EFTS groundschool

[BEagle]

A query to those who teach at EFTS. Do you teach your students how to use the Dalton navigation computer? The reason I ask is that we've recently had ex-EFT students sitting their PPL exams and it's fairly obvious that they haven't been taught how to find their own arseholes without a mirror, let alone how to navigate a light aeroplane in UK airspace....

They say that all they've been taught to use is MDR and that they have never even seen a Dalton computer, let alone been taught how to use it. Please tell me that this isn't so and they're just bull****ting - I simply cannot believe that such a very basic skill is no longer taught to 'professional' military pilots......

[BEagle]

Thank you to the chap who PM'd me saying:

"They get taught Jack Sh*t as far as the computer is concerned. All they get is MDR! I have to deal with it on the UAS and, as you've said they haven’t a clue. MDR is the ONLY way they are taught; I spend all my time at medium level ensuring they don't get too far off track because they don't listen to met briefed winds or apply the MDR wrongly!"

What on Earth is going on? Why have standards reached such a dismal state? RAF QSPs are currently credited any requirement to do the navigation element of the PPL Skill Test - but if they haven't received basic instruction in formal navigation planning, then I shall probably be proposing to the CAA CFE that such credit should no longer be given.

[airborne_artist]

Did RN EFTS at Leeming/Topcliffe in 79, jointly staffed by RAF and RN instructors, nav/grd trg by a retired Sqn Leader.

Certainly never took anything into the skies apart from a map, and used MDR taught by the the S/L - I wake up in the night screaming the 1:60 rule he rammed into us.

Still have the trusty Dalton I bought whilst doing my FlySchol, but don't think it saw the light of day once I was in dark blue.

It's worth bearing in mind that most of us were being trained for a pure (probably ASW Sea King) pilot role, with a looker to do the thinking, although they had just started streaming one off each course for SH.

[jayteeto]

Beagle, the navigator students did not know how to use a Dalton when they arrived at Shawbury. Groundschool had to be shortened and something had to give! If Navs don't, why would pilots??
Personally, I found the CRP5 perfect for in-flight work when non handling in controlled airspace. MDR requires brain cells.....

[godsavethequeen]

when you are doing 7nm a minute at 250ft you do not have the time to find your arsehole, let alone use a dalton computer....LOSER:ok:

[BEagle]

Are we really accepting such idiots into the RAF these days?

I had no need to use a Dalton when I was flying at 540 KIAS and 250 ft either - but I did when flying at 90 KIAS and 2500 ft. But not in flight - just for pre-flight planning. In flight corrections were made using SCA and proportional timing.

Grow up - and learn the basics first!

[Grob Driver]

Godsavethequeen.

May I suggest you crawl back under the rock from which you came.

You've got to learn to walk before you can run.

GD

[soddim]

God save godsavethequeen from the Queen's aircraft and God save the Queen's aviators from his presence in their airspace.

[caspertheghost]

We were briefly taught how to use the Dalton Computer on EFTS groundschool when I went through 3 or so years ago, but it was a very brief lesson as no one in the RAF FJ world ever needs to use one as far as I am aware. I can't see the point in labouring the Dalton too heavily as I have never used one for real or ever needed to use one for that matter, even on a plastic Grob on EFT. I think that is what godsavethequeen is getting at.
Fair enough, teach studes how to use the computer, but I can't see it being used in day to day flying in the RAF today.

Beagle, I don't think it's fair to criticise todays instructors or students just because we don't use the DCs today. But then again, I'm sure it was better in your day....... :D

[airborne_artist]

QUOTE]I can't see the point in labouring the Dalton too heavily as I have never used one for real or ever needed to use one for that matter, even on a plastic Grob on EFT. I think that is what godsavethequeen is getting at.

Fair enough, teach studes how to use the computer, but I can\'t see it being used in day to day flying in the RAF today.
[/QUOTE]

I think I'll dig a deep trench and put on my tin hat now, before the **** starts flying....

[FEBA]

7nm / min. Is that all :mad:
The circular computer is far superior to that Dalton dinosaur. But these days do you realy need it?

[BEagle]

You will if you ever want to obtain a civil licence!

Due to the doubt expressed by CAA-appointed Examiners at the ability of RAF digi-yoof to be able to plan a navigation route (pre-flight) with the assistance of a Dalton computer, I shall be writing to the CAA CFE recommending that the waiver from the navigation section of the PPL Skill Test for QSPs is suspended. The waiver was granted following the assessment of initial flying training courses a few years ago; however, it seems now that such standards have been dumbed down - hence the waiver is no longer valid.

The hostility expressed in response to my original question only serves to reinforce this recommendation.

