PPL(H) use of VOR

[Hughes500]

Well just received my latest copy of Helitrainingcom. No 5 says ac fit, we are now not allowed to use pseudo vor's on a sat nav, yet Fred Cross oked this years ago. Can someone please tell me why ? How many professional pilots let alone pplh use vor navigation ( I would bet less than 1 %) Would it not be more sensible to concentrate on flying the dam thing rather than look at a nav system that has gone out with the ark if you are a vfr helicopter ( granted if you are IFR you need to know it). Then to cap it all No 7 talks about airspace infringement due to people not knowing about satnav and that satnav training should not be part of the course:ugh:. In the pplh nav test students are now allowed to use the satnav for the diversion leg so why not for the vor ? The only difference I can see is the satnav doesnt give the morse code, well big deal.
My final moan and I would be interested to see what The CAA will say is where does the VOR fit in a narrow panel 300 ? To have the fit for Ex 27 all the holes are filled up. So do I now go and change 2 of the 300's to a wide panel at the cost of about $30k ?
Answers on a postcard

[RMK]

It is medieval. I haven’t been in a helicopter with a VOR Instrument since my JAA exam flight. They should concentrate on how people fly, not how they flew 50 years ago. The CAA is still in the post WW2 era. Exams with #2 pencils, no calculators and a slide rule.

Have they ever noted how a helicopter pilot is to use one of the silly CRP-5s while holding a cyclic and collective? Probably even more laughable is the accompanying CD-ROM to train you how to use your £72 plastic slide rule that you are to use because you shouldn't trust electronics.

[Pandalet]

I quite like VORs, but then I did (most of) my PPL in an R22 that had an analogue VOR instrument (and no GPS). I was also lucky enough to train in an area that had plenty of VORs around to navigate by - I hear some areas don't have very many.

Whatever rocks your boat, I guess.

[RVDT]

If you are a day VFR PPL(H) you can't "use" any radio aids to navigation. Or is the UK "different"?

[the beater]

You can use all the instruments at your disposal. You do, however, have to remain clear of cloud and in sight of the surface.
With regards to the use of a GPS based pseudo VOR, I prefer not to use these on a test as they are not that representative of the real thing. I have, however, had no choice in the matter and have had to make use of the equipment fitted. Perhaps it's now time to dispense with this requirement given that I don't know of any PPL that would use one in anger in an aircraft fitted with GPS.:ugh:
I can't remember the last time a school ordered a new basic trainer with a VOR or ADF and the cost involved is not going to be welcomed given the present financial climate.
Note, though, that Appendix 2 to JAR-FCL 2.135 section 3 refers to the use of navigation aids (where available).;)

[misterbonkers]

Even at a VFR commercial level VORs arent much good when you're low level or in the Glens of Scotland.

Didnt think Morse Code was on the ground syllabus anymore?

Also - be interesting to know how many of the aircraft out there actually have VORs fitted! Not many Robinsons coming onto the register have them nowadays and they tend to be the aircraft that PPLs go on to fly...

[the beater]

Not many R22s with VOR or ADF.
Morse was never on the syllabus for PPL, but was required for professional licences until a few years ago.
So no more 'Elephants In Straw Hats Ten Miles Off'!:ok:

[wobble2plank]

Whilst not needed nor required knowing 'how' to use VOR beacons even at the PPL level can be a god send.

Knock them whilst you will, I overheard a fixed wing PPL on guard calling up lost over the Channel en-route to the Channel Islands where his GPS had failed and he couldn't figure out the VOR.

A very, very patient controller from London Centre did a fantastic job of guiding him on how to tune, find and track the Jersey beacon. Very useful.

I know the old 'gps' failure argument rolls on but to have a working knowledge of all available aids is invaluable and makes sense even if the Cash Again and Again says you can't use them you naughty PPL.

As to 'useless VOR's at low level or in the Glenns of Scotland' then either climb to get reception or follow the valley/land?

