It sounds like he failed you because you were never established on the approach since you were not navigating to anything anymore. Once you began your descent, you busted ATCs instruction.  Your problem likely started at the missed approach on the VOR where you didn’t switch back to GPS mode once you were cleaned up and climbing out on the missed.

You may want to create a simple approach checklist that checks some basic things, like the avionics setttings, airframe configuration, and power setting.  I use one and I’m an ATP rated pilot because, I’ve made every mistake and omission a pilot could make.  I have it pasted on my panel so I’m not fumbling with stuff in IMC. 

Make no mistake, flying practice approaches in succession like we do for currency/proficiency is hard because a lot is happening in a short amount of time and distance.  In real IFR flying it doesn’t usually happen like that, except when it does, and then you have to bring your ‘A’ game because it can go sideways very quickly.

Thanks for your thoughtful and helpful response. I'll definitely add the approach checklist.

I'm also hopping on a call today with Gary Reeves (I purchased his Avidyne IFD Mastery Course) and will post his tips to this thread.

Thanks again!

Buck

I actually asked ATC for a missed and vectors (with a long downwind) to try again. I guess I was too fixated with the PFD failure the Examiner introduced on the approach to debug and fix the real problem (not in GPS mode). Ugh!

Buck

Gring wrote: Buck, also, here is a suggestion when doing practice approaches in succession or on an IFR checkride. Tell ATC you need some time. Ask for vectors on the missed approach because you need some time to program you avionics. It's all acceptable, even on a checkride where you are the PIC. I did 6 approaches the other day in IMC to minimums and in some cases didn't even see the runway. Every missed I asked for vectors to give me some time to breath and slow things down.

That's great advice.  As a retired radar controller, I would much rather give you a few vectors for time as opposed to you getting to the base turn and then deciding you need more time.  The radar controller has to figure out where everyone is going to fit into the sequence and it really sucks when somebody blows up your plan right as you are about to clear them for the approach.

Furthermore, when I shoot practice approaches myself, I make it a point to tell the controller that I would like a little longer final so I have time to get established on the approach instead of getting turned final right on top of the FAF.  It seems that fewer controllers are pilots now and a lot of them have never been in the cockpit of a GA airplane.  Airports like where I worked (KSDF) have a huge number of heavy aircraft (UPS main hub) and that is how some of the newer controllers treat everyone.  When I was training controllers, I had to remind them that most GA aircraft were single pilot operations and their CRM consisted of just them.

Interesting.  I've never been turned on close in for an LPV approach to be able to see that.  Does the glide slope just go missing completely in that case?  I've gotten to the point that if I get a base turn too early, I'll ask at that time if we can extend a little more.  The early turn probably means that the controller has someone behind with minimal spacing and he is trying to buy a little room.  Either that or he is just not good at his job.  I would much rather extend a little downwind to follow someone else as opposed to turning early and trying to play catch up and probably not have a stabilized approach.  I don't want to run another controller's sequence but I'm in that cockpit and would really like a favorable outcome.

In that vein,  when at all possible, I ask for the GPS approach and ask if I can go directly to the IAF.  That way, I don't have to worry about the controller running me through the final.  Most controllers like GPS approaches too.  Instead of having to watch and get the base, final intercept, and clearance at specified times, traffic permitting he can have you cross the IAF at the intercept altitude and clear you for the approach all in one transmission without having to continually watch you for the turns.  I have a friend that flies into RYY a lot and he says they always run him through the final on the ILS there.  I told him to request the GPS approach and to go directly to the IAF and see how that works out.  He said, "but they are always advertising the ILS".  The final for the GPS and ILS are the same and the controller will not care and in fact, may like it since he doesn't have to worry about the turn on.  The next time he flew into there he did request the GPS and direct to the IAF.  Was cleared for the approach, went straight to the IAF, no missed turn on.

I passed my Instrument Checkride on the retake. Whew!

This time, I ALMOST got tripped up on a RNAV GPS (LNAV) approach.

Not because I was in VLOC mode (I learned my lesson).

But because I was being vectored to the FAF and it had been suggested to me by an Avidyne expert/trainer that I should never select "Vectors" when activating a GPS approach, but rather load a full approach (e.g. IAF) and manually activate the leg ATC puts me on when being vectored.

This would have been fine, but I wound up with a lot of clutter on my IFD550 screen (including inactive legs and a hold) that had me almost try to intercept something other than the final approach course after ATC told me "turn to 240 and maintain 8,500 until established on the final approach course."

My turn to 240 had me first approaching a white line that I mistook for the final approach course. Thank goodness ATC reminded me to turn to 240 and intercept the final approach course. I took a quick look at the geo-referenced plate on my iPad, realized my mistake, and intercepted the correct magenta course line.

Just a quick note that choosing the full approach when being Vectored could lead to problems because of the clutter.

Buck

It is a little different with a GNS, where the interface is slow and clumsy, and setting vectors will over declutter the screen.

* Orest

My Examiner made a similar comment. I'll use Vectors mode on my next approach if I'm getting Vectors from ATC and see if everything works as planned.

Previously, I tried the Vectors mode on an LPV approach. ATC turned me onto the final approach course over 1,500 feet too high. I never got any guidance from my IFD550 and had to go missed.

 

Congratulations.

I had a similar problem.  After seeing some of the comments in this forum, I set up an ILS to fly the entire approach, knowing that I was going to get vectors to final.  I was doing this one with the autopilot.  When the vector came I tried to adjust the approach and ended up having to abandon the approach when it tried to turn me away from the final repeatedly.  Finally gave up, disengaged the autopilot and flew VFR to the airport.  I'm not sure what I did wrong but it the airplane was having no part of that ILS at all.  Like trying to get a lobster in the pot.

Almost did the same thing on my very first ILS with the IFD with an instructor in the right seat.  Vectors to final and I thought I was about to be vectored through the final when I realized it was a dogleg prior to the final course.  I also didn't select "vectors" due to the opinion of others.  I now agree with Orest; nothing wrong with selecting vectors.  Gets rid of the clutter and avoids having to activate the correct leg for intercept.