[caspertheghost]

These days we tend to use good old fashioned maps, stopwatches and compasses for navigation routes during flying training. I stand by my original comment that a Dalton computer is not needed for the work we currently do/ have done in the recent past in the RAF trg system, although I can only speak for the Jet fraternity.
I'm sure a Dalton Computer is a lovely little gizmo for when you need to calculate TAS vs IAS at 33,200 ft or such other trivia, but this just isn't done in todays trg system. I would have loved to have had the time to pull out my Computer whilst planning a LL SAP, but unfortunately there just isn't the time or the need for it in the stuff we do.
Most calculations are done by MDR/rules of thumb for the good reason that when it all goes wrong in the air (bounced, off track, late etc) you cannot feasibly do anything but come up with a plan in your head in a couple of seconds to regain track or whatever you need to do.
Things may be different in the multi or helo fleets and I await their responses to the original question!
Regards, Casper.

[godsavethequeen]

SODDIM

"God save godsavethequeen from the Queen's aircraft and God save the Queen's aviators from his presence in their airspace"

Well i have been doing ok so far, thanks for looking out for me though!!

I can say without shadow of a doubt that during all my flying training courses in the RAF, nither myself or my course mates have used the dalton computer.

BEAGLE
Why do corrections pre flight for winds at 2500ft. The wind will be different once your flying anyway and varriable along the entire trip, and its not excactly hard to do a bit of MDR at 90kts or is it!!!

[BEagle]

Can that really be the voice of today's aircrew?

I cannot believe that such illiterate and utterly ignorant people are being taught to fly at the tax-payers' expense.

[godsavethequeen]

Sorry i forgot that at the top of all my SAP's i had to write an essay!!

[santiago15]

I did EFT groundschool about 4 years ago and defo remember Willy Clamp teaching us how to use a DC. That said I think it is entirely inappropriate for airborne single pilot ops.

Some air forces (eg. Aus and US) teach their studes to obtain a met wind and drift correct their headings on the ground. This however, is undoubtedly easier than the airborne MDR method. As such, were the RAF to adopt the use of the DC on the ground as opposed to MDR, it would certainly be a 'dumbing down' of EFT, BFJT and AFT - Hawks.

METS studes ARE taught to use the DC both in the air and on the ground (remember that when making your 'waiver recommendations' BEagle.) However, take any student off 208 Sqn (or BFJT for that matter), and after a 15 minute chat they could easily use a DC. It isn't rocket science after all.

Furthermore BEagle, I propose to you that the 'hostility expressed' arises from the younger element due to your perceived arrogance. Remember, the guys hitting the front line these days do so with less hours than their predecessors. That doesn't make them lower calibre individuals. It makes them victims of budget constraints.

Whilst you may or may not be intending to have a dig at the yoof, your posts often read that way and I'm not surprised people take them personally.

[MOSTAFA]

Beag's of course you are right and speaking as the army guy that was on the committee to get the dispensations in the first place its ptretty disappointing but lets be honest the only time in 7000 hrs I've used the damn thing was on the pilot course, the occasional 6 monthly and to get my licence perhaps even the CAA need occasionally reminding that times change. You and I both know we study to pass exams and yes it gives us a good grounding but forget most of the guff in a couple of weeks, be honest it is a little outdated nowadays, aint it? It was very useful for timed arrivals! Before doppler etc, Those were the days eh.

[Spugford]

Looks like the ayes have it.... very little or no use in ops in this century's jets, at least.

When and if, god forbid, the day comes when I have to learn how to use one, I'll look it up in the same section as sextants and telescopes in one of those library places.

Until then give me IN/GPS, a big heading bug and elegantly sufficient MDR.

:ok:

[Dendmar]

BEAGLE

Before you take the 'yooful' attitude to immediately go tell the Authority, may I suggest you check out your facts. It would be very unfair of you to deprive Army Pilots of their exemption based on an unchecked opinion of yours. At DEFTS Barkston Heath, they ARE taught the DC.

I agree with you that the DC is a useful tool to become familiar with in Flying Training but it is not what I would call essential. However, I do feel it should remain within the knowledge base of any aspiring pilot.

The truth is, that a QSP has a lot more experience by the time he wishes to acquire a PPL and we do know that MDR for an experienced Pilot, does work very well.

I have to say that I find it hardly surprising that your threat has engendered a rather juvenile response from some PPruners; perhaps it came across in a way inintended,but then your original threat, was rather juvenile.