[jeepys]

The industry in the UK needs to be modernised and unfortunately that starts with modernising the CAA. We all know that is never going to happen as it's generally staffed with old farts who think that the industry is still the same now as it was 50 years ago. Do we still worry about whether our car will make the full journey to Scotland and back or think that after 50,000 miles the engine is on borrowed time, NO, of course not cars have moved on and become very reliable. So why do we still treat latest generation twin engine helicopters like an over weight 61 on a hot day? The CAA is why.

GPS is good and we all know how good it is. Tom will take us to almost anybody's front door in the developed world. We use it to squeeze around airspace whilst not penetrating it. It gives us an accurate ground speed, heading etc etc. Far more accurate use for flight planning/monitoring etc. How much more good information is obtainable from a GPS rather than VOR? Loads.

If the worry is that the batteries can fail in a GPS then how about ensuring they are powered by the aircraft?

Is it too much to ask for the authority to break into the 21st century?

As to climbing to get reception for a VOR, well, that's not always possible in a country renouned for pants weather.

[wobble2plank]

As to climbing to get reception for a VOR, well, that's not always possible in a country renowned for pants weather.

Quite the reason for having the 'working' knowledge of the 'old' radio aids. Which, ironically, are still widely used throughout commercial aviation.

Add to that that if the 'pants weather' has become so bad then the 'PPL(H)' pilot would be better off landing in a field than relying on any sort of IFR nav aid if the good old clock, map, ground, VMC technique doesn't get them home within the VMC limitations laid down by the CAA (modern or not).

The amount of pilots I have seen over the years who fiddle with the GPS knobs instead of trying to fly the aircraft properly is astonishing. It is an AID to navigation and an aid only. As a primary navigation aid it requires multiple receivers with RAIM redundancy otherwise it remains an aid only. Remember that.

Don't try run before you can walk!

[jeepys]

Yes fiddling with knobs is because there is no training provided for the use of these.
VOR's are not in plentiful supply to always be able to track one. You will almost be guaranteed to get a GPS signal in Scotland for example.

One simple question then. Would you rather have a good GPS unit in your aircraft or a VOR for navigating around the whole of the UK?

As for commercial operators using VOR still, well yes I do have them displayed on my screen but the FMS still is our primary aid using GPS!

I know what I would rather have if put on the spot.

In fact I could not do my job if it were not for GPS!

[timprice]

Dont moan about here, write to Fred Cross, tell the CAA.
They are living in the dark ages.
If we all moan something might be done about it.:ok:

[wobble2plank]

Jeepys,

I am not disagreeing with you on the usefulness of the GPS. The FMS in the Airbus uses GPS from three receivers to provide RNAV capability, it does however have a backup, or in the case of some of the older non GPS aircraft, of VOR/DME only position fixing.

Ironically you must have a RAIM system if you wish to fly IR GPRS approaches within controlled airspace as the reliability of having enough satellites in azimuth to give the required RNAV criteria is not always good enough. Have a look at the AIS for Gatwick and see when they promulgate RAIM outages.

That is creeping a little from the thread though.

Whilst I agree that GPS is a god send (I flew choppers for many years prior to the widespread release of non military high accuracy GPS fixes) I feel that it is detriment to our core skills as pilots to ignore the usefulness of some of the 'legacy' aids. Many of which have stood us in good stead for many a year.

As to operating in the highlands, I flew there on SAR for many a year without GPS or VOR/DME or ILS etc, often in very poor weather. The old clock, map, ground technique sufficed then and would probably suffice now.

We should always be wary of total reliance on aircraft aids. A salient lesson is the BA Airbus 319 that had a total electrical power failure after take off. A scenario that Airbus claimed could never, ever happen. But it did!

To summarise, why not, as a PPL(H), read up and learn to use all available aids instead of saying 'well, GPS would never fail, would it'. The state of the GPS satellites is somewhat shady at the moment with no intention to launch more as the US military doesn't have the budget. As we like to say in the pilot world, always have a backup plan.

