Paper charts now seem to be backup for gps . When navigating i use a panel mounted garmin and back it up with foreflight on the I Pad. Charts take up a lot of space and weight in my little airplane.
And that's why my trainees learn how to flight plan with a pencil, a flight log, and an E-6B, and to navigate with basic flight instruments and a sectional chart before they get to use computer flight planning and a GPS.
That explains why you've attained "geezer" status. I hope Mafoo can learn to understand these concepts so someday he, too, can join the Airport Geezer Club.Same thing I do when planning a flight. I have a bunch of "That's About Right" numbers in my head so when Foreflight or the 430 or whatever device I use spits out a plan, I can check it for reasonableness. If I didn't have those TAR numbers, I would do it the old fashion way until I do. Same thing happens in flight so I know what to use and when to go to the backup.
Good -- there's hope for you yet.I like that idea.
If you have a CFI who doesn't teach you to use everything in the plane before sending you for the ride, find another instructor who will. It may be the difference in passing/failing the practical test, not to mention saving your butt some day.What I don't like, is the idea that the GPS stuff is not something a CFI should train on after they have learned everything else.
No argument there, as long as they learn the fundamentals first. Crawl -> Walk -> Run.If there are times that using one can save your life, it should be yet another tool that students utilize. More situational awareness is better. Why not teach someone how to use the currently best tool available for providing it?
You remind me of an article I read in an engineering journal some years ago, written by the VP of at construction engineering firm. ..... snip....And that's why my trainees learn how to flight plan with a pencil, a flight log, and an E-6B, and to navigate with basic flight instruments and a sectional chart before they get to use computer flight planning and a GPS.
I remember one time at the University when I was teaching an Airline Economics course, we neede to do some division to get an answer. I went over to the corner where the big E-6B for pilot ground school was located, and spun the numbers. When I turned around, there were 20 gaping mouths and 40 wide eyes. One of them finally dug out his calculator, and after some button pushing said, "Hey -- he's right! How'd he do that?" "It's just a big circular slide rule," I said. "A slide rule?" responded another student, "My grandpa has one of those."Good story. Funy how that works. We hand out a lot of big contracts. We always have an informal get together, no calculators, no programs, just a piece of paper and ballpark what we think things will cost. It is amazing how close that comes to the final detailed design costs.
Something to do with putting them all in one basket?What do eggs have to do with this topic?
In short, I put a lot of stock in the old saw about how to spot a good navigator: If you take him up blindfolded, fly him around for a while, then let him see a chart (or CDI or GPs screen) and ask "where are we?", if he looks outside first, he's worthy. When there's not enough to see outside, you may surrender your responsibility to navaids or radar vectors, but if there's anything at all to see, IMHO that should be what you look at first.
I was taught to look out the dome first....."Gary if you don't get that third sighting real soon, and you cut another one, you're coming down here, and I'm taking the third fix.." (you know where the rear end of the person, sighting with the 'labe was, relative to the PIC).....A jewel
That works until you lose signal and panel electrical power just on the edge of a hot MOA in Nevada......if you can't derive you position in 30 seconds you can be in a world of hurt.... they turn on the jammer just before they go hot. EVERYONE you listed is GPS dependent. You, are dependent.Mafoo said:However my Stratus ADS-B receiver, iPad, iPhone, Garmin GPS, and my wife's iPhone (the 90% of the time she is with me) have to all fail before I turn to the Nav radio.
The other day I was on a flight and we had backups galore.Need a backup pilot? Four pilots aboard. Need a backup IFR GPS? Three of those aboard. And if they all went TU? We had 8 VFR GPSs with us, at least four of which had moving maps on sectionals.
And that's why my trainees learn how to flight plan with a pencil, a flight log, and an E-6B, and to navigate with basic flight instruments and a sectional chart before they get to use computer flight planning and a GPS.
Rather than going the whole 1940's approach for flight planning why not just teach the students how to make estimates and perform TLAR checks on their computer generated flight plans? The FAA sure doesn't see things that way though, given their stupid written tests where three of the multichoices for a leg distance or heading are within .03% of each other.And that's why my trainees learn how to flight plan with a pencil, a flight log, and an E-6B, and to navigate with basic flight instruments and a sectional chart before they get to use computer flight planning and a GPS.
