The way I Navigate - better or worse?
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Drauk:
I was refeering to those who post on Pprune slagging the use of GPS, and extolling the use of DR, not to the discussion going on here.
I should have explianed it better.
You don't really think I am weird do you?
Cat Driver:
I was refeering to those who post on Pprune slagging the use of GPS, and extolling the use of DR, not to the discussion going on here.
I should have explianed it better.
You don't really think I am weird do you?
Cat Driver:
The Original Whirly
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah Chuck, but it's not happening any more. Not on this thread anyway. Times have changed, even on Private Flying. Er...who's living in the past?
Join Date: May 2002
Location: West Sussex, UK
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep,we do live in 2003. We do have a reliable GPS system..use it!!
So I agree with Chuck 110%,use it if you have the opportunity.
VFR / DR flying is all great taking family and friends up around the block..and on a little cross country here and there.
But 2-3 hour cross country flights are challenging at best,and sometimes have a high workload that can be reduced by using GPS.
DR just gives you a headache after a couple of hours and squeezing between our cluttered airspace,picking out little towns and motorways.DR..yeah its a good idea and all,make sure you can do it..but its inefficient and only makes long trips longer.
During the summer I did a trip from Lydd-Nottingham to stay with a friend for the weekend,and did not have my GPS back then.Since then got my copy of MSFS2002 and my VOR/instrument flying is hot,so I could do it that way these days..which I do quite often.
Anyhow..If I had used my GPS I could have shaved 15-20 minutes off the outbound and inbound trip,and thats worth doing..saving money on the aircraft rental of £60ish for the weekend (return trip).
Also..PPL holders..how goods your dead reckoning 30 minutes before sunrise and 29 minutes after sunset?? Using the GPS you can depart earlier and arrive sooner
So I agree with Chuck 110%,use it if you have the opportunity.
VFR / DR flying is all great taking family and friends up around the block..and on a little cross country here and there.
But 2-3 hour cross country flights are challenging at best,and sometimes have a high workload that can be reduced by using GPS.
DR just gives you a headache after a couple of hours and squeezing between our cluttered airspace,picking out little towns and motorways.DR..yeah its a good idea and all,make sure you can do it..but its inefficient and only makes long trips longer.
During the summer I did a trip from Lydd-Nottingham to stay with a friend for the weekend,and did not have my GPS back then.Since then got my copy of MSFS2002 and my VOR/instrument flying is hot,so I could do it that way these days..which I do quite often.
Anyhow..If I had used my GPS I could have shaved 15-20 minutes off the outbound and inbound trip,and thats worth doing..saving money on the aircraft rental of £60ish for the weekend (return trip).
Also..PPL holders..how goods your dead reckoning 30 minutes before sunrise and 29 minutes after sunset?? Using the GPS you can depart earlier and arrive sooner
The Original Whirly
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ETOPS,
I don't get that. If you draw a line on a map and follow it, why should it take you longer?
I've flown three Dawn to Dusk entries (minimum of 8 hours flying) using only visual nav. Admittedly there were two of us, but if you're used to it, then it's not tiring, so long as the vis is reasonable, and of course you're in a country like the UK with lots of ground features (OK Chuck? )
I think what people have been saying in the past, or what they SHOULD have been saying, is that GPS etc is fine and dandy and a wonderful thing, but MAKE SURE YOU CAN DO IT THE OLD WAY TOO. I find it slightly worrying when people say that VFR nav is difficult and they don't like it so they won't use it. This means nav skills which have never really been acquired get worse, and very soon disappear altogether. I think this could be dangerous. Even if you're using radio aids or GPS, you need some sort of situational awareness, a rough idea of where you are on the ground, something of an ability to look at a map and visualise what the area under you should look like and vice versa. And, of course, GPS can fail etc...this has all been said.
This is part of a larger issue, which has been discussed several times on Rotorheads recently. The main issue there is should you learn on a helicopter with a governor, which controls your rotor RPM and thereby reduces workload and increases safety, but means the newer generation of helo pilots don't have as much feel for rotor RPM. I've heard the same kind of thing discussed in relation to carb heat; somewhere on some aircraft the carb heat was wired open; the result was that pilots became unaware of the carb icing issue. This is the same sort of problem.
