Amateur/Home Built/Experimental
Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Flight Crew Last 90 Days 40; Flight Crew Total 10000; Flight Crew Type 9950
Confusion; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Human Factors; Chart Or Publication; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Manuals; Procedure
While I fly practice approaches with safety pilots to stay current mechanically and while I handle the airplane acceptably; I haven't been flying the IFR System enough in the past 20 years. It's rarely IMC where I live. Even the Controllers get stressed out when it's IMC here. I am rusty on Terminology and Procedures. And so this was a 'last flight' to deliver the airplane to a potential buyer and quit flying forever.As it turned out; it was solid IFR on the way to the buyer; although the forecast for the Destination was for MVFR with a ceiling of 2;000 foot Broken. Even though I have a good EFB (Electronic Flight Book); I find it easier to get a complicated weather briefing by talking to a Briefer instead of reading a bunch of text in an on-line briefing. So I got my briefing the old school way and called FSS for my planned IFR flight. Near the end of my briefing; the specialist gave me the NOTAM that the ILS was OTS (Out of Service) at the destination. If he also told me that the VOR was also out of service; I don't recall hearing that NOTAM. Because the plane doesn't have a panel mounted GPS; and because I thought the VOR was operational; I had planned for a VOR Approach into my destination if the weather got worse.Sure enough; the destination went to 2;000 feet overcast; requiring some kind of IFR let down though the layer. 'No problem;' I thought. 'I'll just request the VOR approach.' I should add that; while; if by myself; I could have simply gone further down the road to my alternate; which was good VFR; my passenger an even more elderly lady needed to get on the ground quickly for bladder relief. Before I switched to Approach; I listened to the ATIS. That's when I first learned that the VOR was OTS. I was kind of stunned and not sure what to do. The ATIS was calling for the RNAV Approach. But I was certain that ATC would offer me something else since I wasn't /R.To my surprise; Approach assigned me the RNAV Approach anyway. My tablet EFB had the RNAV Approach; and in the past; my EFB has been remarkably accurate flying ILS's in my area; to the point that I have landed out of a practice ILS using the EFB's WAAS (Wide Area Augmentation System) based EFIS (Electronic Flight Instrument System). So I flew to the IAF (Initial Approach Fix) as instructed. However; Approach kept quizzing me about my heading; telling me that I wasn't quite going to the IAF. Even though the EFB said that I was spot on. I think one of the controllers figured it out and offered me Vectors for the Approach instead. Which I accepted. Except that; according to my 'trusty' EFB; Approach was vectoring me past the final approach course. So while I would initially fly the assigned vector; I also would turn when I thought I should to get on the final approach course. ATC said I was a mile off course. Everyone was confused as to what was happening - both me and the Controller.Fortunately I broke out at 2;000 feet and switched to a Contact Approach and landed uneventfully. As is becoming usual for me at this stage in my life; it wasn't until after I was on the ground that it occurred to me that I should have asked for an ASR (Alternate Supply Road) Approach. The airport had RADAR on site. I'm embarrassed to say that; as a former instructor; I used to teach about ASR's. But it's been so long since I've heard of - or done - an ASR that I just couldn't remember what to ask for on this flight. As I said; I realize my limitations and will be grounding myself with the sale of the plane. So that will prevent this problem from occurring in the future. However; regardless of one's age; errors like this in one's EFB's can be very disorienting; even for young whippersnappers. While tablet EFB's have disclaimers warning about using them for approaches; I often hear of pilots in Big Iron using their tablets to shoot approaches anyway. For example; I personally know a corporate pilot who flies Challenger jets that have three big glass panels. Yet he useshis tablet to fly approaches in the jet! We have come to trust these things to the point that when there's a conflict between what they say and what ATC says; we favor our WAAS based tablets instead which; arguably; are more accurate that ATC's RADAR.My particular EFB maker recently acknowledged their error when I reported this problem at this particular airport. They said it occurs on plates that are 'skewed.' And that they will correct this problem in the next data cycle. So my advice is to believe that disclaimer on the tablet EFB's; and if there's any discrepancy between what the tablet says and what others are telling you; believe the others. As parting works; while the FAA's Age 60 (now 65) Rule was arbitrary; I see now that it wasn't entirely baseless. Wise King Solomon said that there was a time for everything. While I'm saddened to quit flying; I'm glad that I've been blessed to fly as long as I have.
Pilot reported attempting an RNAV Approach using their Electronic Flight Book data for navigation but were off course so ATC vectored them to a Contact Approach.