Concerning:

"They get taught Jack Sh*t as far as the computer is concerned. All they get is MDR! I have to deal with it on the UAS and, as you've said they haven’t a clue. MDR is the ONLY way they are taught; I spend all my time at medium level ensuring they don't get too far off track because they don't listen to met briefed winds or apply the MDR wrongly!"

You seem to have set much store on this comment - I thought it was a UAS Instructors role to teach Navigation using, yes perhaps MDR. You can say the same, if the above UAS student was using a DC.

[BEagle]

I certainly don't suggest that a Dalton should be used in flight !

Nevertheless, I feel that it's use for pre-flight planning is an essential part of a pilot's basic training. Certainly in a/c such as are used for Elementary Flying.

MDR is certainly of use once the basics have been learned - and only then.

As the Army, RN and RAF ME worlds still teach the correct use of a computer for pre-flight planning, I'll delay communicating my recommendations.

[jayteeto]

I do agree, the DC is not much good for a handling pilot, however it does have some excellent uses. The main reason that a lot of people slag it off is lack of understanding what it does. In the PLANNING stage of any flight, I use MDR for track, however at times I find the computer works fuel and timing faster than my brain. In other words, I don't use the front of the wheel, just the slide rule on the back. With a little practice, it is quicker than a calculator. In flight, as previously mentioned, Handling Pilot... NO! But as Non Handling Pilot out of low level environment... Yes Please!! Particularly in airways. Don't slag off an excellent piece of kit.
PS... Didn't the nav school issue little electronic computers that work out track and timing??

[FEBA]

BEagle
Have you been taking the angry pills again. I suggest you moderate your posts and consider that the human brain is a far better, quicker and better packaged tool than the mechanical metal and plastic that you advocate. Hats off to anyone who can and has been taught to do the sums in his/her head.
Calculators should only be used for the expense claim form.

[BEagle]

It's a question of using the most appropriate tool for the task in hand...

I always thought that the Dalton work we did during Gnat groundschool was a bit daft - but it was certainly corrrect for pre-flight planning for Chipmunk navigation at 2500ft.

On the JP 125 hr course (before the days of Gp1 Ph 1 or whatever it was called), medium level and radio aids navigation exercises were pre-planned using a Dalton computer; however, MDR was also taught for other applications. The low level technique, taught later, was, of course, totally different.

Personally I think that the Dalton should be used at the elementary stage for pre-flight planning; MDR should be left until later stages of training and therafter the use of the Dalton should be 'as required' only.

[RowT8]

To check out the equipment used in EFT groundschool, try looking in the UAS syllabus of EFT, where it lists the Mk 4a Computer (low speed card) under resources, or RN syllabus, where the ground school time allocated to the Dalton Computer is 2 hours.

However, I still don't see this knowledge being of lasting use to the students, given the careers upon which they are embarking. The CAA dispensation was given as much in the interest of the GA community (spreading understanding between private aviators and the military) as for the benefit of the RAF and RN pilots. Withdrawal would tend towards cutting off the nose to spite the face.

By the way, if we really must debate literacy in this context, it should be noted that it's means it is, not belonging to it.

[BEagle]

Well spotted - apostrophic abuse resulting from careless editing on my behalf. I originally intended to write "It's used....", then changed the wording!

Apologies!

[Burnswannabe]

Having been through the current EFT groundschool not too long ago, I can say that the Dalton Computer is indeed in the course and we are taught, and checked on, its usage.
I have civvie friends who have their PPLs and, obviously, have military friends who have completed EFT, all I can say is that, as they all have approx 60 hrs of experience, I know who I would rather be sharing the sky with.

[InTgreen]

BEagle,

Just to let you know that about 4 years ago, JEFTS groundschool did alittle bit on the DC, however, for the previous 6 months all us poor Navy Students had been getting a complete beasting on the Computer. Stuff like: ' your boat was there, then, you are here, now with x fuel in US gallons, given this met, when could you land on the boat with x left in the tanks??' It was a bugger, but quite good to get your head round the threoy behind the math. As for Fast jet mates not using the DC for wind.... does a 20kt wind affect you guys at 350/450kts??? It does affect at 90kts, but the MDR 'suck it and see' with the conditions DOES work well!!

Regards

Tgreen

[caspertheghost]

IntGreen

Absolutely right, 20kts of wind is fairly negligible at 420kts+ at LL, and the good old "Aim a bit into wind if you're off track" method works a treat. At BFJT and EFT we calculated hdgs to give us accurate tracks using MDR and planned wind while on the nav route, and were not recommended to work it out before flying the route as wind changes, also to test capacity in flight I guess!

