Non-Directional Beacon (NDB) approaches represent one of the oldest categories of instrument approach procedures still nominally present in the National Airspace System, yet a growing number of pilots — including those with thousands of instrument hours — have never executed one in actual conditions. The question of who still flies NDB approaches, and where, reflects a generational and technological inflection point in instrument navigation. Once the backbone of IFR terminal procedures at smaller airports across North America and internationally, NDB approaches are now a rarity in daily line operations, having been systematically displaced by GPS/RNAV overlays, VOR approaches, and the continued expansion of WAAS-based LPV and LNAV/VNAV procedures.
The FAA has been decommissioning NDB ground stations at an accelerating pace for over two decades, driven by high maintenance costs, spectrum management priorities, and the operational superiority of satellite-based navigation. Many airports that previously had standalone NDB approaches now have only GPS equivalents charted, or the procedures have been cancelled entirely. For Part 91 and Part 135 operators flying domestically, an NDB approach in the United States is increasingly a theoretical exercise confined to written tests and checkrides rather than a routine instrument in the toolkit. AIM guidance and instrument rating practical test standards still require applicants to demonstrate understanding of ADF/NDB navigation, but the infrastructure to practice it meaningfully has become sparse.
Internationally, the picture differs considerably. Portions of Canada, Central America, South America, Africa, and parts of Asia and the Pacific still maintain active NDB stations and valid published approach procedures. Corporate and charter pilots flying trans-oceanic or international routes — particularly into remote or lower-infrastructure airports — may still encounter NDB approaches as a legitimate operational requirement rather than an academic one. Operators filing international trips under ICAO flight plan standards should confirm avionics currency and pilot familiarity with ADF equipment before assuming NDB approaches are irrelevant to their fleet.
For airline and large-cabin business jet operations, practical NDB proficiency has effectively disappeared from recurrent training syllabi at most operators, replaced entirely by RNP, ILS, and RNAV-based procedures. The aircraft themselves often reflect this shift — many modern business jets no longer carry ADF receivers as standard equipment, or carry them as optional avionics that operators choose to omit. This creates a subtle but real gap: pilots who hold ATP certificates and fly sophisticated glass-cockpit aircraft may be technically current under 14 CFR Part 61 without ever having flown an NDB approach to actual minimums, a situation that would have been unthinkable in the 1980s or early 1990s.
The broader trend points toward a continued and likely accelerating sunset of NDB infrastructure globally, with ICAO member states progressively adopting PBN (Performance-Based Navigation) frameworks that deprioritize legacy ground-based navaids. The International Civil Aviation Organization's PBN Global Roadmap has long targeted NDB as a candidate for phase-out in favor of GNSS-based approaches, and several countries have already completed or announced formal NDB decommissioning programs. For pilots and operators, the practical takeaway is straightforward: NDB approaches remain a valid certification topic and an occasional real-world requirement for specific international operations, but the window for meaningful hands-on experience with the procedure type is closing rapidly, making simulator-based proficiency maintenance the only reliable option for most professional crews.