So the question really is: Should we learn everything on as basic an aircraft as possible with no modern aids until we can do it well, THEN use modern aids? Or should we accept that we live in the 21st century, and that maybe some of these things (including visual nav?) are becoming outdated? Or a combination of the two?
Hmmm...anyone want to start another thread?
I don't get that. If you draw a line on a map and follow it, why should it take you longer?
I've flown three Dawn to Dusk entries (minimum of 8 hours flying) using only visual nav. Admittedly there were two of us, but if you're used to it, then it's not tiring, so long as the vis is reasonable, and of course you're in a country like the UK with lots of ground features (OK Chuck?
)I think what people have been saying in the past, or what they SHOULD have been saying, is that GPS etc is fine and dandy and a wonderful thing, but MAKE SURE YOU CAN DO IT THE OLD WAY TOO. I find it slightly worrying when people say that VFR nav is difficult and they don't like it so they won't use it. This means nav skills which have never really been acquired get worse, and very soon disappear altogether. I think this could be dangerous. Even if you're using radio aids or GPS, you need some sort of situational awareness, a rough idea of where you are on the ground, something of an ability to look at a map and visualise what the area under you should look like and vice versa. And, of course, GPS can fail etc...this has all been said.
This is part of a larger issue, which has been discussed several times on Rotorheads recently. The main issue there is should you learn on a helicopter with a governor, which controls your rotor RPM and thereby reduces workload and increases safety, but means the newer generation of helo pilots don't have as much feel for rotor RPM. I've heard the same kind of thing discussed in relation to carb heat; somewhere on some aircraft the carb heat was wired open; the result was that pilots became unaware of the carb icing issue. This is the same sort of problem.
So the question really is: Should we learn everything on as basic an aircraft as possible with no modern aids until we can do it well, THEN use modern aids? Or should we accept that we live in the 21st century, and that maybe some of these things (including visual nav?) are becoming outdated? Or a combination of the two?
Hmmm...anyone want to start another thread?
Why do it if it's not fun?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, let's not start another thread - if we did that, people would know what they were reading about before they opened the thread!
I'm not sure that you can relate ded-reckoning with a governor on a helicoptor, although I do know where you're coming from. The governor (correct me if I'm wrong - I know very little about these whirly things!) is a technical advancement which means that old techniques are no longer applicable on modern equipment. A bit like double-declutching in your car. Or landing a tail-dragger. Before the days of synchro-mesh, every driver knew how to double-declutch, but that doesn't mean those of us who drive post-war cars are worse drivers. Likewise, the fact that many of us can't land a tail-dragger doesn't make us worse pilots, because those techniques aren't necessary now that nearly all modern aircraft have tricycle undercarriages.
Of course, it's still good fun to learn to fly tail-draggers, and it will probably improve your flying generally. And, although I've never done it, I'd imagine that driving a car without synchro-mesh is good fun and will improve your general driving skills. Likewise, I'd guess that flying a helicoptor without a governor would improve your helicoptor flying skills.
But here's the difference... when I get back into a PA28, I don't do 3-point landings (at least, I try not to!
). When an owner of a classic pre-war car gets back from the car show and hops into his Mondeo, he doesn't double-declutch. And once you get back into your helicoptor with a governor, you let the governor take care of the rotor RPM. Although all these things will help your general skills, you don't use them, directly, when you're operating modern equipment.
On the other hand, you can (and arguably should) make use of DR skills, regardless of what modern equipment you've got. You could hop into an airways-equipped aircraft, with a couple of IFR-approved moving-map GPSs, and still draw a line on a map and follow it - and many people do. Even if you don't draw a line on the map, you still look at the map for a quick sanity check (hmm, DI says 085 but I should be going north-west, something's wrong), or for a rough idea of time (looks about 200nm, I do about 100kts, should take about 2 hours - the 4 hours' fuel I've got in my tanks will be enough). Technology will mean we have to rely less and less on DR - but it won't ever completely remove the skill from flying the way a governor has removed the need to control rotor RPM manually, or the way synchro-mesh has removed the need for double-declutching.
