who continues to use their whizz wheel?

[liam548]

How many post PPL pilots continue to use their slide rule to plan trips? Or do MOST just simply purchase a GPS as soon as their licence arrives?

I'm reluctant to start using one just yet and want to complete some decent trips using the methods shown during the PPL, this will also have benefits when I come to do a CPL.

But I was just wondering, are people who dont use GPS really that far in the minority these days, almost a ratio of 1:10?

:)

[kevmusic]

Stand by..........

[1800ed]

I use GPS, a corrected PLOG and I draw lines on the map too; nice to have both :)

[Piper.Classique]

Map, compass, watch. Whizz wheel for initial planning, line on the map, and go fly. Mind you, at 75 knots I have time to do that.

[IO540]

Last time I used mine was on the IMCR nav exam (mandatory).

A piece of crap and a total waste of time which would be better spent learning any of fifty more important things.

I should add that I was using a real slide rule at school at the age of 10, in the 1960s, behind what is called the Iron Curtain, so I do know how it works :)

[S-Works]

Last time I used mine was CPL exams, time before that was PPL exams. Never used between and never used since.

Complete and utter waste of space and should be consigned to the dustbin of history.

[joelgarabedian]

I flew from Shoreham to Biggin Hill last and back last Saturday. Did all my planning with my map, PLOG, and trusty CRP-1. Having said that, it's mainly because I haven't bought a GPS yet ;)

[chris-h]

Is GPS the only answer if you dont want to continue with a slide rule?

Id like to put mine in the bin.. :-)

[cct]

Surely if you use a handheld GPS, you still need to work out adjusted headings. I dont see a GPS as a replacement - I have been playing with a variety of PC based flight planning tools, but would expect to double check with the whizz wheel - after all they are fairly simple to use.

[777fly]

I gained my PPL in 1964 and I am still an active commercial pilot flying heavy metal at age 63+. I have aways remained current on light tin and plastic M/SEP and find it disturbing to note some of the posts in this thread.
A drift towards reliance on GPS, without the appreciation of the effect that wind will have on your flight management can only be detrimental to air safety, in terms of situational awareness and flight endurance. A few minutes spent twiddling a 'whizz wheel' can give you a broad appreciation of the fluid environment that you are going to be flying in. There is no substitute for keeping a basic awareness of track and groundspeed and relating that to what you want to achieve and what you see. A GPS failure in low visibility will soon show you the value of map and compass navigation, backed up by pre-prepared, if basic, track/GS information . Perhaps it is unsurprising that infringements of controlled airspace are increasing if pilots are relying on GPS with no basic nav skill back up. Question: Are you getting to the stage where getting airborne and finding your GPS has failed means aborting the flight?

[Pilot DAR]

I don't find myself doing a lot calcuations for most of the flying I do, though when I do, I reach for the whizz wheel first. It always works, and is quick. If you get a wrong answer, it's pretty easy to see where you put in the wrong question!

It was pretty handy the other week for some TAS corrections, and other performance calculations for the King Air I'd been evaluating.

[Tinstaafl]

I still use my Jepp CR5 (CR5 is the smallest one) after well over 25 years in things from piston singles to turboprops. With modern avionics I find I use it less but there are still some things I can calculate more quickly with it than by twiddling knobs & pushing buttons. Try calculating PNR or Crit Point with a GPS. Damned if I've figured out how to but my whiz wheel does it easily. Flying air ambulance over the N.Sea I used to have to do those calcs regularly. With my CR I could also use off-track DMEs to find along-track groundspeed - quite useful when out of range of on-track DMEs.

[DA-10mm]

do you do a lot of instruction? i though not.
learn it and teach it.
it'll come in handy, trust me.

[KeesM]

I do not use the wheel or GPS. Just a line on the chart with waypoints, true headings and wind direction.
I know I'll do 1.4 Nm/min, burn 20 l/hr.
Not real rocket sience.

[742-xx]

Just bought a gps but I still plog and draw lines on the chart, and use the old wheel thingy.
I'd hate to be out and about if/when the gps goes blank for whatever reason.
That said, gps is wonderful, provided that you understand it's potential shortcomings.

[bingoboy]

Don't have an iphone as yet but there is there not an app for this sort of thing?

[IO540]

I have a CR5 here too; it's fun to use for TAS conversions. And for working out the approximate aerodynamic heating.

But for real flight? No use to me at all.

[S-Works]

No one was suggesting a reliance on GPS. There is no place for a slide rule in modern aviation other than in the minds of the old farts who have some romantic attachment to a long gone age.

There are plenty of modern tools that will do the job much better, much more accurately and much faster. The CX2 is an example of a dedicated electronic tool. I have a couple of apps on my iPhone that do the job perfectly.

Don't anyone give me the tosh about running out of batteries, its crap in this day and age. Show me someone who can claim to hand fly and use a CRP at the same time and I will show you a liar.

When I fly VFR I use a chart with the lines and the wind drawn on it and a GPS. I use my iPhone app to do the wind correction and write that on the chart. I then use a blend of GPS and visual navigation to make sure I am in the right place. I have yet to be unsure of position in my private or commercial careers.

[1800ed]

Speaking of electronic tools - I also use Pilotwizz on my iPhone which is fantastically useful. I don't think I've ever really needed to do whiz wheel calculations in flight though, I can imagine it to be a bit tricky as I've only got two hands.

[neilgeddes]

This works for me flight calculator (http://www.pilotfriend.com/calcs/calculators/flightcalc.htm)

[S-Works]

What standard of pilot are you flying with? A standard renewal for me involves using a CR5/calculator and formulas with full avionics failure, expected to conduct full approaches and we continue until the end of the flight (because it dont get fixed enroute in real life! ). More recently my Check Captain took my calculator and CR5 off me!

So you have 2 hands on the aircraft and 2 eyes looking out the window, how many hands are you using to operate the whizz wheel and how many eyes are you using to look at the results? Also what calculations are you actually doing during this full avionics failure that require the whizz wheel? How are you flying approaches with full avionics failure?

I have never used a whizz wheel at work nor in the sim. Flight planning is done prior to departure and as I said before there are much better tools than the CRP for speed and accuracy. If I need to re-plan in the air then I use mental dead reckoning as I feel it better for my passengers and other airspace users to actually fly the aircraft. Duty of care and all that.

This discussion is one of the oldest chestnuts in PPRune, on internet forums full stop. The Whizz wheel is archaic junk. People ask why the US does it better? Because they advance with technology and don't bury there hands in the sands. It is the European Emu's that keep us in the dark ages.

