Highway in the Sky

AggieMike88

AggieMike88

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Jan 13, 2010
Messages
20,805
Location
Denton, TX
Display Name
Display name:
The original "I don't know it all" of aviation.
In this article, Sporty's iPad Pilot News discusses some of the new features the EFB's have. One EFB, Aerovie Reports now offers "Highway in the Sky" for approaches.

I wonder if this feature will be seen on other EFB's and certified glass panels.

(I can hear @Jay Honeck chuckling from here since he's had that in his RV8 for some time now)

thumb_IMG_0364_1024-1024x768.jpg
 
Is (and has been for quite some many years) on the GRT Horizon series (but these can only be used on E-A/B aircraft)
 
oldShar said:
Is (and has been for quite some many years) on the GRT Horizon series (but these can only be used on E-A/B aircraft)
Click to expand...
This was the source of my saying Jay was chuckling.
 
I think the some iteration of the g1000 is capable of showing that.
 
I've been using Flight Cheetah/TrueFlight for seven years and they've had this since before I starting using them.

It's nothing new. You iDiots just are blind to anything not Foreflight.
 
I have also used the boxes once and, like EdFred, found them distracting.
 
tsts4 said:
Yep, both the certifed G1000 and the experimental G3X has HITS although Garmin calls it Pathways. Personally I found it distracting and turned it off.
Click to expand...

Both my Blue Mountain and Advanced EFIS have had HITS available. I tried it for about 3 minutes. Haven't looked at it since. Definitely not a selling point for me.
 
Used HITs on the old Chelton we used to have. Without the auto pilot it was nice to have for holding. For approaches it gets you in the ball park but the raw data on the HSI is more precise. Definitely not a big safety enhancement but not much of a distraction either.
 
I would think that unless it was a HUD it would be quite distracting. I'll stick with keeping the needles centered for now. I've not even pulled up syn vision when practicing approaches. I would like something cheap for GA that called out the approach to minimums.
 
I never turn on the Pathways in the Cirrus. If I'm hand flying, the FD is good enough for me.
 
Seattle Avionics FlyQ for the iPad has HITS. After all the Foreflight discussion on it not allowing other than Stratus, I'm still amazed it has so many supporters.
 
Just another idiot,that enjoys foreflight. I have an aspen,and don't use the synthetic vision,not sure I'm ready for the highway in the sky yet, all the demos I've had ,haven't convinced me yet.
 
I guess I do not see the point in that. I have a CDI and glideslope which work pretty well for course guidance.
 
I've had three different planes with the G1000 w/SVT and HITs. I use them and love them. They're great for situational awareness, particularly when flying an approach, departure or missed. Most people I know tried them once, found them distracting and gave up. I think they are well worth a concerted attempt to get used to.
 
fiveoboy01 said:
I guess I do not see the point in that. I have a CDI and glideslope which work pretty well for course guidance.
Click to expand...
I agree... Reading more about it and the responses here, I'm coming to the conclusion that HITS is more of an eye candy thing for lay sheeple who don't know what a CDI/HSI/Glideslope is.
 
AggieMike88 said:
I agree... Reading more about it and the responses here, I'm coming to the conclusion that HITS is more of an eye candy thing for lay sheeple who don't know what a CDI/HSI/Glideslope is.
Click to expand...

No it's an improvement to a traditional CDI/Glideslope if you learn to use it correctly. In the same way antilock brakes are an improvement for the vast majority of drivers than are traditional brakes. You can stop fine with both however.
 
Last edited:
I think it's a fantastic tool I too at first found them odd but when I picked up my plane from Cessna and went through there little training familiarization course they did a good job focusing on the HITS and I find it phenomenal, flying approaches etc. it's something different your scan must change from what we are all used to and have traditionally learned but like some others have said I think it's well worth your time. The aircraft I fly at work doesn't have HITS or SVT and I find myself missing it as the situational awareness I find it provides is great

I do turn it off when flying s true visual approach because boxes going odd ways can be distracting but when flying enroute with loaded points and a loaded approach it's phenomenal
 
fiveoboy01 said:
I guess I do not see the point in that. I have a CDI and glideslope which work pretty well for course guidance.
Click to expand...

