PLT OF A PIPER APACHE HAD TO REQUEST ATC ASSISTANCE FOR VECTORS TO THE RWY AFTER ATTEMPTING A VOR AND ILS APCH THAT COULD NOT BE MADE SUCCESSFULLY DUE TO THE ERRATIC MOVEMENT OF HIS COURSE INDICATOR.

Narrative

WHILE ON AN IFR FLT PLAN; AFTER DSNDING TO BEGIN THE VORA APCH ON VECTOR TO FINAL APCH FIX TO SEG; I BECAME DISORIENTED. THE VOR NEEDLE SEEMED TO FIRST ALIGN WITH THE COURSE; BUT I WAS UNABLE TO HOLD COURSE. AFTER MAKING SEVERAL ATTEMPTS TO EXECUTE THE APCH; I ABANDONED THE EFFORT. I WAS THEN VECTORED TO MY DESIGNATED ALTERNATE OF MDT BY HARRISBURG APCH; BUT WAS UNABLE TO EXECUTE 2 ILS ATTEMPTS TO RWY 13. APCH THEN VECTORED ME TOWARD THE RWY; WHERE I WAS ABLE TO SEE APCH LIGHTS; WAS CLRED TO LAND; AND LANDED WITHOUT FURTHER DIFFICULTY. I FEEL MY DISORIENTATION WAS CAUSED BY AN INTERMITTENT ERRATIC VOR INDICATION THAT I WAS NOT AWARE OF; PROBABLY CAUSED BY A FAULTY VOR INDICATOR OR RECEIVER PROB. EARLIER IN THE FLT; I HAD COM DIFFICULTY WITH ZOB. THERE WAS A SECOND HAND-HELD TRANSCEIVER IN THE ACFT DURING THE FLT; BUT IT WAS NOT EMPLOYED. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THAT HE DID HAVE THE NAV RECEIVED AND VOR/ILS INDICATOR CHKED OUT BY MAINT; WHICH FOUND NO NOTICEABLE PROB. HE FURTHER STATED THAT HE BELIEVED THAT HE WAS TOO NERVOUS AND UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THE APCHS WHICH MAY HAVE CAUSED HIS ERRATIC FLT BEHAVIOR RATHER THAN THE EQUIP. HE WAS ALSO ADVISED THAT WHEN THE CEILING/VISIBILITY IS AT LEAST 800 FT; 2 MI; THAT OTHER ACFT COULD BE TAXIED ACROSS THE RWY TO WHICH HE IS HEADED CAUSING TROUBLE WITH THE GS INDICATIONS. HE SUMMARIZED HIS PROB; BY NEEDING MORE INST PRACTICE WITH A SIMULATOR AND INSTRUCTOR.