Beagle

As other posters have said, we do still teach the DC, but with much less emphasis as it is fairly unnecessary these days as a lot of nav training is done by rapid planning under tight time constraints. MDR has never let me or anyone I know down (other than when under big pressure in the air from the git in the boot!) so I guess this is the way our lords and masters have decided students should be taught.
I don't mean to appear confrontational, but you should maybe check out your last few posts and see why you may have offended a few fellow aviators. Illiterate and ignorant? I'm all for banter but I think this may be going a bit far!
Take care and fly safe everyone, Casper.

[BEagle]

To rectify offence perceived by some, I wish to make it clear that it was the UAS/EFTS system to which my query concerning navigation computer was aimed, not DEFTS.

It has been revealing to note that there is a variation across - and indeed within - the various services concerning contemporary basic nav training and doubtless all have their reasons for the level of 'whizz-wheel' pre-flight planning training which they consider appropriate.

I will conclude by stating that it is my opinion that the old adge:

Plan accurately
Fly accurately
Think ahead

still holds true; the smaller the error from accurate pre-flight planning, the less correction needed in flight from observed progress. I also consider that the basics should be taught first, MDR later.

Have a good weekend, everybody!

[caspertheghost]

Also...

Plan the flight,
Fly the plan!

[fidae]

Beagle

I'm not that worried that guys who are taught how to use the Dalton by the RAF don't know how to operate it....guess that comes from lack of practice with the instrument. I'm afraid I have to fundamentally disagree with your training philoshopy.

Avionic systems and the planning tools in all front line aircraft have now progressed that skill with the Dalton is irrelevent. I would rather students arriving on my OCU were taught effective sytems management (far more appropriate) and a proper cockpit workcycle than a working knowledge of the computer. If the radar isn't picking up targets we still use MDR to run the intercept, furthermore we employ MDR techniques for glidepath ROT and drift calculation on emergency recoveries, so I think the emphasis on MDR at all stages of flying training is entirely justified. Furthermore I was rescued from a FNT failure at EFT by an enlightened GR1 QFI who taught MDR impeccably, Dalton is far more inaccurate.

If you want to talk about the generation gap between the avionic systems training airframesto the front line....new thread

[gedney]

"Skill with the Dalton is irrelevant". Is it?

Hmm. As a SARboy I still find the 'Dalton Confuser' invaluable, both on the ground and in the air; every long-range job I go on you'll find me busy with my whizz-wheel. No amount of button pressing on the Sea King's CDNU gives you the same warm feeling as going back to basics to confirm that you have the fuel to get there, do the job and get back to a dry bit.

[Fordhom]

Although I have not flown anything fast or pointy enough to be able to comment on the relevance (or otherwise) of the DC to faster aircraft, as I one of the UAS scrotes BEagle has referred to, I figured I'd chip in with my 2p's worth.....

As I see it the function of whatever method one uses is to ensure that turning points and fixes are reached accurately, both in terms of correction left/right of track, and in terms of an accurate ETA.

Before joining the UAS I used the DC when doing naviagation exercises at a civilian flying club. I remember finding this a relatively fiddly tool, and having some difficulties at times reaching my TP's. Later on, flying with the UAS, I was taught MDR. Armed with this I was able to fly a light aircraft around a route at 120kts. Today I flew a sortie in one of BEagle's beloved aircraft at 90kts, again using purely MDR. Once again I was able to accurately follow the route and forecast my ETA's.

My rather long-winded point therefore is that (in my admittedly very humble opinion) MDR can achieve the same results as a DC, so what is the problem? In addition, as I see it, MDR is also much more relevant in the case of a diversion - us studes therefore only having to learn one technique for both routine and diversion navigation.

Anyway, I'm off to get that mirror before I can go to the loo.....

BEagle: Naturally I'll use the DC for my skills test - keep the examiner happy and all!

[fidae]

Sorry Forhom

The DNC is f###### irrelevant for FJ...cannot think of one single instance in last 10 years on any FJ type when it was; therefore there should be no regret some individuals do not know how to use it

however interested to hear it is useful for SAR

would be interested to know why there is no on-board fuel calculation device?

[BEagle]

Fordhorn - good for you.
You might wish to download CAA Standards Document 19 from the www.srg.caa.co.uk website from this site:

http://www.caa.co.uk/publications/publicationdetails.asp?id=1206

as it will tell you what's required in the Test. Including such things as doing a weight and balance calculation and completing a planning log pre-flight - and 'maintaining' the log in flight...

And by the way, it's not you chaps who are the 'scrotes'!

The only use I had for the DC on fighters, bomber or transports was the TAS computation and airspeed/mach no. calculator... But on slow a/c I certainly did use it for pilot nav pre-flight calculations and so did all the studes (not just mine either!).