Safe flying.

[JCR]

A few points chaps. Fred, and the CAA, I believe, are somewhat "governed" by other member states on the rules-even if something does make sense to us AND Fred and the CAA, it's not always THEIR fault!

Secondly, whilst we ALL use GPS, VOR work for low time students on basic Nav is a huge confidence booster for them. I teach an "A to B" "via a VOR" and they never get lost....

Just a point.

Best to you all.

JCR

[hihover]

We are using GPS at the mercy of the system owner. If someone decides to feed in an error or disallow its public use then those who can only perform with the aid of a GPS will be stuffed. Whilst this scenario would be very unlikely, it is not within the control of the CAA.

I would imagine that this is taken into consideration by the old farts who make the decisions on which navigation aids are required to be tested.

Those of you who know more than them should offer the CAA your services through employment there, I am certain we will all benefit.

tam

[Hughes500]

Some interesting replies so far. I am on the side of what is the point in teaching someone something that they will practiically never use. More to the point the 300's we use have the following instruments which take up all available holes

VSI
DGI
AH
Altimeter
Dual Tachometer
MP gague
ASI

Votes please on which one you would remove to put the vor or ADF indicator in ? CAA I would be interested to know which you would replace and with what extra benefit to flight safety would the vor bring over what you have replaced ?

[jeepys]

If somebody turns off the satellites then little jonny in his R22 reading the GPS will be the least of the worlds worries!

[jellycopter]

Hughes500

I sympathise.

My aeroplane has a KX125 Nav/Comm that has an LCD display. The centre of the screen has a digital bar graph CDI (rather like the track error bar graph on the old Garmin GPS100) which would be perfectly suitable to meet the PPL(H) VOR tracking requirements without losing any panel space. It would require swapping your existing radio + installing a localiser antenna and you'd then have the facility to adhere to the regs.

It could be a low (ish) cost, low weight gain and relatively simple fix.

JJ

(edited for typos)

[Hughes500]

Jelly

I will look into that, thanks.

[Hughes500]

Garmin SL30navcom
Well just looked at this which is a vor nav system. It gives a cdi that is nothing like the cdi on a " normal cdi" the pseudo skymap3 is a better representation of a normal cdi. Oh well I will be speaking to Fred, anyone have his e mail address [email protected] at a guess ?

[AnFI]

fred.cross (at) caa.co.uk


I am sure he'll be delighted ....

.... he really needs some more triviality .


His answer might include that an ADF or VOR comply with the requirements......

" It's not up to me, blame ..... " :ugh:

[heli-man]

Hardly trivial. This has an impact on lots of people's PPL and lots of schools' ability to have an aircraft they can have for test purposes. It's is Fred's job to deal with this grey area and provide an answer.

[jellycopter]

If you read trainingcom, it doesn't look like a grey area to me; and it was written by Fred!

[HeliCraig]

Does anyone have a link to the TrainingCom? I have searched the CAA's site, and only found the joint A & H one from earlier this year about ATSOCAS?

Thanks.

(Oh, and as a PPL I rarely use a VOR; but every now and again if I am in a machine with a receiver and a flight passing nearby a VOR I will attempt to track it - why not? But yes, a GPS is IMHO more useful - but as an aid!)

[mickerick2]

jellycopter

WHAT DATE DID THIS REGULATION OFFICIALLY COMMENCE?

WHAT PUBLICATION DOES IT APPEAR IN?

anwsers please

[rotarywise]

IIRC, the easement to allow the use of the GPS was purely to cover the non-availabilty of a VOR on the PPL Skill Test. I do not recall that there was ever an easement applied to PPL instruction in general.

The requirement is in the PPL(H) syllabus in JAR-FCL 2 and commenced when the UK implemented the requirements, what, about 8 years ago?

[WLM]

Hughes500

Replace the DGI and the AH with an ADI and HSI, problem solved

[Hughes500]

Can do but a bit expensive !!!!