[overandout]

I have yet to be unsure of position in my private or commercial careers

One thing not to be unsure of your position. Quite another to be exactly sure of your position.
If you are exactly sure of your position always (ie to within a couple of hundred metres). Perhaps you could knock the precision Pilots off their pedestals and show them how it should be done. Of course doing it as they do only using whizz wheel and map,compass and stop watch. No GPS.
I am sure they could learn a lot from you and would welcome you to compete.

[S-Works]

One thing not to be unsure of your position. Quite another to be exactly sure of your position.
If you are exactly sure of your position always (ie to within a couple of hundred metres). Perhaps you could knock the precision Pilots off their pedestals and show them how it should be done. Of course doing it as they do only using whizz wheel and map,compass and stop watch. No GPS.
I am sure they could learn a lot from you and would welcome you to compete.

I am sorry, but you are going to have to explain the relevance of that comment to me? I can tell you that I am always exactly sure of my position to within a few meters. Would I do it with a whizz wheel,map, stopwatch and compass the answer is no. I don't have the interest in making an art form out of using outdated methods in the same way I have no interest in restoring old tractors or making walking sticks.....

[Rod1]

I have flown power from 1991 to now. I stopped using my WW last year as I now have a sophisticated glass panel, which is programmed via an SD card. I do my planning on a Net Book and that produces a plog and a GPS file, along with checking weather and Notams. Very quick and I keep tec info on the aircraft on it as well.

Rod1

[KandiFloss]

Use the CRP-5 whenever i'm planning nav, it's not hard to use :rolleyes:

[S-Works]

I had my left hand on the column and a busy right hand. My eyes were focused on my standby AH, ALT, ASI and calculations. I'd look outside but not much out there from cloud. I was replanning for an alternate because we'd had a simulated bus failure and missed on return to the departure Ad

I was just trying to work out where you were finding time to use the whizz wheel while doing all of this. I am humbled that I am stood in the presence of a giant. ;)

[BEagle]

I've found the back of the whizz-wheel quite useful for Mach / IAS / TAS stuff if I don't have access to anything more accurate such as adcalc.

The slidey-uppy-downy thing is, however, extremely useful....



...as an ice-scraper. Quite why the CAA still insist on using a slide rule for navigation calculations, I cannot fathom. Provided that a student pilot can understand the 'triangle of velocities', then why not step into the world of 30 years ago and use an electronic navigation planner, if that's what the student prefers?

For real-world day-VFR, I'd still recommend a chinagraph line on map with track/dist measured pre-flight to compare with GPS DTK and DTG - but would use MDR and GPS-blended visual navigation in flight.

Visual navigation needs to step into the aera age! Fortunately there are now a few dinosaur hunters in the CAA who agree.

[Pilot DAR]

There is no place for a slide rule in modern aviation other than in the minds of the old farts who have some romantic attachment to a long gone age.


Yeah, I suppose.... kinda like tailwheels and sideslipping eh?

[Mark1234]

Yup, still use it.

Planning all done before flight, but yes, it's perfectly possible to fly and use the jeppesen type computer anyway - it can be operated one handed, and it only takes one hand to fly the aeroplane. As for looking, it's a quick glance down every so often - no different to looking inside to check the ASI when on approach. In fact my somewhat malicious examiner made me re-plan a diversion doing exactly that on my PPL test. I don't know about those big rectangular things, never used one.

Personally, figuring out which buttons to press on the GPS takes far more of my attention, but then I'm hiring, and every d*mn a/c has a different GPS - it's easier for me to rely on what's in my nav bag; not that I mind having a nice moving map to hand.

P.S. I'm not old, no comment on being a fart.. but I do rather enjoy tailwheels and sideslipping :E

[Flyingmac]

How on Earth do weightshift pilots manage in flight without a whiz-wheel?

[S-Works]

Yeah, I suppose.... kinda like tailwheels and sideslipping eh?

No, nothing like tailwheels and side slipping. They are essential skills. Using a slide rule is not an essential skill. It can quite easily be replaced by a modern tool that is more accurate. The issue is the slide rule is FORCED on pilots rather the freedom of choice. I have no issue with dead reckoning navigation, I have an issue with the use of a slide rule being used to teach it.

[what next]

Hello!

... there are indeed benefits of going electronic, lets face it ...

An important one being the biggest shortcoming of the whizwheel: It only does multiplications and divisions. But many tasks require addition and substraction, like mass&balance and fuel planning. Therefore, the most primitive four-function calculator is more useful for flying than the whizwheel. As for wind calculations, there are rules of thumb that come to within 90 percent of the accuracy of the whizwheel and require no calculator at all to be performed.

Jumping in an aeroplane, switching on a GPS and taking off is in my opinion a stupid idea.

But that's the way we do it in the world of commercial aviation (with "GPS" to be read as "FMS"). It can't be so wrong then, can it? :)

On a personal note: Since many years I collect vintage calculators, preferably navigational ones. So far, I have over 700 (20 or 30 being dedicated navigation tools). I really would like to use them (or some of them) in my daily professional life. But I am unable to find anything useful to do with them, especially because they really tend to slow down your work a lot and distract your attention from important tasks - most of all the whizwheel.

Happy landings,
max

[mm_flynn]

The Americans seem to still find the whizz wheels quite valuable ;)This is a special purpose slide rule, which was used by pilots to determine true airspeed, based on indicated air speed, altitude, and other instrument readings. It is typical of the many specialized slide rules used for air navigation and flight management, before the advent of electronic calculators and satellite-based navigation systems.

The slide rule was found with a collection of paper archives that were donated to the Smithsonian in 1957.

US - "We go forward into space"

UK - "We go back to 1066"

both are nice in their own way, but also irritating when you would like a little of the other philosophy.

[englishal]

I just plug my route into Jeppesen, it then uses real world winds for each leg to generate a plog accurate to the minute which I take with me. Actual winds and TAS come from the GPS and ADC...If GPS fails then I still have a plog to work from. I haven't used a "flight computer" for years, stuff like cross wind one can guestimate easily enough.

[BackPacker]

I still use it for all my flight planning. I'm too lazy to get an electronic flight planner, or use the GPS, or open up a spreadsheet or webpage, or download a smartphone app. The whizz wheel is always right there, tucked away neatly in my kneeboard package next to the other essential stuff.

[englishal]

How do you get the winds aloft then :)

[pa28r driver]

i havent used the wheel since requalifying,
i use sky demon to plan,using real time winds and weather transfer the whole sheebang to the 296 draw a line on me chart and then go for it.
if the gps fails i still have adf,vor etc etc et al
and equally as important i have radios,
oh and before i forget i usually have me eyes OUTSIDE the cockpit lookin for suitable fields so at same time im checking the ground for any points that can be useful on the chart therefore keepin a check on me progress
happy landings,regards to all
pete

[Captain Smithy]

I still use mine. None of the aircraft I fly are GPS-equipped and I don't own my own GPS either, plus I'll need plenty practice with the 'wheel for doing the CPL.