[FEBA]

BEagle
I see you have backed down nicely on this issue. May I suggest you send your cv to Nbr10 and apply for Alistair Cambell's job.
I'm sure your DC will come in handy for calculating the postage.
FEBA

[MrBernoulli]

I must admit to using more MDR than DC in my UAS instructor days but the whizz-wheel does ensure a good understanding of the principles of navigation. I guess, like most things, it is necessary to re-famil yourself with the thing if you are going to be using it for a specific task. I certainly had to sweep a few webs out when it came to preparing for the ATPL exams (back in the days before the JAR dispensations) and getting to grips with the CRP5!

I have to agree with Beags and say that all studes should have a good grounding in the thing. Perhaps if certain sections of the military pilot force don't get training in the use of a DC then they should be the ones to do the Flt Planning exam when it comes time for a license?

[Leprechaun]

BEagle

As a rotorhead I was given two Dalton confusers, one big one and one handy pocket sized doofer, by the magnificent RN, AND taught how to use it. Any students going through Shawbury will use the Dalton to wind their maps prior to a low level nav sortie, or should anyway! I don't know if the pointy drivers are being taught the same way!
Despite the training though I have to admit that I'm now very happy to have an observer to do all the difficult math for me!

"throw the stick monkey another banana!!!"

Cheers
Leprechaun

[Fox_4]

A Dalton Computer! I got one of those on Jefts I think. The amount of use it gets is shown purely by the fact I have no idea where it is, and actually dont care.

Beagle- Someone that learns to fly at 90 kts on their Nav route and rigidly sticks to headings planned using FORECAST winds is stupid. Wouldnt surprise me in the slightest if they were the aircraft bimbling thru the wrong circuit totally cluedo. Why not just look out of the window (weird concept huh!) and use features on the ground to find your way round the route instead of spinning the wheel and baffling yourself. If you cant nav using features at 90kts I suggest you hand in your driving licence too since you shouldnt be driving on a dual carriageway for fear of getting lost!

MDR is a proven method of military navigation both in fast jets and slower types. Why use a dated contraption when your systems should be able to give you the answer at the press of a button.

As for your "recomendation", why dont you employ your experience in a more productive way and "teach" the younger pilots how to use the DC for that 1 skill test. Surley cant take more than 5 minutes, then they can throw it in the bin after they land. I cant believe you have so much time on your hands that you have an issue with the lads using this prehistoric GPS, to such an extent that you are becoming a beaurocrat and building more hurdles for them in the shape of effectively disregarding their professional military flying training. As a previous user wrote, I know who I would rather fly with out of a mil trained or pure ppl flyer. Im sure it was so much better in your days and no one got lost whilst flying because they were all proficient DC users, micro navigating to the second.

I cant believe I just sat and typed this. I must be seriously bored! Now where is that DC so I can plan mondays trip.

:zzz:

[MrBernoulli]

Fox_4

You complete and utter smackhead! It was actually BEagle's hard work that helped in sorting out the JAR license dispensations that exist now for the benefit of military pilots. For example, thanks to these dispensations the only ATPL exam required now is Air Law.

Get back in your playpen!

[jayteeto]

fox 4

'MDR is a proven method of military navigation both in fast jets and slower types. Why use a dated contraption when your systems should be able to give you the answer at the press of a button.'

a. Dated contraption....... oh yes..... the wind blew differently in my day......

b. Oh yes, how many times as an OCU instructor on Pumas did I see that button pressed and bollocks come out

[Fordhom]

Good new chaps - I found my arsehole. It's the knobbly thing located between my upper arm and forearm.....

BEagle - thanks for the advice, I'll have a read!

[Hueymeister]

I am with Beags on this one..well to an extent anyway.

I got to my new (foreign) unit and was given my kit...including a new DNC. Ahh I thought....I can put this in my Nav Bag and it'll stay there..how wrong I was. We are expected to do all pre-flight planning using it, be IFR or VFR. 'Twas a shock..I hadn't practised with it for yonks, and now wouldn't be without it....I use it to prove the GPS right these days!

[CIT Team]

Beagle,

It has been good to read a thread that throws up a real argument regarding the training of today vs yesteryear but I feel some of the ultra negative feedback you have received may be in part due to your slightly abrupt opener on this thread. Ostricising those currently in/around the training system with a comment like "can't find their arseholes without a mirror" is at best mildly amusing banter but at worst it triggers anger and lack of respect towards those 'Old Crusties' who although attempting to instill the tactics and discipline of a past era are thwarted by a display of mild ignorance. I do note you are a veteran of this site but manners cost nothing Sir. Also goes to those who snapped back.. shame on you!