Now, I wonder how much more off-topic this thread can get?
FFF
-----------
Due to the heavy use of these forums we would prefer it if you are going to post something then please make sure it is worthwhile and at least 20 characters long. One liner replies such as 'Yes', 'No' or 'I agree' for example, are not necessary and only use up valuable bandwidth. Please use your back button to change your reply or use the link below to go to the forums.
P.E.
I'm not sure that you can relate ded-reckoning with a governor on a helicoptor, although I do know where you're coming from. The governor (correct me if I'm wrong - I know very little about these whirly things!) is a technical advancement which means that old techniques are no longer applicable on modern equipment. A bit like double-declutching in your car. Or landing a tail-dragger. Before the days of synchro-mesh, every driver knew how to double-declutch, but that doesn't mean those of us who drive post-war cars are worse drivers. Likewise, the fact that many of us can't land a tail-dragger doesn't make us worse pilots, because those techniques aren't necessary now that nearly all modern aircraft have tricycle undercarriages.
Of course, it's still good fun to learn to fly tail-draggers, and it will probably improve your flying generally. And, although I've never done it, I'd imagine that driving a car without synchro-mesh is good fun and will improve your general driving skills. Likewise, I'd guess that flying a helicoptor without a governor would improve your helicoptor flying skills.
But here's the difference... when I get back into a PA28, I don't do 3-point landings (at least, I try not to!
). When an owner of a classic pre-war car gets back from the car show and hops into his Mondeo, he doesn't double-declutch. And once you get back into your helicoptor with a governor, you let the governor take care of the rotor RPM. Although all these things will help your general skills, you don't use them, directly, when you're operating modern equipment.On the other hand, you can (and arguably should) make use of DR skills, regardless of what modern equipment you've got. You could hop into an airways-equipped aircraft, with a couple of IFR-approved moving-map GPSs, and still draw a line on a map and follow it - and many people do. Even if you don't draw a line on the map, you still look at the map for a quick sanity check (hmm, DI says 085 but I should be going north-west, something's wrong), or for a rough idea of time (looks about 200nm, I do about 100kts, should take about 2 hours - the 4 hours' fuel I've got in my tanks will be enough). Technology will mean we have to rely less and less on DR - but it won't ever completely remove the skill from flying the way a governor has removed the need to control rotor RPM manually, or the way synchro-mesh has removed the need for double-declutching.
Now, I wonder how much more off-topic this thread can get?
FFF
-----------
Due to the heavy use of these forums we would prefer it if you are going to post something then please make sure it is worthwhile and at least 20 characters long. One liner replies such as 'Yes', 'No' or 'I agree' for example, are not necessary and only use up valuable bandwidth. Please use your back button to change your reply or use the link below to go to the forums.
P.E.
Last edited by BRL; 3rd Jan 2003 at 10:08.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Dorset, UK
Posts: 619
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FFF rightly points out that a knowledge of basics does help you to spot the gross errors, that can arise when something, such as a navaid fails.
I have had a HSI fail (faulty flux detector, whatever that may be
). I had, as usual, drawn a line on the chart, so I knew that I should be heading about 190, but the HSI was indicating 040. So it did prompt me to look at the dear old fashioned wet compass, which I then used to get home.
And yes, FFF , I can get even further off topic
As part of the day job, I train student accountants. I can soon spot the younsters who were weaned onto calculators at age 5. They are the ones who insist that 9x5=5683, 'cos their calculator says so. They cannot imagine that some of us older ones, can do such a calculation in our heads, & that we learnt old fashioned things like tables & mental arithmetic, when we were at school.
I have had a HSI fail (faulty flux detector, whatever that may be
). I had, as usual, drawn a line on the chart, so I knew that I should be heading about 190, but the HSI was indicating 040. So it did prompt me to look at the dear old fashioned wet compass, which I then used to get home.And yes, FFF , I can get even further off topic
As part of the day job, I train student accountants. I can soon spot the younsters who were weaned onto calculators at age 5. They are the ones who insist that 9x5=5683, 'cos their calculator says so. They cannot imagine that some of us older ones, can do such a calculation in our heads, & that we learnt old fashioned things like tables & mental arithmetic, when we were at school.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello -
Thank you all for your respective replies!