I tend to use a combination of 'wheel and radio nav. Seems to work fine enough for me. No doubt will come across GPS at some point, look forward to it I must say, although I'd still be working out a Plog with the 'wheel for a backup.

Use what you want, as long as it's safe and gets you there all the same :)

Smithy

[liam548]

No one was suggesting a reliance on GPS. There is no place for a slide rule in modern aviation other than in the minds of the old farts who have some romantic attachment to a long gone age.

There are plenty of modern tools that will do the job much better, much more accurately and much faster. The CX2 is an example of a dedicated electronic tool. I have a couple of apps on my iPhone that do the job perfectly.

Don't anyone give me the tosh about running out of batteries, its crap in this day and age. Show me someone who can claim to hand fly and use a CRP at the same time and I will show you a liar.

When I fly VFR I use a chart with the lines and the wind drawn on it and a GPS. I use my iPhone app to do the wind correction and write that on the chart. I then use a blend of GPS and visual navigation to make sure I am in the right place. I have yet to be unsure of position in my private or commercial careers.

you have been flying a lot longer than me but even in my limited experience I have the same mindset as you. I wish the training would move into the 21st century.

[liam548]

This works for me flight calculator (http://www.pilotfriend.com/calcs/calculators/flightcalc.htm)


very useful link, thank you.

[AliB]

Lines on a chart, headings on a chart or plog - but not wind corrected.

Wind correction done roughly in my head and then adjusted as necessary to maintain track (obviously VFR only). If I change my plan in the air this still works and the winds aloft predictions are often inaccurate anyway.

GPS as a backup and cross check - worked too long in software to feel comfortable relying on it :eek:

[BackPacker]

How do you get the winds aloft then

Just fly low and use the wind as reported on the ATIS.

[Torque Tonight]

I have three whizzwheels: one from my PPL, one from the RAF and one from my fATPL. In each case after completing training the thing was put away and never used again.

In reality you don't need to work out your heading and drift to one degree accuracy because a) you're not going to maintain heading to one degree accuracy for the entire flight and b) the actual wind is not going to be exactly the same as the forecast wind. Good technique and some mental dead reckoning is all you need for VMC nav in the real world and so I don't even consider a GPS unit to be THE alternative to a whizzwheel.

[IO540]

I don't even consider a GPS unit to be THE alternative to a whizzwheel.It never is, because the slide rule cannot be usefully used when airborne.

This topic comes up regularly. A lot of people get a bit religious about it, but really I don't think anybody cares about how somebody else plans their own route. The real debate is whether it should still be taught in the PPL, given that

- there is no set mandatory ground school (so any ground tuition is informal stuff, done at the discretion of the instructor(s))

- the slide rule takes up a LOT of ground school time

- the PPL training already omits a lot of much more useful practical stuff e.g. how to get weather off the internet

The slide rule is basically a gross mis-allocation of training resources.

Regarding GPS, much of the anti-GPS brigade thinks/claims that GPS users fly without any paper plans, but this is wrong. Most solid GPS-only-nav pilots have a written/printed plan for the flight. I certainly print everything needed for the flight plus diversions and would never rely wholly on an electronic solution.

[FREDAcheck]

bose wrote:
No one was suggesting a reliance on GPS. There is no place for a slide rule in modern aviation other than in the minds of the old farts
I'm sure you're a really great person too.who have some romantic attachment to a long gone age.There are plenty of modern tools that will do the job much better, much more accurately and much faster. The CX2 is an example of a dedicated electronic tool. I have a couple of apps on my iPhone that do the job perfectly.
Nothing romantic. Just that I've got a CRP2 and I don't have a CX2, whatever that is.

Don't anyone give me the tosh about running out of batteries, its crap in this day and age.
I generally fly with a hand-held Garmin GPS that eats batteries. If I've forgotten to stuff 4 AAs into my pockets, I end up scrabbling about in my flight bag (fortunately I've got an autopilot) and have been known to run out.
Show me someone who can claim to hand fly and use a CRP at the same time and I will show you a liar.
Nope, I don't think I'd try to use a CRP in the air.
When I fly VFR I use a chart with the lines and the wind drawn on it and a GPS. I use my iPhone app to do the wind correction and write that on the chart. I then use a blend of GPS and visual navigation to make sure I am in the right place. I have yet to be unsure of position in my private or commercial careers.Well, my VFR planning is not much different, except that I use a spreadsheet to produce a flight log from F214 wind forecasts. But if I have a night away without a computer, then sometimes it's the down to the CRP. One day I'll spend time figuring out how to do it on my iPhone. No romantic attachment to the CRP, and generally I'm an early adoptor of most new toys, just not happened to do so with flight planning. Each to his own.

Now the iPhone, there's something that really does run out of battery unpredictably. And I certainly don't have a USB charger in the plane...

[englishal]

The best "pre-GPS" VFR navigation technique was taught to me by an ex-harrier pilot I used to fly with....

Draw a line from A to B and note Mag heading, then mark on it 5 or 10 minute intervals based upon book speed. When you take off write down the time, and after 10 minutes you should be at your first tick mark. Will likely be around t/o + 10 mins, plus or minus a min or so. You can then make a note of the time difference and expect to reach the next mark at 10 mins +/- the time difference. You could write the ETA at the next tick.

When you pass the feature closest to the mark, note the time and write it on the chart by the mark. If you are too much left or right of it, adjust the heading a bit, either right or left and see what happens at the next tick mark...etc...If for some reason you miss one, well no bother, continue flying until the next mark and write down the time you pass it. Works very well, you are never more than 10 minutes from your last "known" position, never have to write on a plog as it is all on the chart.

Of course now I just make a flight plan in the GPS, and keep the ground track overlaid on the course and do it that way....

[S-Works]

Well, my VFR planning is not much different, except that I use a spreadsheet to produce a flight log from F214 wind forecasts. But if I have a night away without a computer, then sometimes it's the down to the CRP. One day I'll spend time figuring out how to do it on my iPhone. No romantic attachment to the CRP, and generally I'm an early adoptor of most new toys, just not happened to do so with flight planning. Each to his own.


Ah! The power of selective cutting and pasting.....

You have just made my argument for me. I suggest you read my post again and see if you can find where I suggested people should use GPS only or not do any flight planning.

My issue is specifically that we are still forced to teach an archaic device as part of the PPL curriculum. Lets imagine that you were taught to use a CX2 (electronic calculator) or an iPhone app during your PPL and then someone showed you a Whizz wheel. Most people would run a mile, yes there are anoraks who would use one for the romantic nostalgia just as there are anoraks (IMHO) who restore steam engines. But the main stream are modern electronic gadget users and would easily adopt an electronic tool and less mistakes would be made and quite likely less airspace busts.

