Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. Username Protected
    Frequent Poster

    Posts
    145 Posts
    Thanked 32 times
    Researching Phenom 100
    Join Date
    Joined Sep 2021
       #1  

    VOR approaches, Phenom 100, G1000s bee

    Hello
    It’s been a while and I have not had the occasion to do a VOR approach in real time.
    Does anyone remember the buttonolgy?
    I know to select the VOR approach from the approach options in MFD.
    When inbound to VOR, do you switch CDI to VOR only? Or does one have to press the ‘APPR’ button also?
    Assume you HAVE to do it in green needles (cos I know that not everyone subscribes to using green needles, except as back up on the right PFD).
    I will go practice a VOR approach, of course, next time I get a chance, but it will be easier if I know the procedure for button pushing ahead of time
  2. Username Protected
    Member

    Posts
    42 Posts
    Thanked 27 times
    Phenom Pro Pilot
    Join Date
    Joined Dec 2021
    #2  
    You don’t have to switch to green needles, FYI. As long as you are referencing the correct VOR frequency (using one or both bearing pointers) you are legal. Even U.S. airlines use this method.

    To do it the way you describe, press the CDI button when appropriate (there will be a message pop up on the PFD telling you, but the is normally crossing the FAF) to select VOR #1. Next select approach mode on the autopilot control head using the APPR button. I prefer to do this with the airplane very closely aligned on the correct course or the switch to green needles may cause just enough drift to not have the autopilot re-capture once in APPR mode.

    Alternatively, just do it the “new school” method and all you have to do is acknowledge the message on the PFD.
  3. Username Protected
    Frequent Poster

    Posts
    102 Posts
    Thanked 123 times
    Phenom Instructor/Mentor
    Join Date
    Joined Oct 2020
    #3  
    What (Username Protected) said on both counts.

    The FAA has even (surprisingly) come out with policy that it is acceptable on checkrides and proficiency checks to leave the CDI source on FMS as long as the underlying signal is visible (e.g. bearing pointer).

    For AP mode in "green needles" you can press NAV or APR button- APR will give you "VAPP" mode which is more aggressive tracking than "VOR" from the NAV button. For some VORs this is too much, and NAV may be better, or even HDG with manual HDG bug adjustments.
  4. Username Protected
    Member

    Posts
    29 Posts
    Thanked 5 times
    Phenom Pro Pilot
    Join Date
    Joined Apr 2023
    #4  
    The advantage to the ‘new school’ method is if you have go around is that the FMS will sequence the MAP and saves steps for you having to press the CDI button while climbing out and tracking. You still have to manage your descent crossing the FAF or procedure turn inbound (on a non-DME VOR).

    I also believe the “APPR” is for activation of the Glideslope of which the VOR does not have.
  5. Username Protected
    Frequent Poster

    Posts
    145 Posts
    Thanked 32 times
    Researching Phenom 100
    Join Date
    Joined Sep 2021
       #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by (Username Protected) View Post
    The advantage to the ‘new school’ method is if you have go around is that the FMS will sequence the MAP and saves steps for you having to press the CDI button while climbing out and tracking. You still have to manage your descent crossing the FAF or procedure turn inbound (on a non-DME VOR).

    I also believe the “APPR” is for activation of the Glideslope of which the VOR does not have.
    (Username Protected)
    you are correct in that APPR mode does provide vertical guidance when the approach is associated with vertical component.
    For a VOR approach, as others have noted here, using the APPR button may provide tighter tolerances. (I cannot prove this but have heard similar arguments before for other jets).
    I am happy to hear from (Username Protected) that the FAA has approved the use of magenta needles with monitoring of green needles in the background or on the Right PFD.
    As far as the missed approach is concerned, the FMS automatically sequences and guidance goes to the FMS once TOGA is pressed for the ‘missed’.
  6. Username Protected
    Member

    Posts
    16 Posts
    Thanked 8 times
    Phenom Instructor/Mentor
    Join Date
    Joined Oct 2021
    #6  
    (Username Protected), This comes up all the time in training. I’m all for sticking with magenta needles but how does the FAA justify deviating from AFM limitations on proficiency checks and check rides?

    “Use of the Garmin GPS/SBAS receivers to provide navigation guidance during the final approach segment of an ILS, LOC, LOC-BC, LDA, SDF, MLS or any other type of approach not approved for "or GPS" navigation is prohibited. When using the Garmin VOR/LOC/GS receivers to fly the final approach segment, VOR/LOC/GS navigation data must be selected and presented on the CDI of the pilot flying.”

    I was under the impression that unless the approach specifies “or GPS” then green needles on the CDI was required. Bearing pointers on the HSI wasn’t good enough and even setting the right side up with CDI and “cross checking” wasn’t following the letter as it had to be “Pilot Flying” side as stated. Other airframes (Pilatus) clearly allow for this in their limitations section but Embraer hasn’t.
  7. Username Protected
    Frequent Poster

    Posts
    102 Posts
    Thanked 123 times
    Phenom Instructor/Mentor
    Join Date
    Joined Oct 2020
    #7  
    (Username Protected)-

    It's a solid question.

    First, the FAA definitely isn't telling pilots they can ignore AFM limitations. There are many times an aircraft limitation will be more restrictive than a FAR, SAFO, etc...and that is what we must comply with.

    In the case of the AFM limit you mention, I would offer than it can be read differently than I think you are.

    Quoting the 100 AFM:

    "Use of the Garmin GPS/SBAS receivers to provide navigation guidance during the final approach segment of an
    ILS,
    LOC,
    LOC-BC,
    LDA,
    SDF,
    MLS,
    or any other type of approach not approved for "or GPS" navigation is prohibited."

    VOR approaches are (in some cases) approved for "or GPS" navigation. I read that limit as the referring to the broader approach type- i.e. there are NO "ILS or GPS" approaches, and so on down the list for each type enumerated.

    I think the verbiage "type of approach not approved" vs "approach not approved" is important.

    Of course that's just my take on the section two verbiage, if regs and limitations were always clear we wouldn't have all the legal interpretations we do!




    Quote Originally Posted by (Username Protected) View Post
    (Username Protected), This comes up all the time in training. I’m all for sticking with magenta needles but how does the FAA justify deviating from AFM limitations on proficiency checks and check rides?

    “Use of the Garmin GPS/SBAS receivers to provide navigation guidance during the final approach segment of an ILS, LOC, LOC-BC, LDA, SDF, MLS or any other type of approach not approved for "or GPS" navigation is prohibited. When using the Garmin VOR/LOC/GS receivers to fly the final approach segment, VOR/LOC/GS navigation data must be selected and presented on the CDI of the pilot flying.”

    I was under the impression that unless the approach specifies “or GPS” then green needles on the CDI was required. Bearing pointers on the HSI wasn’t good enough and even setting the right side up with CDI and “cross checking” wasn’t following the letter as it had to be “Pilot Flying” side as stated. Other airframes (Pilatus) clearly allow for this in their limitations section but Embraer hasn’t.
  8. Username Protected
    Member

    Posts
    16 Posts
    Thanked 8 times
    Phenom Instructor/Mentor
    Join Date
    Joined Oct 2021
    #8  
    “I think the verbiage "type of approach not approved" vs "approach not approved" is important.”

    I like this wording. Heck, it’s not just the FAR’s that are confusing. I can find ways to struggle with basic English sentence structure. When GPS approaches were a new concept charts were regularly labeled “or GPS” but we don’t see that much anymore. Your interpretation makes sense that those NAV sources that can be replaced with GPS by the FAR’s (VOR, NDB’s) can be flown by FMS based reference.


Posting Permissions