If I may for a moment re-align the topic: having a handheld GPS, a VOR, ADF, DME etc - is this a safe way to fly as opposed to DR or Pilotage?
Rgrds
VT
Thank you all for your respective replies!
If I may for a moment re-align the topic: having a handheld GPS, a VOR, ADF, DME etc - is this a safe way to fly as opposed to DR or Pilotage?
Rgrds
VT
Why do it if it's not fun?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VT,
Opinions will differ, as you've discovered. My opinion is Yes. You have redundancy - if you have a complete electrical failure you've still got your handheld, although you need to be aware of the limitations of a handheld GPS, what you can legally use it for, and where you place the aerial.
But it's not as safe as using a handheld GPS, a VOR, ADF, DME and a DR plog.
FFF
---------------
Opinions will differ, as you've discovered. My opinion is Yes. You have redundancy - if you have a complete electrical failure you've still got your handheld, although you need to be aware of the limitations of a handheld GPS, what you can legally use it for, and where you place the aerial.
But it's not as safe as using a handheld GPS, a VOR, ADF, DME and a DR plog.
FFF
---------------
The Original Whirly
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FFF,
The governor on a helicopter is not an exact analogy, but closer than you might think. Despite having a governor, a helicopter pilot should ALWAYS be aware of rotor RPM - is it too high or too low, is it fluctuating for some reason, has the governor failed? People who learn to fly helos without governors - and there still are some around - do this naturally. The rest of us know we should, but often don't. Much the same as the newish pilot with a GPS, who knows he should be using his nav skills as a backup, but doesn't. Until his GPS fails, or he discovers he's heading in completely the wrong direction, or whatever. And when something goes wrong, you discover you don't have those skills which should be basic and instinctive, but now aren't.
But OK, I'll leave you to stick to the point, and start another thread if I feel it's worth it.
The governor on a helicopter is not an exact analogy, but closer than you might think. Despite having a governor, a helicopter pilot should ALWAYS be aware of rotor RPM - is it too high or too low, is it fluctuating for some reason, has the governor failed? People who learn to fly helos without governors - and there still are some around - do this naturally. The rest of us know we should, but often don't. Much the same as the newish pilot with a GPS, who knows he should be using his nav skills as a backup, but doesn't. Until his GPS fails, or he discovers he's heading in completely the wrong direction, or whatever. And when something goes wrong, you discover you don't have those skills which should be basic and instinctive, but now aren't.
But OK, I'll leave you to stick to the point, and start another thread if I feel it's worth it.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Further reading of this thread leads me to beleive my understanding of this discussion is cultural.
Not being a Brit I just may not understand the topic.
To me DR navagation is using desired tracks and forcast winds to calculate headings to be flown and the time it will take.
VFR flying using ADF, VOR, GNS, RNAV, INS, LORAN, GPS, smoke signals or what ever.... SHOULD ALWAYS BE BACKED UP BY MAP READING.
VFR and map reading are one and the same.
DR to me is an altogether different subject.
DR in the year 2003 is an inexact science due to the fact that forecast winds are never a guarantee of what you will get.
PS.
Whirley: Park your helicopter and get a gyroplane and you can forget RRPM.
Cat Driver:
Not being a Brit I just may not understand the topic.
To me DR navagation is using desired tracks and forcast winds to calculate headings to be flown and the time it will take.
VFR flying using ADF, VOR, GNS, RNAV, INS, LORAN, GPS, smoke signals or what ever.... SHOULD ALWAYS BE BACKED UP BY MAP READING.
VFR and map reading are one and the same.
DR to me is an altogether different subject.
DR in the year 2003 is an inexact science due to the fact that forecast winds are never a guarantee of what you will get.
PS.
Whirley: Park your helicopter and get a gyroplane and you can forget RRPM.