[PPRuNeUser0172]

I think Beagles initial post was a little derogatory, "back in my day" kind of approach but Godsavethequeen was his usual tactful self in response!! The Dalton isnt even muttered throughout the training system as far as i can see unless i have been asleep for 3 years, and the reason we dont give a **** about it is because we dont get taught to give a **** about it. I am afraid I fall in the category of not knowing where mine is and caring even less.

It seems to me that using a Dalton is very much like measuring with a micrometer, marking with chalk and chopping with a big axe! Is there any need for such minutiae when planning? MDR seems to work fine and as far as I can see, the Dalton would be only useful for high level planning. Which, as we keep getting told, is a means to an end, ie getting bombs on targets and getting home with enough motion lotion. Therefore it seems to have been (rightly or wrongly) condemned to history. I totally agree with gosavethequeen however that placng too much emphasis on using forecast winds on the ground to plan your mission is fundamentally flawed. To quote Beags, the met man can never usually find his arse with a mirror let alone give a decent forecast wind!

Anyway thats my toughts, now retiring to a safe distance and donning tin hat.

[BEagle]

No need for tin hat - unless you happen to like wearing them...??

I agree that to rely solely on forecast winds is unwise and also that the effect of incorrect drift or groundspeed calculations resulting from such methodology alone is of less importance at high TAS. BUT, and it is a big BUT, I cannot agree that the elementary skill of using the Dalton for low speed a/c naviagation pre-flight planning has no relevance these days. I know that the other Services still teach their students to use it - and for very good reasons.

An accurate pre-flight planning process using forecast winds will mean that in-flight corrections should be much smaller when correcting by obeserved error using SCA and proportional timing. Not that relevant at low level and high TAS, perhaps, but very definitely of relevance at 90 KIAS and 2500 ft.

[50+Ray]

Beags I agree with much of what you say. May I point out as one who was at the JEFTS coalface that the pressure to abandon the DC and go strongly for MDR was entirely from the Fast Jet mob, to whom it almost certainly is useless. In my view it is not sensible to fly at puddlejumping speeds in wind speeds of 20kts+ without modifying fixes/turning point times by proper calculation on the DC. It does not take long and saves much embarassment. In early pilot days nav should be relatively unfraught, all the hassle can come later.

[BEagle]

That's kinda what I'd guessed......

A 20 knot wind is only an insignificant 4.76% of a 420 KIAS fast jet's LL navigation speed - but it's 22.2% or nearly 1/4 of the speed of a 90 KIAS puddlejumper's. And highly significant.

Horses for courses....crawl, toddle, walk - then run! (Apologies for mixing my metaphors!).

I think that MDR is an excellent methodology when applied to the appropriate problem. But use of the DC is a core skill which does have its place to play in pilot training. To bin it completely at elementary flying level is rather a mistake, in my view.

I don't apologise for the tone of my original post - if one tosses a pebble into a pond, not much happens. Throw a hefty rock in and all sorts of stuff comes to the surface...


And remember the big red writing at the bottom of the page!

[MOSTAFA]

Beags, obviously TB and GWB are not aware of their metaphors

"if one tosses a pebble into a pond, not much happens. Throw a hefty rock in and all sorts of stuff comes to the surface"

Sorry could not resist it
:O

[loganairlad]

Just to clear things up regarding the original post, given that I'm an ex-UAS stude enjoying the wonders of EFTS groundschool as we speak......

1. On the UAS you are not issued with a Dalton Computer, and not told how to use one either.

2. Following IOT, pilot studes undertake 4 weeks of groundschool at Cranwell where we ARE taught AND examined on how to use the machine and get issued with one.

We then head for Tucano, Squirrel, King Air etc.

Direct-entry RAF studes (plus Navy and Army) get the groundschool BEFORE they do EFT at the UASs or DEFTS.

Hence why your UAS stude didn't know how to work one. So as the UAS stude could not apply for a PPL using his Grob 115 flying until after groundschool, you can feel assured that all exemption-using RAF pilot studes do know how to work the Dalton.

[BEagle]

So are you saying that non-DE UAS students are not taught pilot navigation pre-IOT? Or do they use some other technique on the UAS and then learn the theory of what they have been doing nearly a year later after having completed IOT and a 4-week groundschool?

Whereas others complete the groundschool first?

Groundschool before flying training. Well, there's a novel concept....

[ntscheck]

Beags

As a current UAS/EFT QFI I'm afraid I tend to avoid the DC. I emphasise good pre-flight planning (still wind), route study and then as the flight nears putting the wind on the map and thinking how it will affect the sortie ie MDR on the ground - which, surely, is little different from using the DC with the exception that with the DC one would put wind corrected hdgs and timings on the map.

