Narrative:

I (X) asked ZOB for a practice NDB approach to runway 23 at arnold palmer regional airport (lbe). I was east of the NDB (benje-bhu) when center told me to fly heading 310 degrees. He also told me I would 'have to do this approach on my own.' I assumed this to mean I would be responsible for my own traffic and terrain separation. After the approach, I realized he may have wanted me to do the procedure turn. However, when being radar vectored, a procedure turn is not necessary according to the aim. In addition, when I was cleared for the approach, I was already established inbound on the 233 degree course to the NDB outside of tiney intersection. At this location, according to the approach chart, I would have been on the procedure turn inbound with no need (or clearance) to go around the holding pattern. When I learned how to fly instruments, I was taught there was 2 kinds of approachs, a straight-in (no procedure turn) approach, and a full (procedure turn) approach. If the controller wanted me to do the procedure turn, he should have stated 'cleared for the full NDB runway 23 approach.' I still don't know what 'you'll have to do this approach on your own' means. However, I should have asked. Once established between tiney and bhu I descended from the last assigned altitude to 3900 ft. My ADF showed I was on course, but the airport was off to the right. Apparently the ridgeline to the east of the final approach course affected the accuracy of the NDB and led me off course. The center controller told me I was off course and below his minimum sector altitude (which are not published on approach charts). I then proceeded visually back on course to the airport. Corrective actions could have been the use of 'full approach' or 'straight-in approach' by ATC, my questioning on unclr instruction, and better FAA monitoring of the accuracy of navaids especially NDB's.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PART 135 PA31 PLT IS CONCERNED WITH ATC CLRNC FOR APCH, BUT DEVIATES OFF ADF FINAL APCH COURSE AND NAV ERROR IS CAUGHT BY CTLR.

Narrative: I (X) ASKED ZOB FOR A PRACTICE NDB APCH TO RWY 23 AT ARNOLD PALMER REGIONAL ARPT (LBE). I WAS E OF THE NDB (BENJE-BHU) WHEN CTR TOLD ME TO FLY HEADING 310 DEGS. HE ALSO TOLD ME I WOULD 'HAVE TO DO THIS APCH ON MY OWN.' I ASSUMED THIS TO MEAN I WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MY OWN TFC AND TERRAIN SEPARATION. AFTER THE APCH, I REALIZED HE MAY HAVE WANTED ME TO DO THE PROC TURN. HOWEVER, WHEN BEING RADAR VECTORED, A PROC TURN IS NOT NECESSARY ACCORDING TO THE AIM. IN ADDITION, WHEN I WAS CLRED FOR THE APCH, I WAS ALREADY ESTABLISHED INBOUND ON THE 233 DEG COURSE TO THE NDB OUTSIDE OF TINEY INTXN. AT THIS LOCATION, ACCORDING TO THE APCH CHART, I WOULD HAVE BEEN ON THE PROC TURN INBOUND WITH NO NEED (OR CLRNC) TO GO AROUND THE HOLDING PATTERN. WHEN I LEARNED HOW TO FLY INSTS, I WAS TAUGHT THERE WAS 2 KINDS OF APCHS, A STRAIGHT-IN (NO PROC TURN) APCH, AND A FULL (PROC TURN) APCH. IF THE CTLR WANTED ME TO DO THE PROC TURN, HE SHOULD HAVE STATED 'CLRED FOR THE FULL NDB RWY 23 APCH.' I STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT 'YOU'LL HAVE TO DO THIS APCH ON YOUR OWN' MEANS. HOWEVER, I SHOULD HAVE ASKED. ONCE ESTABLISHED BTWN TINEY AND BHU I DSNDED FROM THE LAST ASSIGNED ALT TO 3900 FT. MY ADF SHOWED I WAS ON COURSE, BUT THE ARPT WAS OFF TO THE R. APPARENTLY THE RIDGELINE TO THE E OF THE FINAL APCH COURSE AFFECTED THE ACCURACY OF THE NDB AND LED ME OFF COURSE. THE CTR CTLR TOLD ME I WAS OFF COURSE AND BELOW HIS MINIMUM SECTOR ALT (WHICH ARE NOT PUBLISHED ON APCH CHARTS). I THEN PROCEEDED VISUALLY BACK ON COURSE TO THE ARPT. CORRECTIVE ACTIONS COULD HAVE BEEN THE USE OF 'FULL APCH' OR 'STRAIGHT-IN APCH' BY ATC, MY QUESTIONING ON UNCLR INSTRUCTION, AND BETTER FAA MONITORING OF THE ACCURACY OF NAVAIDS ESPECIALLY NDB'S.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.