The query reflects a persistent and practical challenge for instrument-rated pilots in the United States: the near-total disappearance of NDB (non-directional beacon) approaches from the National Airspace System. NDB approaches, once a foundational element of instrument training and a common backup approach at smaller airports, have been decommissioned en masse over the past two decades as the FAA has prioritized GPS-based approaches (RNAV/GPS, LPV, LNAV) under its Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) initiative. The FAA has systematically decommissioned NDB navigational aids nationwide, with only a small handful remaining—largely in Alaska, parts of the Pacific Northwest, and a scattering of other remote locations where GPS augmentation or terrain challenges historically justified retaining older infrastructure. For a pilot in the contiguous 48 states searching for a live NDB approach to fly for currency, checkride prep, or simple proficiency, the honest answer is that very few exist, and fewer still are charted as usable procedures.
This matters to working pilots for several reasons beyond nostalgia. The FAA's Practical Test Standards and Airman Certification Standards for the instrument rating no longer require NDB approaches specifically, reflecting the reality that ADF (automatic direction finder) equipment has been stripped from most training fleets and many newer aircraft never had it installed at all. However, understanding NDB procedures still has value: it reinforces fundamental instrument scan skills, timed approaches without vertical guidance cues, and the kind of raw situational awareness that GPS moving maps can mask. Pilots flying older aircraft, tailwheel bush planes in Alaska, or vintage warbirds may still encounter functioning ADF equipment and NDB procedures as a practical reality rather than a historical curiosity. Flight instructors and DPEs occasionally field questions about NDB knowledge on oral exams even when the maneuver itself is impractical to demonstrate, since the underlying concepts—bearing, homing, tracking, and RMI/ADF needle interpretation—still appear in academic instruction.
The broader trend here is unambiguous and mirrors what's happened to VOR infrastructure as well: the FAA's VOR Minimum Operational Network (MON) program has been steadily decommissioning VORs since 2016, with NDBs having gone through an even more aggressive drawdown earlier. This is part of a global shift toward satellite-based navigation as the primary means of instrument flight, with ground-based navaids retained mainly as a backup layer against GPS signal loss, jamming, or spoofing—an increasingly relevant concern given documented GPS interference incidents in conflict zones and even some domestic testing corridors. For flight schools and training providers, this creates a curriculum tension: procedures like NDB approaches are essentially untestable in a real-world flying environment, pushing instruction toward simulators, redbird/ATDs, or purely academic coverage rather than live practice.
For pilots specifically hunting a real NDB approach to fly, the practical answer typically points toward Alaska, where NDBs remain more common due to terrain, sparse infrastructure, and general aviation's reliance on varied approach types in areas with limited GPS approach development historically. Some pilots have also found isolated surviving NDB approaches in the Pacific Northwest and a few legacy procedures elsewhere, though the number shrinks with each biennial chart cycle. This underscores a maintenance-hours reality for CFIIs: NDB proficiency training has effectively transitioned from "go fly the approach" to "study the procedure and understand it conceptually," a change that reflects both the FAA's infrastructure priorities and the broader industry consensus that GPS-based navigation, backed by redundant systems, represents the future baseline for instrument flying rather than an emerging trend.