That's exactly what I do. But how are they going to learn how to make those estimates without those basic tools? One of the beauties of the E-6B is the wind side, which displays the solution graphically so it's easier to understand and visualize.Rather than going the whole 1940's approach for flight planning why not just teach the students how to make estimates and perform TLAR checks on their computer generated flight plans?
Kinda dumb, isn't it? Especially since they're measuring with a micrometer something which will be cut with a broadaxe -- while moving.The FAA sure doesn't see things that way though, given their stupid written tests where three of the multichoices for a leg distance or heading are within .03% of each other.
I was taught to look out the dome first....."Gary if you don't get that third sighting real soon, and you cut another one, you're coming down here, and I'm taking the third fix.." .
That works until you lose signal and panel electrical power just on the edge of a hot MOA in Nevada......if you can't derive you position in 30 seconds you can be in a world of hurt....
Hmmm. ..That works until you lose signal and panel electrical power just on the edge of a hot MOA in Nevada......if you can't derive you position in 30 seconds you can be in a world of hurt.... they turn on the jammer just before they go hot. EVERYONE you listed is GPS dependent. You, are dependent.
BTDT, arse saved by having two VORs tuned. All I had to do was twist, turn left about 10 degrees, and climb to above FL 18.
I like that idea.
What I don't like, is the idea that the GPS stuff is not something a CFI should train on after they have learned everything else.
If there are times that using one can save your life, it should be yet another tool that students utilize. More situational awareness is better. Why not teach someone how to use the currently best tool available for providing it?
Ever notice that in a lot of antii-GPS posts, the GPS is the only thing in the cockpit capable of failing?
I've gotten a RAIM error on a KLN-89 in the past during a real approach. Went missed and requested vectors for the VOR-A. So even when it is working, it can fail to give guidance!In a plane I rent regularly, my CFI had a KLN94 spontaneously shutoff and refuse to turn back on while in the middle of a GPS approach. Fortunately it was VMC and it was just for practice.
I've had a KLN94 spontaneously switch to a different waypoint in the opposite direction while in direct-to mode. I hit direct-to and entered my intended waypoint, which went through. A few minutes later it did it again. I was close to home by this point so I just followed I495 the rest of the way.
Maybe it's my electrical engineering background, but I really don't trust technology anymore.
Rather than going the whole 1940's approach for flight planning why not just teach the students how to make estimates and perform TLAR checks on their computer generated flight plans? The FAA sure doesn't see things that way though, given their stupid written tests where three of the multichoices for a leg distance or heading are within .03% of each other.
As they say, trust but verify.Maybe it's my electrical engineering background, but I really don't trust technology anymore.
In a plane I rent regularly, my CFI had a KLN94 spontaneously shutoff and refuse to turn back on while in the middle of a GPS approach. Fortunately it was VMC and it was just for practice.
I've had a KLN94 spontaneously switch to a different waypoint in the opposite direction while in direct-to mode. I hit direct-to and entered my intended waypoint, which went through. A few minutes later it did it again. I was close to home by this point so I just followed I495 the rest of the way.
Maybe it's my electrical engineering background, but I really don't trust technology anymore.
I've gotten a RAIM error on a KLN-89 in the past during a real approach. Went missed and requested vectors for the VOR-A. So even when it is working, it can fail to give guidance!
Normally I have my guys do it all on paper, its also nice to use a normal calculator so you can see the math behind it.
There have been a few times I've re-routed myself on a cafe table with a pen my chart, ruler and scrap paper.
Electronics make life easy but they do screw up (even TSOed units), during training I do not let my students use electronics UNTIL they have a excellent grasp of where they are, where they are going and how they are going to get there without help from electronics.
Saying "well I have this backup to that GPS" doesnt prove the case for me, it's like saying engines have dual mags, documented maintenance etc, why should we teach engine out procedures, the engine has backups for most of it's components.
