Transitioning

Most pilots experienced in navigating with both VOR and GPS will prefer the latter. It’s easier, it’s more accurate and it’s available right down to the ground. The VOR technology—with the exception of ILS and where VOR stations are on the airport—enjoys only one advantage: It’s been around so long, most everyone knows how to use it. Well, everyone, that is, except pilots trained in aircraft lacking a VOR receiver, of which there are a growing number.

Editorial Staff

Friday, November 16, 2012 at 12:00 AM ET

Verified

Key Takeaways:

The FAA is transitioning from VOR-based navigation to GPS-based systems (NextGen) to reduce costs and utilize more advanced technology, planning to reduce the number of ground-based navaids while retaining a minimum operational VOR network and existing ILS for contingencies.
A primary concern with this transition is the potential loss of instrument approach procedures at general aviation airports as VORs are decommissioned.
The author advocates for the FAA to ensure no net loss of instrument approaches by retaining VOR-based procedures at retained VOR facilities and establishing RNAV procedures for airports losing VOR service.

See a mistake? Contact us.

The FAA, like any other government agency these days, is fighting for every budget dollar it can get. Over the long run, maintaining the existing air traffic control system and hundreds of ground-based navaids like VOR isn’t compatible with the agency’s desire to reduce costs. That’s one of the reasons—but by no means the only one—underlying the FAA’s next-generation airspace system—NextGen—and ADS-B. Of course, to properly realize savings from NextGen, the number of ground-based navaids needs to be reduced.