Cat Driver:
Why do it if it's not fun?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chuck, I'm not sure what you mean about the cultural thing. As far as I'm aware, the only cultural difference between the US and the UK is that US private pilots tend to rely on nav-aids a little more than UK private pilots - I put this down to the fact that there are many more large featureless areas in the States than there are in the UK.
You said:
I agree. I'd also like to add that flying using DR should always be backed up using another method, due to the inherent inaccuracies of the method. If you're VFR, then you should back it up with, at the very least, map reading (pilotage), and optionally use other navaids.
Can't see any differences in our thinking, except maybe a little personal preference - cultural or otherwise.
FFF
-------------
PS - was thinking about apologising to BRL for wasting valuable bandwidth with my earlier post, but decided not to waste valuable bandwith with an apology!
You said:
VFR flying using ADF, VOR, GNS, RNAV, INS, LORAN, GPS, smoke signals or what ever.... SHOULD ALWAYS BE BACKED UP BY MAP READING
Can't see any differences in our thinking, except maybe a little personal preference - cultural or otherwise.
FFF
-------------
PS - was thinking about apologising to BRL for wasting valuable bandwidth with my earlier post, but decided not to waste valuable bandwith with an apology!
Use everything that's available.
Don't rely on only a single thing ie confirm it using alternative methods.
Often one method will be more appropriate than another as your primary method, depending on the task.
Don't rely on only a single thing ie confirm it using alternative methods.
Often one method will be more appropriate than another as your primary method, depending on the task.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Saying it is danergous to rely on your electrical system (ingore handheld GPS for now) - does that mean that IFR in all SEL without dual electrical systems is not safe.
If that's the case, the ones who preach most about "old school" flying (instructors) are contradiciting themselves flying in IMC?
VT
If that's the case, the ones who preach most about "old school" flying (instructors) are contradiciting themselves flying in IMC?
VT
Sub Judice Angel Lovegod
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London
Posts: 2,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder if people are aware that panel mount GPS often (always? I don't know) have battery backup, so they will continue to work for a period after a power failure.
How many VFR pilots actually recalculate their track made good etc? I just eyeball it and correct accordingly, I don't write it down just adjust the compass (my coffe grinder DI is purely decorative).
I always draw a line on the chart if I'm going out of the local area, I would find not doing it silly when it is a good method of checking the NavPro / GPS generated plog for accuracy. I usually note the time of passing significant landmarks to give me a datum to work from if I become "temporarily unsure of my position". Doing the full blown DR bit however is a timewasting exercise IMHO as it is too inaccurate for todays' crowded and restricted airspace.
I know the WW2 navigators used DR as it was all that was available early in the war. At night it was the best method for locating the wrong town to attack due to the inherent assumptions required. Accurate night bombing wasn't generally possible until the first generation of radio aids was invented. These in turn spawned the ADF, VOR transponders etc which make our life much easier.
So to conclude, I think a pilot should be familiar with basic map reading skills, look out of the windows and also use every method at their disposal to maintain accurate navigation.
I always draw a line on the chart if I'm going out of the local area, I would find not doing it silly when it is a good method of checking the NavPro / GPS generated plog for accuracy. I usually note the time of passing significant landmarks to give me a datum to work from if I become "temporarily unsure of my position". Doing the full blown DR bit however is a timewasting exercise IMHO as it is too inaccurate for todays' crowded and restricted airspace.
I know the WW2 navigators used DR as it was all that was available early in the war. At night it was the best method for locating the wrong town to attack due to the inherent assumptions required. Accurate night bombing wasn't generally possible until the first generation of radio aids was invented. These in turn spawned the ADF, VOR transponders etc which make our life much easier.
So to conclude, I think a pilot should be familiar with basic map reading skills, look out of the windows and also use every method at their disposal to maintain accurate navigation.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Swindon, Wilts,UK
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any method you use is fine if used properly! At a CAA safety talk a while back the nice man said that the main problem with GPS is people don't bother drawing lines on the map and end up infringing controlled airspace. As with any tool it's not what you've got it's how you use it.