Lol well make sure you don't ever use a GPS or anything that gives you more than a needle to stare at, wouldn't want all of that additional information to be available at your fingertips. Did people have such a negative attitude about technology when VOR's started replacing NDBs and 4-course radio?
 
SoonerAviator said:
Lol well make sure you don't ever use a GPS or anything that gives you more than a needle to stare at, wouldn't want all of that additional information to be available at your fingertips. Did people have such a negative attitude about technology when VOR's started replacing NDBs and 4-course radio?
Click to expand...

You're reading into it and putting words in my mouth that I never said.

I said I don't see the point... Notice I did not say anything negative about anyone who would like to use the feature.

Read what I wrote, not what you want to see.
 
fiveoboy01 said:
You're reading into it and putting words in my mouth that I never said.

I said I don't see the point... Notice I did not say anything negative about anyone who would like to use the feature.

Read what I wrote, not what you want to see.
Click to expand...

You don't see the point of having a 3-D representation of your flight path/glideslope? I understand that you can follow a CDI just like you have done since you started instrument flying, but the point is that it provides more than just two needles bouncing around. You see the path, and can have terrain and obstacles displayed in relation to your position. There's nothing wrong with sticking with the CDI layout, but I fail to understand why you would miss "the point" in it.

I understand not really seeing much value in it when up at cruising altitude, but when beginning an approach, a hold, going missed, it takes a lot of the mental gymnastics out of the equation.
 
It's just a slightly different way of presenting the CDI and glideslope. No big deal. If you like it great, I have not tried it, but would like too.
 
HITS is a Flight Director for people who lack visualization. Also it's not as precise as a dual queuing system as you can be anywhere in the box and still think you're doing pretty good. It is cool to look at for sure but at the end of the day it does the same thing as any old FD does.
 
I love threads like this, as they expose so many deep seated insecurities and outright falsehoods.

I've had HITS approaches (to any runway in the US -- even grass strips) since 2014. Like GPS and onboard weather before it, it is a fantastic tool.

Now, you ask, why would a dedicated VFR-only pilot need HITS? Well, I'm glad you asked... Listen up:

Yesterday we flew up to Kenedy (2R9) for dessert. (Great home made pies at Barth's Cafe, an easy walk from the ramp. But I digress...)

By the time we waddled back to the plane, it was nearly dusk. We launched into a beautiful, if hazy, setting sun, on a luscious 75 degree evening, and pointed Amelia South toward the coast. At 185 knots ground speed, with a nice push, it was only a 30 minute flight to KTFP...

As we approached the coast the sun set prematurely, behind a super-thick haze layer that only thickened as we approached the Gulf. By the time I was 10 miles out, KTFP was down to 4 miles vis, with an unlimited ceiling that meant nothing because it was obscured and nearly dark.

Before synthetic vision and HITS, this would have been pretty uncomfortable. While legal VFR, it was virtually impossible to see the airport, or much detail on the ground. Basically, conditions were what I call "faux IFR".

With SV and HITS, it was just another flight. With two button pushes, I activated a HITS approach to Rwy 13. With SV, the entire world was visible, plain as day. With HITS, I could simply follow the boxes until the VASI became visible in the murk.

It's an absolutely amazing tool that can and should save lives. The fact that it hasn't become standard equipment on every GA airplane is a testament to how dysfunctional our dangerously obstructionist government has become.

IMHO, of course.
 
I had the exact same thing on Wednesday. VFR but rain, and crummy vis... probably bare minimums. 5 miles out and still couldn't see the airport.

How did I ever make it back to the airport???? GPS and a CDI.

It's cool... It's not groundbreaking.. Like any other navaid, it's the same thing, different presentation. That it's made out to be revolutionary is funny, to me anyways.

If you like it, use it. If it was an option, I'd use it myself. But I won't be buying anything so equipped anytime soon and probably never.
 
HITS is great when I have my 9 year old flying - "just keep the meatball in the middle of the box"... flys it as good as the auto pilot :) Take it off and we nose dive!

Uh oh. I may get slammed for this...
 
Instead of "George" you have Junior.
 
EdFred said:
I've been using Flight Cheetah/TrueFlight for seven years and they've had this since before I starting using them.

It's nothing new. You iDiots just are blind to anything not Foreflight.
Click to expand...


Do you still have you rolling TrueFlight hardware?
 
Just as long as there is never a Super Highway In The Sky...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top