I have used the DC often in the past and it has its merits, but so does the current technique of MDR - the student gets plenty of practice at a technique that he can carry forward to all fleets. Having flown with many civil light ac pilots I can't believe they are current on the DC either. They trust to that great God GPS and when it fails to pick up the satellites they start sweating like a pti in a spelling test.

[BEagle]

I note your point of view, but the technique at medium level is subtly different to that at low level. There are likely to be fewer track changes - probably only 1 or 2 and relatively longer legs - and different considerations (airspace, other Golf Alfa err, err drivers, RT work as against terrain avoidance and feature recognition). I've heard of guys using a Brady rule to try to ackle the times on the day using the nearest 10 kt graduation after MDR guesstimation of GS; if you're going to go to that bother, instead of using 100 from the Brady rule, why not work out the correct GS using the front of the whizz-wheel, then put 60 against the accurate GS of, say, 96 and read off the time at pre-measured waypoints directly off the dist/time scales? A classic example of how an analogue computer can be quicker than a digital one, by the way!

We are under great pressure from the CAA to minimise airspace violations. Hence I insist that any of my puddle-jumper students plan as accurately as possible and then apply 'wind of the day' using the whizzer. They use SCA and proportional timing to correct in-flight, to amend heading from observed drift following assessment of the reasons for requiring a SCA correction, but the errors they should see will be much less if based upon accurate pre-flight planning using the computer.

Incidentally, when I was a UAS QFI, it was fairly obvious that few of my colleagues relished navigation trips - or cross-checked their students' planning, for that matter. Same old GH in the same old 'training area' was about the limit of their exploratory adventure! Pre-VOR/DME, the opportunity of a navex to, say, Cranwell was not welcomed by many. Too used to having a talking TACAN or two, I guess!

Re GPS, yes, a lot of folk pin their faith in that. We leave ours with a default of DTK, GS and ETA in the navigation fields, plus a 1 mile CDI bar. So the pilot can check GS and Desired Track against the expected values (I'm not an advocate of the 'Pilot Log Card', but the CAA are, unfortunately). Then if the correct heading is followed, the CDI will be a useful cross-check. But the GPS is a VFR-only back-up...and has been known to go tits-up at the most inopportune moment!

Sweating like a PTI at a spelling test....liked that line! :ok:

[the_cyclone]

BEags,

I thought that MDR was the basics!

Don't forget that all FJ guys in the training system are striving towards that bounced SAP at the end of 19 Sqn where a tgt has to be hit +/- 5 sec without any kit except a map and stopwatch! Must have been the same in your day and I'm sure that you remember this is obviously achieved by making drift and groundspeed corrections on the hoof to reach your waypopints. Not an easy task in mountainous terrain at 420 kt reacting to weather / aggressor jets etc etc.

Obviously this is a cold-war way to fight a mission but nevertheless a great way to test capacity and the RAF's only option until a modern jet trainer is available. Clearly the build up to this begins at EFT when you're flogging around in a Grob. To learn these techniques at the start of your RAF career is essential!

I see MDR as a critical test of capacity and skill in the training world - any monkey can plan a route before you get airborne (with or without a Dalton computer) but when the plan goes to rat-**** because your turn points are weathered out, that's when you start earning your money!

Back to my first point; MDR is the basics! The advanced stuff is surely leading a COMAO with night AAR, some TST, being tapped by some fags at LL all on the goggs beneath an overcast layer in no millilux in the Highlands!



:ok: :ok:

[BEagle]

Whilst noting your undoubted enthusiasm, I have to sate that in my day one learned how to walk before being taught how to run....

Yes, I was taught to navigate a Hunter to recce targets around Wales without any marks on a map whilst leading a PAI in another jet......but I'd also been taught how to navigate a Chipmunk properly using a Dalton for pre-flight planning just a couple of years earlier. The skill required for either task was not the same; regrettably that fact no longer appears to hold sway in the current training system.

[fidae]

Beagle

I can see this thread repeating itself every page. I think your last post is very telling. Chipmunk followed by Hunter followed by which frontline aircraft and more pertinently what 'Nav kit'. Much respect to your endeavour to cover all bases in instruction but I really don't regret the dissappearence of the DC in all aspects of Fast-jet stream training. Time is too short and there are far more relevant things to teach.

Fidae

Furthermore to the point about relying on GPS, I guess the redundancy of airborne aligning LINS, JTIDS prop nav, TACAN, ground mapping radar might help.

[BEagle]

"Time is too short"

Or rather "Time is too expensive nowadays"..??

