Narrative:

Aircraft was operating night VFR and flying to jvy (clark country regional). PIC was navigating with VOR and dead reckoning and using an android based tablet for moving map VFR sectional chart. A student pilot was in the right seat and was practicing navigation skills with paper sectional charts. Aircraft was approaching from west; using VFR flight following and was in contact with louisville approach (sdf). At approximately 20 NM west of jvy the pilot reported field in sight and was switched to advisory and VFR squawk code. The PIC was maintaining an altitude of 3000 MSL due to a set of towers (1965 MSL) approx. 5 NM west of field. The pilot was having trouble visually identifying the towers and was diverting to the north of the field. At that time a jet reported being on the visual to runway 18 at jvy and the PIC began trying to visually identify the traffic. Once the traffic landed the PIC began trying to visually identify the airport. The android tablet had frozen and was showing the aircraft approx. 10 nm to northwest of jvy. The PIC visually identified what he mistakenly thought was jvy and proceeded to fly southbound towards the field. The PIC flew to lou and the table remained intermittent. The PIC entered a pattern at lou at approx 1500 MSL and noted the runway configuration did not appear consistent with the airport of intended landing jvy. The PIC initiated a climbing turn towards 3000 MSL and 090 due to concerns of terrain separation from towers which he knew were west of jvy. The PIC contacted louisville approach and received vectors back to jvy.1) prior to purchasing aircraft X; the PIC had flown (approx. 150 hours) a rented G1000 equipped T206 and primarily used GPS and the avionics supplied moving map for primary navigation. The PIC had mainly used VOR for IAP proficiency. 2) aircraft X has a dual screen aspen 1500 and a KLN90B GPS unit. The GPS had been removed for service and the PIC was using VOR and dead reckoning as the primary means of navigation. An android tablet was used by the PIC to provide charts while the right seat student pilot was using paper charts to practice flight planning and navigation.3) prior to the flight the PIC had found the VOR did not pass the accuracy requirements for IFR (actual was -5 deg using vot and ict). Normally the PIC would carry paper instrument approach plates and use an IAP to back-up the visual approach. Since the aircraft was not IFR approved the PIC did not bring IAP booklets and had not downloaded indiana IAP to the tablet.root cause: PIC lost situational awareness due to distraction and compelling failure of reference navigation device (android tablet). Contributing factors were insufficient preflight briefing of airport environment using VFR chart and over reliance on GPS/advanced technology.1) pilots need to be aware that ipads and android tablets do not meet the rigorous certification requirements of aircraft avionics and can produce compelling failures. These devices receive inappropriate levels of praise and emphasis on social media.2) the need to contact ATC for assistance when a pilot is unsure of their position cannot be overemphasized. In this instance; the PIC should have immediately contacted ATC when his expected position did not match the position shown on the reference nav aid (tablet).

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: General aviation pilot reported lining up for the wrong airport in VFR conditions. Pilot suggested contributing factors were lack of GPS due to maintenance and failure of an Electronic Flight Bag 'Android tablet.'

Narrative: Aircraft was operating night VFR and flying to JVY (Clark Country Regional). PIC was navigating with VOR and dead reckoning and using an android based tablet for moving map VFR sectional chart. A student pilot was in the right seat and was practicing navigation skills with paper sectional charts. Aircraft was approaching from West; using VFR flight following and was in contact with Louisville Approach (SDF). At approximately 20 NM west of JVY the pilot reported field in sight and was switched to advisory and VFR squawk code. The PIC was maintaining an altitude of 3000 MSL due to a set of towers (1965 MSL) approx. 5 NM west of field. The pilot was having trouble visually identifying the towers and was diverting to the north of the field. At that time a jet reported being on the visual to RWY 18 at JVY and the PIC began trying to visually identify the traffic. Once the traffic landed the PIC began trying to visually identify the airport. The android tablet had frozen and was showing the aircraft approx. 10 nm to NW of JVY. The PIC visually identified what he mistakenly thought was JVY and proceeded to fly Southbound towards the field. The PIC flew to LOU and the table remained intermittent. The PIC entered a pattern at LOU at approx 1500 MSL and noted the runway configuration did not appear consistent with the airport of intended landing JVY. The PIC initiated a climbing turn towards 3000 MSL and 090 due to concerns of terrain separation from towers which he knew were W of JVY. The PIC contacted Louisville approach and received vectors back to JVY.1) Prior to purchasing Aircraft X; the PIC had flown (approx. 150 hours) a rented G1000 equipped T206 and primarily used GPS and the avionics supplied moving map for primary navigation. The PIC had mainly used VOR for IAP proficiency. 2) Aircraft X has a dual screen Aspen 1500 and a KLN90B GPS unit. The GPS had been removed for service and the PIC was using VOR and dead reckoning as the primary means of navigation. An android tablet was used by the PIC to provide charts while the right seat student pilot was using paper charts to practice flight planning and navigation.3) Prior to the flight the PIC had found the VOR did not pass the accuracy requirements for IFR (actual was -5 deg using VOT and ICT). Normally the PIC would carry paper instrument approach plates and use an IAP to back-up the visual approach. Since the aircraft was not IFR approved the PIC did not bring IAP booklets and had not downloaded Indiana IAP to the tablet.Root Cause: PIC lost situational awareness due to distraction and compelling failure of reference navigation device (Android Tablet). Contributing factors were insufficient preflight briefing of airport environment using VFR chart and over reliance on GPS/advanced technology.1) Pilots need to be aware that IPADS and Android tablets do not meet the rigorous certification requirements of aircraft avionics and can produce compelling failures. These devices receive inappropriate levels of praise and emphasis on social media.2) The need to contact ATC for assistance when a pilot is unsure of their position cannot be overemphasized. In this instance; the PIC should have immediately contacted ATC when his expected position did not match the position shown on the reference nav aid (tablet).

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.