Now the iPhone, there's something that really does run out of battery unpredictably. And I certainly don't have a USB charger in the plane...

Again you missed utterly the tone of my post. You have no right to be using an iPhone in the cockpit to flight plan either. Flight planning is:

planning |ˈplani ng |
noun
the process of making plans for something.

If things don't go to plan:

plan |plan|
noun
1 a detailed proposal for doing or achieving something

Then you have to make corrections in the air, this is achieved by MDR, 1/60 etc and not by pulling out any type of computer. Doing is negligent and makes you a danger to yourself, your passengers and other air users.

So just for clarity and to restate from an earlier comment: There is no room in modern aviation for a slide rule. There are better, easier to use, more accurate and more reliable tools available and like the FAA we should be looking to the future not to the past.

At no stage am I suggesting that anyone should be reliant on a single tool nor should they not PLAN. Safe aviation is about planning, accurate navigation is using a blend of all the tools available to you.

**PS - I can charge my iPhone in my aircraft..... ;)

[FREDAcheck]

You have just made my argument for me. I suggest you read my post again and see if you can find where I suggested people should use GPS only or not do any flight planning.
Bose, it's always a joy to read your posts over and over again, but I don't think I misread it. I don't think I implied (or anyone can reasonably infer) that you suggest people should use only GPS. I was commenting on my use of CRP.
Again you missed utterly the tone of my post. You have no right to be using an iPhone in the cockpit to flight plan either.
I don't think I did. I didn't suggest using an iPhone to flight plan in the air. I was referring to your earlier restrained comment:
Don't anyone give me the tosh about running out of batteries, its crap in this day and age.
Respectfully, that's not true in my experience. Unless of course I misread that, and you are implying that battery life is "crap" in this day and age. As I say, my Garmin eats batteries, and my iPhone battery life is quite unpredictable.

I wasn't commenting on your views about the place of the CRP in training, and if you're saying there's a better way of teaching people about wind drift etc then I bow to your wisdom.

[S-Works]

What is the issue if a device battery runs flat? If you are in the PLANNING stage you should be on the ground and thus be able to replace the batteries. I have had a CX2 calculator for 7 years and it still has the same batteries. I have a Bose-x headset and always carry spare batteries for it which are the same type. I have no problem with battery life on my iPhone either but do carry a charger for it. So claiming you need a slide rule because the electrical variants eat batteries is just tosh. No doubt you will come up with a dozen example of how you do your flight planning in a draughty hanger with no power (we wont discuss how you get the weather and NOTAM) and thus if your battery went flat you would have no fall back.

There are many ways of teaching the triangle of velocities that are simpler and easier to understand than forcing the use of a slide rule. Personally I find it much easier to draw the triangle onto a map when I explain it to people. You would be amazed how quickly this sinks in with people compared to trying to teach it on a slide rule.

We have to face the fact that if we are to attract new blood to aviation then we have to cater for the 'nintendo generation' and make it attractive. My kids have zero interest in flying as they think it is full of old fuddy duddies who smell of piss and have a bizarre fixation on ancient ritual......

[Doodlebug]

Coming back to the original post, we shouldn't be arguing about what means are employed to plan a flight, rather we should be emphasizing the importance of planning as opposed to just leaping into an aircraft and setting sail, blindly relying on a gps.

[Miroku]

I use the met office site for the winds, 'go flying' website to calculate the headings, and then complete a flight plan sheet.

As back up I have a Pilot 3 black and white GPS.

If the weather changes and I decide to go elsewhere my whizz wheel is always in my flight bag. For diversions I use the GPS and some mental arithmetic to adjust for cross winds.

[A and C]

Its a good bit of kit for stopping my beer glass marking my desk!

[eharding]

My kids have zero interest in flying as they think it is full of old fuddy duddies who smell of piss

Have they tried to have you moved into a nursing home yet?

[S-Works]

I am writing from one..... :p

[AfricanEagle]

I don't own a GPS, and rarely use the whizz wheel during initial planning.

The few occasions I fly gps equipped aircraft I use the gps as a back up, occasionally checking to see if it agrees with my planning. :)

[Halfbaked_Boy]

Seems a common push factor for GPS practicality is the battery life.

Simple answer - cigar lighter.

Cheers.

[Captain Smithy]

GPS as a backup and cross check - worked too long in software to feel comfortable relying on it http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/eek.gif

You and I both... :uhoh: But there again I am just a cynical avionics bloke.

Although to be fair GPS seems very reliable, at least in aviation use.

Smithy

[The Heff]

I think there are some very strong arguments for keeping the whizz-wheel in aviation:


I have one;
I actually know how to use it;
It does the job to a satisfactory level of accuracy;
It does the job quick enough, too.If I were to invest in GPS as a back-up, I would have an initial start-up cost of £300+ to buy one, then I'd have to spend time learning how to use it. I realise that money should never be considered an issue in General Aviation, but frankly, I'd rather spend the money on a PLB.

[20milesout]

I use the ASA pathfinder for preparation. Still, I always have the CR2 handy. Sometimes it is just fun to "visualize" where I am going.

[IO540]

I think there are some very strong arguments for keeping the whizz-wheel in aviation:

I have one;
I actually know how to use it;
It does the job to a satisfactory level of accuracy;
It does the job quick enough, too.If I were to invest in GPS as a back-up

Anybody who thinks a GPS is some kind of replacement for the slide rule has never used a GPS :ugh:

A GPS is a device which makes coffee but only above 1000ft AGL. It is nothing to do with flight planning.

[S-Works]

Whilst an interesting tangent, the discussion was not about using GPS instead off a Whizzwheel. It was asking who still used it.....

No one is suggesting that people do not flight plan and switch to a GPS. What many people are saying is that the whizz has no place in modern aviation. It is a slide rule that has been surpassed by better, easier to use and more reliable tools.

The biggest errors I see as an Instructor are by people trying to use a whizz wheel when flight planning. There is no need for it. An electronic calculator will do the job faster and more accurately.

[The Heff]

It is a slide rule that has been surpassed by better, easier to use and more reliable tools

But are these replacement tools neccessarily a cheaper alternative?

I don't dispute that you'll probably never get cheaper than the standard scientific calculator, which will adequately serve the purpose if you're happy to apply trigonometric fomulae to calculate headings and ground-speed. I would still rather use the 'wind' side of the whizz-wheel because its all graphical, and doesn't really require measurement of angles or distance using a protractor or rule.

I don't dispute that the ASA CX-Pathfinder isn't as efficient, I'm just in favour of the ASA E6-B which is approximately £50.00 cheaper (Or £65.00 cheaper if you get the cardboard version).

I also wouldn't advocate use of the GPS as a replacement for flight-planning, but only as a back-up. Whilst nice-to-have, at £300.00+ its still an expensive nice-to-have.

