[ammar2]

The VOR Minimum Operation Network[1] in the US is basically supposed to be that. They're decommissioning a lot of the VORs but at least guaranteeing that you'll be 100NM away from a working VOR and an airport with an approach that can be accomplished with VORs for the initial fixes.

Still definitely feels like putting a lot of reliance on GPS but at least there's a backup for the worst case.

[1] https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/at...

[tjohns]

There's also a DME Minimum Operational Network, for airliners that can use DME-DME RNAV. (That's too expensive for smaller aircraft to install, though.)

[cameldrv]

It's too bad that DME/DME RNAV isn't more widely available. The only real reason it's so expensive is that there isn't much demand for it since GPS (usually) works fine. Electronics-wise, it's not much more complicated than a transponder. Unlike a GPS, it does have to transmit, so it will always be somewhat more expensive than GPS.

The other problem is that there's a limit to how many aircraft a DME station can serve at a time (about 100), but I believe that could be greatly expanded if aircraft weren't pinging the DME so often. A position fix every second is generally fine, and it could be even more infrequent if you have a cheap inertial system to fuse with it that can fill in the track for a few seconds between pings.

[rlpb]

One thing I have yet to understand is why DME-DME is preferred over VOR-VOR. Because the latter can support unlimited aircraft, unlike DME.