Ive had a certified and very well maintained aircraft have a catastrophic engine failure on me and I put much more faith in my engine then my GPSs
One would be a fool if one were not planning the next move for WHEN that engine/electrical/trim/etc fails.
Did you ever find out the cause? I have a KLN-94 and it's been rock solid.
I agree that it wasn't a failure of the unit and that it functioned as designed. My point was that it failed to give guidance, so that an alternative/backup means of navigation was required! And with a KLN 89, there's really no other approach type for it to degrade to, since it's not a WAAS unit.Not sure I'd call that a GPS failure. RAIM stands for Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring. If you get a failure, the normal procedure is to go missed or change approaches. Some approaches will downgrade depending upon the unit. Don't see anything wrong here.I've gotten a RAIM error on a KLN-89 in the past during a real approach. Went missed and requested vectors for the VOR-A. So even when it is working, it can fail to give guidance!
I agree that it wasn't a failure of the unit and that it functioned as designed. My point was that it failed to give guidance, so that an alternative/backup means of navigation was required! And with a KLN 89, there's really no other approach type for it to degrade to, since it's not a WAAS unit.
The complete shutdown was a result of a circuit board failure according to the avionics shop.
I'm not sure what the cause was for the waypoint switching problem, but I left out some details. I had used flight plan mode for 1B9-MVY-KACK and it worked fine getting there. Hours later when departing KACK, the unit powered on and the previous flight plan was still active, saying I was 0.4 miles from KACK. I could not find a way to create a new flight plan or invert the current one, and I was wasting Hobbs time trying to figure it out.
I planned on following the same route home, so I selected MVY and hit the direct-to button. The direct-to symbol appeared and showed my destination as MVY. Once I was flying over MVY, I hit the direct-to button and entered 1B9. The direct-to symbol appeared and the destination was shown as 1B9. While about 20 miles from 1B9, it spontaneously switched to a direct-to for MVY. I hit direct-to and entered 1B9 and all was well. About 12 miles out it happened again. Afterwards I spent hours reading the PG, but could not make sense of it.
Hmmmn. I don't consider that to be an anti-GPS post. I consider it to be "pro everything else".Hmmm. ..
Ever notice that in a lot of antii-GPS posts, the GPS is the only thing in the cockpit capable of failing?
Did you check to see if the right outer knob had been pulled out? Were you diddling with the OBS and had the GPS in OBS mode?
Absolutely!At some point in time the words "4 course's, do they make pilots lazy" or "adf, do they make pilots lazy" were said............
???Hmmm. ..
Ever notice that in a lot of antii-GPS posts, the GPS is the only thing in the cockpit capable of failing?
???
The "anti-GPS" crowd isn't an anti-GPS crowd. It's a pro-alternate-method-of-determining-your-position crowd.
The reason the topic of GPS failures arises in these discussions is because they're always started by the "I'm good because I have multiple GPS's in the cockpit" crowd.
If you had started out by saying an alternative method of navigation outside GPS is required, I doubt there would have been much debate. I've already said the people arguing with you are the pro-alternate-method-of-determining-your-position folks.I have repeatedly stated that and alternate method of navigation outside of GPS is required.
What would you call all the people who have been arguing with me?
Translation: "I'm good because I have multiple GPS's in the cockpit."I think the question at hand, is...if using GPS as the only reliable form of navigation is acceptable. (Let's say he had 3-4 GPS systems with him, like I would most of the time).
I think knowing how to use something else is always good, however I find no need for it. Technology moves on, and people adapt.
<snip>
If GPS as a service goes down, you have a lot bigger problems then knowing exactly where you are.
Translation: "I'm good because I have multiple GPS's in the cockpit."
I'm a pro-multiple-methods person myself. I've even had GPS failures (as well as VORs, NDBs and Comm failures).???
The "anti-GPS" crowd isn't an anti-GPS crowd. It's a pro-alternate-method-of-determining-your-position crowd.
The reason the topic of GPS failures arises in these discussions is because they're always started by the "I'm good because I have multiple GPS's in the cockpit" crowd.