[S-Works]

But are these replacement tools neccessarily a cheaper alternative?

The ones I have vary between .99p and £5.00 from the apple store a lot cheaper than a slide rule.......

[The Heff]

Which are only a valid option if one has an iPhone or possibly a touch-screen iPod.

[S-Works]

You asked if they were a cheaper alternative.....

[IO540]

Oh dear.... there is a number of non-pilots here :)

Most modern pilots flying from A to B for real don't actually work out the wind triangle at all.

If VFR, what they do is plan the route (using a mixture of navaid/intersection waypoints), enter it into a flight planning prog (Navbox is popular for European VFR and hard to beat for simplicity) and print off the plog, and a little route map. Then use the printed chart for obstacle clearance (MSA) planning. The Navbox route can be loaded directly into a handheld GPS. And off you go.

And this can be done without a laptop, in various ways. An Iphone may be one but it's a damn expensive mobile phone... You can pick up a little PDA for peanuts and run some "E6B" prog on it (I have FlightCalc) which does the wind triangle. But in reality almost everybody going places uses GPS and - like VOR/DME flying - that gives you continuous lateral guidance so there is no need to work out the wind correction. The heading/track offset is obvious within about 30 seconds of levelling off... It is nearly 10 years since I did any wind offset calcs and I've been as far as Turkey. Wind correction on the cruise speed (i.e. range) yes; that is a different thing, but is much easier.

If IFR, airways, you use a routing tool (such as Flight Plan Pro (http://flightplanpro.eu/Home.html)), paste the route into Flitestar (that's one way), print off the strip charts, the plog, print off the plates (from where-ever you get them) and off you go. Oh and get weather of course etc etc ;) No wind offset calcs there either...

The basic issue is that Form 214 accuracy is such that any accurate computation of the wind offset is no better than some rule of thumb e.g. drift = crosswind/2 or whatever. Garbage in = garbage out. But they don't teach that in the PPL. It's only when you start flying yourself that you realise most of the so-called met data is a lot less accurate than you expected. Like the temperature lapse rate - most of the time it is nowhere near 2C/1000ft. Yesterday it was about half that.

[TWR]

Like the temperature lapse rate - most of the time it is nowhere near 2C/1000ft. Yesterday it was about half that.

Not exactly your smartest post, Peter.

[IO540]

According to this (http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/sm1/lectures/node56.html) it should be 3C/1000ft, so fair enough, but that makes my point even more in that one cannot rely on it. A lot of the time it is in fact inverted...

[spikeair]

I'm PPl with 250+hours, IMC.

I still use the whizz wheel and will continue to do so.
It works, keeps your brain in the loop. Doesn't require batteries .
Can't see any reason for not using to be honest.Its very quick to use.
The plane I fly has GPS , I don't have a portable one myself though (feel I'm in the minority there!) but manually calculating things I feel is the best way to go.

For navigation whilst I input a flight plan in the Garman 430, I fly using radio navigtion as the primary method with GPS as a background check. Plus if you can see out and are not in cloud, visual references as well to make sure the 'picture' looks right.

I don't fly using dead reckoning but I do plan using that method so I have times for the flight based upon the wind forecasts for fuel management.

[Flyingmac]

DRY ADIABATIC LAPSE RATE (http://www.tpub.com/content/aerographer/14312/css/14312_47.htm)

[Crash one]

I once was "admonished" by a fellow student for suggesting that to fly from LHR to Truro we should head westish, with "No no, we have to be a little more accurate than that, we should steer 087deg magnetic" as he was playing with his new electronic thingy.
The point I am trying to make is that to learn the basics & do most of it in your head is extremely usefull. Errors can be made on any piece of kit. The square protractor can be rotated 90deg & that set of numbers written down, I've seen it done, & nearly done it myself.
The triangle could be drawn out on the chart with a Nm calibrated rule, just to demonstrate its function. Knowing the basics like reasonably correct direction of track by ref to the chart & being able to point at the target destination, even very roughly, should eliminate gross errors like heading off on a reciprocal. Reliance on anything other than a chart & compass can/will produce an error at some point. Being able to use the CRP1 I think is not a bad thing, to learn the intricacies of setting up a GPS requires the teachings from a 10yr old Nintendo pilot. But when my daughter kept asking "what has time got to do with it?" while I was muttering about deg-mins & seconds, makes me wonder if the 10yr old would be much use. Old fart I may be but I do believe that knowledge don't weigh nothin, & the batteries don't go flat.

[bingoboy]

I have never seen a microlight pilot use a whizz wheel and they have the same exams, flight planning is possibly more important when one's cruise is even more effected by wind etc.
I have never actually seen a GA pilot use a whizz wheel either, apart from students.
I have never seen anyone take a starsight either.

ps do yachtsmen still regularly use sextants?

[puntosaurus]

I don't think anyone will dissuade a die hard whizz wheel supporter to change, and fair enough. It works. Similarly there's no reason to critiscise anyone using a more modern method, such as the various pda/phone tools.

However there is only one thing that people ought to agree on, and that is that hopping into the aircraft, putting a goto on the gps, and then adjusting the heading to fly the magenta line is a high risk strategy that will let you down badly one day.

There's been very little talk here of the 'rules of thumb' methods that rely only on brainpower, and were designed for use on the fly, if you'll pardon the pun. The one I was taught involves calculation of the maximum drift based on the airspeed (TAS/120 times windspeed), and then working out how much of that you're likely to get based on your heading relative to the wind (the clock rule). This particular tool is accurate to within wind forecast and flying ability limits, and clearly has the advantage in that any failure of the processor has much wider consequences than simply navigation !

[liam548]

I'm a 27 year new pilot. I am what you might call part of the Sega generation. I like checking my email on the go and recording programmes on my high def TV remotely using my phone, pushing the boundaries of technology and finding new uses for it.

I like using sat nav in a car, I know I can still read a road atlas or A-Z if need be.

I want to use a GPS unit in the aircraft instead of (in my opinion) an ancient piece of plastic that turns and goes up and down.

But I'm sticking with it for now until I am confident I can do it well the old fashioned way and I have done some decent trips. This also ensures it does not come as a big shock come CPL time.

The technology is there to overlay the whole of Europe on a HUD (Head up display) with obstacle and airspace warnings, I expect GA flying might start using this within the next 25 years or so.

[batninth]

BingoBoy
I have never seen a microlight pilot use a whizz wheel and they have the same exams, flight planning is possibly more important when one's cruise is even more effected by wind etc.

Not quite, we don't have to use the whizz wheel instead being taught to plot out triangle of velocities for the microlight nav exam.

