILS/NAV better than ILS/TCN when doing heads down ILS approach. You have the setup a STPT on the runway. The HSI shows wind correction angle and range to runway. The heads down ILS LOC is a bitch in a crosswind. But you should cross reference the two displays.
Is substituting the HSI for the for the heads down ILS LOC “one of my funny tricks” or is a realistic procedure?
-
I think you have a term mixup. HSI is the heads down instrument on the center pedestal between your knees.
-
I’m using the ILS bars in the ADI and the HSI together.
-
I like the ILS/NAV better than ILS/TCN when doing heads down ILS approach.
Once agin, for ppl who wants to do like IRL, do not follow Caper’s procedure (sorry Caper, but I have to say it).
Because published procedures are based on TACAN distance which are used for minimas, MAPT, and glideslope validation.Using a custom steerpoint is illegal, and dangerous.
(I see you guys comming with TwoDog using this to land on a runway non equiped with radio nav approach proc. Again, there is a difference between regular/standard use and extreme situations where the pilot made a mistake (or really really unlucky) and have no other choice than doing this to land.)
-
Once agin, for ppl who wants to do like IRL, do not follow Caper’s procedure (sorry Caper, but I have to say it).
Because published procedures are based on TACAN distance which are used for minimas, MAPT, and glideslope validation.Using a custom steerpoint is illegal, and dangerous.
(I see you guys comming with TwoDog using this to land on a runway non equiped with radio nav approach proc. Again, there is a difference between regular/standard use and extreme situations where the pilot made a mistake (or really really unlucky) and have no other choice than doing this to land.)
Have you ever diverted to a airstrip (out of fuel or deadstick). Looked up the airstrips GPS location, setup a STPT, set the HSI course to the runway heading and intercept the radial for a HSI asset approach. I’ve done this for deadstick landings in campaigns.
There’s a book about a r/l pilot that sets up a STPT and uses like a ILS approach.
It real easy to overcorrect using the ADI ILS bars using the HSI helps and I did say to cross reference.
I’m talk’n combat. There is a combat element in BMS.
-
Have you ever diverted to a airstrip (out of fuel or deadstick). Looked up the airstrips GPS location, setup a STPT, set the HSI course to the runway heading and intercept the radial for a HSI asset approach. I’ve done this for deadstick landings in campaigns.
There’s a book about a r/l pilot that sets up a STPT and uses like a ILS approach.
You still don’t understand caper
If you have to divert, you have to chose your divert field according to the weather. If TAF are announcing bad weather, you will have to plan an IFR field where Instruments procedures exists and where all the related radionav systems are operational (see NOTAMs).
If conditions are VMC, you can go on an VFR field …This is called flight planning, flight management … And all are dicted by flight rules.
No way you have the right to do what you are saying except in case of GPS/GNSS that charts are officially published (which is the same as other IFR chart but using GPS fixes … But is not safe for single pilot operation because there is no crosscheck of the coordinates programmed on the system, can even be not authorised depending on countries.)
The book you are mentioning is the one I’ve mentioned above (TwoDogs, Viper Driver) and has no other choices because of a “bad” flight management.
Another point, what is no said in the book is what he has used for glide slope!?!
What he did is not a pseudo ILS, but a pseudo TACAN approache whith alt checks based on distances … Any cases, this was illegal and dangerous (no way for him to know what are the actual obstacles clearance during his final) … But had no other choices. -
Another point, what is no said in the book is what he has used for glide slope!?!
What he did is not a pseudo ILS, but a pseudo TACAN approaches whith alt check based on distances …that makes no sense.
Anycases, this was illegal and dangerous (no way for him to know what are the actual obstacles clearance during his final) … But had no other choices.
I said to use it for a reference. I know it’s illegal. My old boss petition the FAA change the ruling for rotorwing. The FAA didn’t want to have two different set of rules for fixwing and rotorwing.
Anyway I guess I got the answer. -
that makes no sense.
In the book, he flew an approach down to a markpoint he had made (so all the problems with EGI accuracy aside, it was already going to be subject to a bit of steering error). He flew that blind down to past minima if I recall correctly. He then directed a bunch of other pilots to land on that markpoints coordinates, acting as though there was glideslope guidance as you get from ILS - but as there was no ILS at the field, this was basically the same as a TACAN approach (non precision) but from a markpoint instead of a real TACAN station. Hence DeeJay calling it a pseudo TACAN approach.
Its not safe, and unless your alternatives are less safe, you shouldnt do it.
You might also want to read the next chapter Caper, where he got discharged from the air force while he was sleeping after landing. (He got reinstated before he woke up, too…)
-
Have you ever diverted to a airstrip (out of fuel or deadstick). Looked up the airstrips GPS location, setup a STPT, set the HSI course to the runway heading and intercept the radial for a HSI asset approach. I’ve done this for deadstick landings in campaigns.