Presumably that's JTIDS Relative Navigation, by the way?

[Flap62]

Whilst noting your undoubted enthusiasm, I have to sate that in my day one learned how to walk before being taught how to run....

Despite several gentle promptings on this thread Beags, you really can't stop yourself from sounding like a pompous old fool. Your tone is patronising in the extreme and any valid points you make are lost, simply because you alienate half of the contributors by your tone. A front line fast jet mate is unlikely to be impresed by your tales of LL nav as a pair in Wales as he has done the same thing. Similarly your rivetting stories of UAS QFI are likely to leave him cold.
To many you come across as a dinosaur who couldn't crack it at the sharp end, for whatever reason, and spent the rest of your time firmly in the comfort zone. To preach in an arrogant and pompous manner simply leaves you open to ridicule.



Any spelling and grammar mistakes are because I'm not very good at it.

[BEagle]

Of course you're entitled to that opinion - but the fact remains that basic navigation theory is unaffected by the passage of time. I happen to think that the axiomatic triangle of velocities is best understood by use of the DC at the elementary stage for medium level nav planning - by all means chuck it in the bin later on if you wish when you're flying something rather more interesting! But to leave it out of basic pilot education altogether is, to my mind, rather akin to leaving out the need for children to learn multiplication tables on the grounds that they'll all be using calculators for the rest of their lives.

Oh - and I don't normally comment on my perception of others on PPRuNe. Except for that correspondent called godsavethequeen whose tone was well out of order. However, others 'discussed matters' with him as well...

[PPRuNeUser0172]

In a very desparate attempt to put this rather mundane post to bed; in answer to your original question Mr Beagle - "Do we get taught how to use the Dalton Computer at EFTS", then the answer is a resounding YES. However, as a UAS type, this came after completing my EFT on the mighty Dog and the plastic spastic (Tutor). So Yes, it was probably a little late as I haven' t the faintest idea where mine is now and I dont think this will matter in my coming flying career.

I agree with your belt and braces approach to flying; walking before running etc etc... however, as you have just stated, the Dalton is only really relevant at med lvl when going not very quicky in a low stress environment. Any other situation, I think it is as much use as tits on a fish.

[BEagle]

I agree with you 100%!

But this afternoon I've got to work out some TAS values for a non-RAF AAR training application, given IAS, ISA dev and FL. Guess what I'll be using to get the answers.....:E

Which I guess is rather like tits on a mermaid...?? Useful now and again, but not that often!

[Roland Pulfrew]

Beags

Just to confirm that the basics are still taught by UASs - that is to plan, map study, fly and apply MDR techniques on the day. All EFT students do get taught the DC so there is no need to put electrons to e-mail ;).

However one thing you need to be aware of is that some of today's baby pilots do not even know which direction the sun rises in!! On a recent test ride I asked the student why he re-erected the well toppled compass whilst heading away from base rather than turning towards base and then re-erecting. "How could I do that when the compass was toppled?" No thought (or knowledge) of using the big glowing object in the sky and time as a basic compass!!:uhoh: :uhoh:

[BEagle]

Sounds like their lOOkout is as sharp as ever, Roly old bean;)

"Left 10 o'clock low, range 81 million nautical, one sun. No threat"

I gather bits fell off one of Das Teutors dahn sahhf in a somewhat spectacular manner t'other day?

And it has a compass which topples? Presumably Herr Grob did at least give you a standby? Sounds like the pre-AHARS Hawk saga all over again!

[Always_broken_in_wilts]

Beag's,

Not one to normally question your erudite posts but if you are still using a dalton comp despite all the tecno available today how can us mere mortals here ever take anything you comment on seriously in the future:E

Luddite:ok:

all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced

[BEagle]

Sorry - no time to answer as I've got to light the boiler in my horseless carriage before I set off to go flying today!

Techno isn't always best - remember how easy it once was to twiddle a knob labelled 'volume' on your TV/radio instead of faffing with software driven menus? And when 'off' switches actually turned things off?

[airborne_artist]

Some newer readers of this thread may have missed Gedney's post:

As a SARboy I still find the 'Dalton Confuser' invaluable, both on the ground and in the air; every long-range job I go on you'll find me busy with my whizz-wheel. No amount of button pressing on the Sea King's CDNU gives you the same warm feeling as going back to basics to confirm that you have the fuel to get there, do the job and get back to a dry bit.

Who's the fool - the person who checks the computer's calcs, or the one who believes all he sees in front of him?

Bet you'll be happy to see Gedney arrive with fuel to spare in his big whirly SAR bird when you are cold and wet!