Personally speaking, I read a few books about flying where the whizz wheel is mentioned for doing really useful snap calculations in the cockpit. You mention the wind calculation & I could have done with that on my GST for example. I don't have a whizz wheel for the reason mentioned above, but have it on my todo list to see if it really is useful as a quick calculator that doesn't need batteries but helps with general flying.

[englishal]

There is nothing wrong with using an Abacus if that is your thing.

Personally I'll continue to spend 5 minutes on the internet as I drink my morning coffee and check my email.....I can then get the printer to print out all the papers I need while I brush my teeth and pack my flight bag.

Realistically one cannot do "proper" flight planning without access to the internet for: Notams, weather, winds aloft, freezing level, actual weather conditions, and even booking your aeroplane.

[SpannerInTheWerks]

I remember the PPL who was about to take his IMC Rating flight test. He insisted on using an electronic device rather than a navigation computer. His batteries went flat, he didn't have a CP-1 so he failed the test.

I remember a total electrical failure at night in a C172 over the bleak North Yorks moors. No electrics, no battery, no NAVAIDs - just a line on the map and a heading to fly to get me safely down (and a hand-held radio I always carried at night - just to be on the safe side!).

I remember a friend of mine having an engine failure in a C172 - all power lost - he used the lines on the map and the PLOG created using a nav. computer to carry out a (successful and expeditious) straight glide into Sywell.

In all these cases the pilots were situationally aware of where they were.

The problem these days is that, if you're not careful, total reliance is placed on 'technology' and little on common sense.

Provided you use brain first, gadget second then you should be fine. Otherwise sooner or later finger trouble, gadget failure or loss of power might catch you out.

Like most things in aviation they're great when they're working but a nightmare when they don't.

I remember those two chaps who, having flown out for the proverbial 'expensive cup of coffee' had to fly back to base in the murk using GPS. That was great - except they forgot The Wrekin was in the way and flew into the top of it. Great gadget and experienced pilots but with no other flight planning and no situational awareness - game over.

It's not always pilots either who fall foul of electronic gadgets - it was once carrying out a practice PAN with my PPL instructor and the Radar service we were using gave us vectors and an altitude to fly that took us straight into the Winter Hill mast - until the instructor asked (sarcatically) what this 2,500 mast ahead of us was!? Oops!

So at PPL/private flying level at least it's always best to plan carefully assuming something may go wrong with the 'gadget' - and to work out your alternatives if it does.

Trouble is in these days of almost total dependance on all things electronic it's unlikely that much heed will be taken - after all, many of you have said that navigational computers and the like should be relegated to the bin. The logic must therefore be that modern light aircraft are 100% reliable and nothing will fail - ever.

I don't believe that so until this level of reliability is achieved I will continue to use lines on a map and a navigational computer (if required).

I've been caught out already and know others who have too - and some have died as a consequence.

Happy GPSing.

SITW :)

[S-Works]

What a moving set of stories. However I could really do with you explaining how having a slide rule would have changed the outcome......

[englishal]

Well I guess if the engine fails, get the wizz wheel out, work out your wind vectors, glide ratio, and whether you'll make the airport?

Personally I'd rather NRST > ENTER ENTER...;)

[SpannerInTheWerks]

Story A - the student would have used his slide rule to complete his flight planning and been able to commence the test.

Story B - I had situational awareness and lines drawn on the map and a PLOG created using a slide rule to give me headings to fly to destination.

Story C - Pilot had used slide rule to produce PLOG and was situationally aware of route and was therefore able to immediately change heading to Sywell - no need to consult GPS (or NAVAIDs) to determine heading to fly - he only just made the field - any delay would have been critical.

Story D - If they had used a slide rule to plan their flight and drawn lines on the map they would (arguably) have seen the hill on the map.

A slide rule was not, in itself, essentail but was/would have been an intregral part of the flight planning process. In the cases where one was used there was a successful outcome, in the cases where it wasn't there was failure and death.

However these stories were from the days when GPS was not in common use, but the situational awareness issues are still valid.

Obviously the whizz wheel was not used in the air. This is about flight planning. How you would press ENTER ENTER when you have no power whatsoever is beyond me?

SITW :)

[IO540]

The very best situational awareness comes from using GPS.

The biggest problem is that too many old-timers in GA think that a GPS is what you buy in Millets for £50 :) That's a useless piece of junk.

A decent moving map GPS totally transforms one's SA, and because you can get them battery-powered, one of those also solves the "total loss of electrics" scenario. I fly with a reasonable IFR GPS in the panel, but have a Garmin 496 permanently running in the yoke and could enter DCTs into that very fast. And carrying an Icom radio completes the backup picture. If you have comms, you can talk to ATC, and if can fly DCT legs, you are done! All you need is a working motor up front...

The argument then comes down to just how stingy a pilot should be if they want to fly at night, when visual nav is not possible, etc.

The instrument training scene is heavily geared up for the ridiculous situation where you lose most of your nav sources, but for a few hundred quid on Ebay you can sidestep the really dire scenario.

Even the VFR training scene is geared up for a totally minimum cost cockpit, where the most expensive aid is a £5 kneeboard. I don't think this is reasonable - because flying is not that cheap, it never was that cheap, not even 80 years ago, and spending a tiny fraction of one's flying budget on some "kit" transforms the whole scene so much.

By all means, if someone wants to fly like his grandfather did in WW2, let them. It's a free world, and Transair still sell the leather caps and goggles :) And the £500 "authentic" leather jackets ;) But to pretend this is a justifiable approach for Mr Pilot Average 2010 is just daft.

But these debates will carry on because the CAA will never introduce GPS formally into the syllabus, because if they did, the schools would have to install it, and they pay the CAA good fees, so it will never happen.

[mm_flynn]

Story A -
On the ground he should have time to get the answer close enough with the various rules of thumb and drawing a few vectors on a piece of paper.

Story B-
I fail to see how the whizz wheel is relevant to drawing lines and planning a flight -(although I still have mine in the flight case and use the edge of it for drawing lines - but any piece of wood or plastic will work for this)
Story C -
I doubt the slide rule had any impact in being situationally aware of the enroute airfields - one would have thought the chart (or memory) would be more relevant
Story D -
Once again, I find a chart to be much more useful for identifying terrain and CAS than the whizz wheel. In FAA, I believe there have been no CFIT incidents involving TAWS equipped aircraft - increasingly common in panel mounted GPSs

[Droopystop]

I'm a commerical helicopter pilot who still keeps a whiz wheel in my pocket when flying. Don't use it much, but useful when the wonderful computer system at work crashes or if standed somewhere away from a computer. I use it so infrequently that it's not economic to buy a flight computer. I do use it flight for fuel burn calcs.

There is nothing wrong with the whiz wheel - it was perfectly accurate enough for the longest range SAR flight done by a civillian aircraft. There is nothing wrong with a computer. The most unreliable feature of either system is the organic matter operating it.