Again, you are mixing things!
On one side, you talk about ILS (instruments procedures implying IMC conditions), and then, on the other side about visual recovery using HSI just to help to acquire visually the field and help for runway alignment!
that makes no sense.
No, you just do not understand.
I said to use it for a reference.
What you didn’t said is that you are doing this on non Radio nav equiped airfield.
Anyway … You can’t because:I like the ILS/NAV better than ILS/TCN when doing heads down ILS approach.
To perform a proper ILS you have to validate the glide, hence, you need the TACAN distance. You can’t (or must not) perform an instument prodecure using the wong references.
This is illegal and unsafe (not only for you but for the others)
Using a GPS fix as a TACAN to perform an instrument recovery should be an ultimate “solution” if no other choices…
A “good pilot” will divert to a suitable IFR field before being trapped into that situation.In case of VFR (visual) recovery, you do not need to do this.
… Caper, you still don’t trust us!? we are not trying to confuse you.
-
In the book, he flew an approach down to a markpoint he had made (so all the problems with EGI accuracy aside, it was already going to be subject to a bit of steering error). He flew that blind down to past minima if I recall correctly. He then directed a bunch of other pilots to land on that markpoints coordinates, acting as though there was glideslope guidance as you get from ILS - but as there was no ILS at the field, this was basically the same as a TACAN approach (non precision) but from a markpoint instead of a real TACAN station. Hence DeeJay calling it a pseudo TACAN approach.
Its not safe, and unless your alternatives are less safe, you shouldnt do it.
You might also want to read the next chapter Caper, where he got discharged from the air force while he was sleeping after landing. (He got reinstated before he woke up, too…)
If I understand DJ, the STPT was only used for glideslope and not for course. That makes no sense.
I think a lot of Euros hate him because he is a war profiteer. He wrote a book made some money.
-
Again, you are mixing things!
On one side, you talk about ILS (instruments procedures implying IMC conditions), and then, on the other side about visual recovery using HSI just to help to acquire visually the field and help for runway alignment!
No, you just do not understand.
What you didn’t said is that you are doing this on non Radio nav equiped airfield.
Anyway … You can’t because:To perform a proper ILS you have to validate the glide, hence, you need the TACAN distance. You can’t (or must not) perform an instument prodecure using the wong references.
This is illegal and unsafe (not only for you but for the others)
Using a GPS fix as a TACAN to perform an instrument recovery should be an ultimate “solution” if no other choices…
A “good pilot” will divert to a suitable IFR field before being trapped into that situation.In case of VFR (visual) recovery, you do not need to do this.
… Caper, you still don’t trust us!? we are not trying to confuse you.
1. I want to see if using HSI NAV mode was ok for a VFR approach on a field that has no beacon, ILS, ATC. I guess it’s still a no or not necessary.
2. I did understand if glideslope include course correction.
3. I said to cross reference several times. I would want to abandon the ILS LOC bar.
4. you never been trapped, you never flown F4AF combat.Why did god put NAV mode on my HSI? No beacons during war time. <shrug>In 90’s GPS was not approve by the FAA for anything having to do with a/c. Funny how in the 80’s EGI/INS/GPS was intergraded into the F-16’s navigation system.</shrug>
-
In 90’s GPS was not approve by the FAA for anything having to do with a/c. Funny how in the 80’s EGI/INS/GPS was intergraded into the F-16’s navigation system.
What’s FAA regulations got to do with Military Flying during time of conflict or training in military airspace? While transiting through civilian airspace yes FAA rules and equipment standards apply - hence why the F-16 has these systems. However, it is highly unlikely that in a combat situation the other side is going to leave you with their navigation aids to help you bomb them. Thus military aircraft also have systems that the FAA don’t approve for use in civil airspace so that they can do their job with more precision than is available through dead-reckoning navigation.
-
Caper, if you want to fly VFR, then you dont need the HSI. Use your mark ones, they will be perfectly fine.
Technically speaking military aircraft are not bound by FAA regulations, but they are bound by air force regulations… which are often just as restrictive (as far as Ive seen anyway. Im no expert on the topic - yet).
You dont understand DJ, as the STPT created was used for course, and altitude was guessed at for the approach.
-
What he did is not a pseudo ILS, but a pseudo TACAN approache whith alt checks based on distances … Any cases, this was illegal and dangerous (no way for him to know what are the actual obstacles clearance during his final) … But had no other choices.
DJ said it was illegal.
All I know is the FAA did not want anything to do with a GPS approach/departure system for peace time rotorwing.