Whatever you use, you need to be able to ensure the answer you get is correct.

[englishal]

This is about flight planning. How you would press ENTER ENTER when you have no power whatsoever is beyond me?
Ah but, I have a plane with a battery, so even if the engine stops the GPS and MFD will still function...

But should that fail, I'd revert the the backup GPS which although is powered by the aircraft power, also has a build in battery and capable of running it for a further 5 hours or so....

But I am joking with you ;), anything to help and for some people it may be wizz wheel. But don't discount GPS, a friend of mine would still be alive today had he had the situational awareness that a GPS *would* have given him. The clue is to know when something you rely upon is not working properly,in his case it was obviously his brain, and perhaps a moving map and/or TAWS would have alerted his brain to the fact that there was going to be an imminent impact with a mountain. These days GPS's are cheap (in flying terms) so to me is seems daft to resist buying one just in case the batteries go flat....

But I digress, this post was about wizz wheels...sorry....but the same applies in some respects, don't discount technology just because....

[1800ed]

The old 'fail to prepare' mantra goes no matter what form of tools, instruments or gadgets you use.

[FlyingOfficerKite]

There is certainly a training 'black hole' in this respect.

Once again last summer I renewed my IR with the standard ILS, NDB, hold etc. just as I have always done. No progression here in 20 years.

Although I have flown the B737NG not once, at any stage, have I asked for, needed or used GPS for private flying or instructing.

The situation now is similar to the one years ago when I was being examined on Doppler and Omega systems yet being trained and tested using VOR. I never ever saw the older systems.

So whilst technology moves on the CAA lag behind leaving GPS training to the individual pilot or instructor.

Although I always carry a whizz wheel in my flight bag it has only ever been used for instructional purposes during the past 18 years.

Whilst PPL training might still have a use for the whizz wheel the CAA really need to catch up and recognize the benefit of the alternatives available.

KR

FOK

[Droopystop]

Whilst there should be some form of formalised training in the use of GPS and flight planning software, the problem is which of the miriad of GPS/software options does the CAA choose for training? To choose one would cause lawsuits from other suppliers. The wheel and visual nav techniques are the lowest common denominator so have stuck. But perhaps the PPL should have add on modules to train in the use of GPS (in particular) and flight planning software (ok not hard, but still need some basic training), the choice of which would be down to the individual flying school to match the equipment in their aircraft/facilities.

Whilst the "red tape", traditionalism and hoop jumping of flying will put many people off after their ppl (the realisation that you cannot rock up, jump in and go), I wonder how many give up because flying from a to b in anything a low time ppl is allowed to fly is not as thrilling as they expected? Maybe, just maybe some would stay if they realised how satisfying navigating and planning without electrons can be. And that is down (in part at least) to how well they are taught to plan and navigate.

[liam548]

The problem is with the training is that the whizz wheel is FORCED upon you. Surely alowing other reasonable methods as well as the whizz wheel should be allowed?

Anyway back to my original question, it seems that most PPLs invest in some form of GPS soon after the licence arrives and very few in fact continue to use the whizz wheel like they did for their QXC.

[Crash one]

Realistically one cannot do "proper" flight planning without access to the internet for: Notams, weather, winds aloft, freezing level, actual weather conditions, and even booking your aeroplane.

If this is true, then the PPL sylabus should include computer literacy examinations. A suitable computer should be a requirement for nav tests etc.
I agree internet access makes life easier, but is it the case that Notams, weather are unavailable by any other means?
I never flew Lysanders into France in the dead of night, I was only 5 when it was all over, but ???????

[IO540]

I agree internet access makes life easier, but is it the case that Notams, weather are unavailable by any other means?

For notams, yes. You could do it on the back of somebody else, of course, who has internet access, e.g. pop into a flying school and see what area notams are pinned on their notice board.

Weather... you could get it off the BBC, as many apparently do :) Or look out of the window (OK for a short local flight). But all the serious data is accessible only online.

Flight plans can still be faxed, or (generally) handed in at the airport tower, but how many pilots have a fax? So the internet is the only way too.

But the goode olde PPL training machine grinds on happily, churning out a load of pilots of which about 90% chuck it in the moment they get their PPL. The school has made its money by then.

[Sciolistes]

The very best situational awareness comes from using GPS.
I think we've had this debate before :} Personally I don't see it like that. At the most basic level of situation awareness, GPS can be a major asset. In terms of complete SA GPS isn't a silver bullet. It can't be.

The very best SA comes from knowing what you are doing, monitoring and anticipating what is coming next. That transcends specific items of equipment.

Much of this thread seems to focus on navigation. Calculation of a heading is really basic simple mental maths, wind triangles and all that quasi calculus nonsense can get rooted. Such basic and simple stuff and does not need a GPS, whizz wheel or whatever.

Whizz wheels are good for a vast range of calculations, and once one is practised very quick and efficient. A pilot who chooses to use one is not making life difficult or more unsafe for himself. Neither is one who ticks all the options on his Cessna 400 order form.

[AliB]

it seems that most PPLs invest in some form of GPS soon after the licence arrives and very few in fact continue to use the whizz wheel like they did for their QXC

This is true for me but the important point is that they are not related.

I gave up using the whizz wheel because I found working out which way the wind was going to carry me easy to do in my head and with reference to the ground features.

I bought a GPS as a backup to my navigation - not as a substitute to the whizz wheel.

If I ever take up IMC flying I guess I will need to find a way of calculating the wind drift in advance again. I would expect (and this may just be my ignorance of things IMC) only to be using it on the ground - so does it really matter if it is slide rule or electronics based?

[IO540]

The very best SA comes from knowing what you are doing, monitoring and anticipating what is coming next

Indeed, but your brain is going to be working a lot better if it is running at 10% of max rated power than at 90% of max rated power :)

The way to keep pilot workload right down is to stick a map in front of his face, with the plane in the middle of it :)

A few years ago I had a bizzare situation. As a result of post-preflight messing about, the slaved compass (fluxgate magnetometer) system was switched to the FREE setting rather than the SLAVE setting. It took a few minutes for the HSI and all the GPS maps to get screwed up as regards orientation. But the plane remained in the centre of the map correctly, and the track line was displayed correctly (it just wasn't pointing forward anymore). If this happened without a moving map, and while manouvering (or in turbulence) so you can't read the mag compass, you would be well screwed, and so would the autopilot. It was a great demo how a GPS very visibly indicates that something is very wrong elsewhere.

[1800ed]

I think a lot of people on here must have had painful experiences with learning how to use the whiz wheel. Comments like 'forced upon us' and 'wasting lots of time learning how to use it' seem to come up a lot! My training to use it was something like 15 mins on the ground when I planned my first PLOG and then after that I was left to get on with it.

Formal training on how to use a GPS will annoy the people want to fly non-GPS aircraft. You can ask your instructor how to use it. You can download the simulator and play, which for the 430 is a great way of learning! If you want to fly a technically advanced aircraft/glass cockpit then there will probably be some mandatory ground school you need to complete to keep the insurers.

Use the whizz wheel to pass the nav exam, if you don't like it, use something else after! I certainly didn't feel that my instructor was breathing down my neck pressing me to use a whiz wheel when I was planning navs during training.

[ak7274]

I use mine whenever I plan a flight. So shoot me for being a Luddite.

[Tinstaafl]

I'm a technically advanced luddite. A Navajo I fly has Garmin 530 & 430 with terrain & airspace warning, Avidyne MFD, XM satellite weather (surface radar uplink, TAFs & METARs), on board Wx radar, stormscope, digital fuel flow, JPI-760 engine data monitor, Mode S traffic uplink and a glass HSI. Not every aircraft I fly is so well equipped. Even some Kingairs I've flown didn't have that level of gear. Other types lacked GPS entirely with the job requiring frequentl flights around the N. Sea/Shetland/Orkney & N. Scotland. PNRs & ETPs were essential and very easily calculated with whiz wheel & updated in-flight with actual wind.

Most of my flight planning & plan submission is now online but from time to time I end up in places without internet access.

End result: I still carry my Jepp. CR5 to use when needed but take advantage of any advanced tool that's available.

[FlyingOfficerKite]

Just as the 'principles of flight' by and large apply whether you're flying a glider, light aircraft or jet, so the 'principles of navigation' similarly apply.

The whizz wheel enables students to grasp and visualise the triangle of velocities etc., which can be difficult to grasp through electronic instruments alone.

The idea of introducing GPS training would, in my opinion, be beneficial at IMC stage upwards - which would require both instructors and students to be appropriately trained.

I appreciate the multitude of formats available on the market, but the individual flying school/instructor would have to train on the model fitted in the aircraft used for training - just as NAVCOMs vary, to some extent, in presentation and use.

The current situation where no approved training syllabus is available leaves the knowledge imparted open to variation and level of completeness.

I took my ATPL exams just after glass instruments were examined under 'instruments' - many were flying glass cockpits long before they were examined on them. The examination process should, ideally, lead industry not lag behind it. But aviation isn't alone in this respect.

KR

FOK

[liam548]

quote from Peter2000 (who has some very interesting articles on IFR flying on his website by the way, well worth a read)



"Another is the need to embrace modern navigation. Navigating with the map, stopwatch, and compass is a tedious and highly error prone procedure which remains popular with a hard core of "traditional" pilots and these will find it harder to get used to something a bit faster. I had no problem with this since I discarded all PPL navigation training the day after the PPL skills test, and used GPS backed up with conventional radio navigation (VOR/NDB/DME) as the sole means of going everywhere. The benefit of this is that the workload of flying is a tiny fraction of what it is during training"


Its on his page regarding ownership experience of the TB20

Socata TB20 Trinidad (http://www.peter2000.co.uk/aviation/tb20-experience/index.html)

[jimmygill]

I use it to multiply and divide numbers. The circular scale is my favorite side of the wheel.

For the velocity triangles I use other shortcuts.

[eocvictim]

"Another is the need to embrace modern navigation. Navigating with the map, stopwatch, and compass is a tedious and highly error prone procedure which remains popular with a hard core of "traditional" pilots and these will find it harder to get used to something a bit faster. I had no problem with this since I discarded all PPL navigation training the day after the PPL skills test, and used GPS backed up with conventional radio navigation (VOR/NDB/DME) as the sole means of going everywhere. The benefit of this is that the workload of flying is a tiny fraction of what it is during training"


This is the same reason I've had to spend up to 30 hours retraining 400-600hr UK PPL's to get to Australian standards. No navigational skill and what's worse is they think they dont need it. What happens when the GPS falls over? Use your NDB or VOR I hear you say... over 1100nm on one sector I cross 2 NDBs and 3 VORs, the last jump between aids is 400nm.

I've had others who dont use nav aids as sole means and were fine.

[ShyTorque]

Modern gadgets indeed, a load of rubbish.

I once bought one of these so-called whiz-wheels and the first time I used it to re-calculate my Mach number, two screws fell out in the cockpit, rendering it completely useless. Gee, whizz, not impressed at all.

As for those "navigation charts".... I once bought one of southern England and drew my route on it. A mast of 1184 ft amsl, about five miles north west of Wycombe Air Park, was completely absent from it but right on my track. Thank goodness I had my eyes outside the cockpit and was using the M40 as my IFR line feature.

Damned well nearly asked for my money back. :rolleyes:

[24Carrot]

The thing I like least about my whizz wheel is the poor printing. 2 x 3 = 6.07 according to mine (your answer may vary). Being old enough to remember proper slide rules at uni, I took it back to the shop, where we found mine was the most accurate they had. They also assured me it was accurate enough for air work, "even CPL". Shy Torque, just curious, for how long was Stokenchurch mast not on the CAA map?

[ShyTorque]

Shy Torque, just curious, for how long was Stokenchurch mast not on the CAA map?

Till the next edition was printed!

[IO540]

The basic thing I don't get is what exactly is one going to be doing with the circular slide rule in the cockpit - many allege that it should be used there.

Basically, one side does multiply/divide (with handy marks on common conversions) but what exactly is one going to be converting when airborne?

The wind calcs also seem meaningless when airborne. If you have a GPS, or are tracking a navaid and have a DME, the wind aloft is obvious, so no need to do wind calcs. And if you haven't, then you will have got the forecast winds aloft and planned it all on the ground - and won't have a basis for recalculating wind calcs when airborne because you haven't got any means of getting any new data!

I can visualise complex procedures, used no doubt on the WW1-WW2 era flights across Africa etc, where you had 5 men in the cockpit and were doing long range NDB work, but this has no relevance to GA today.

And if I was flying in Australia, without a GPS, I would want my head examined :ugh: At the very least I would carry a satellite phone. I think Iridium is the only option down there; you can pick them up for about £1500, or less on Ebay, which is about the cost of a cheap liferaft and cheap at 10x the price in terms of survival value. Plus an ELT, obviously. Anybody crossing large swathes of uninhabited terrain without a backup for a backup is an idiot, but applying these principles to normal GA is way over the top. You'd have every PPL flying with a tent and food/water for 10 days :) I know a number of Australian pilots and they all went fully "modern" many years ago.

Converting IAS, temperature, altitude to TAS - that I can understand... I have a little Jepp CR-5 for that, but I have no idea how it is used for wind calcs. However, I have never had to work out TAS... when flying using radio nav, you know your GS, and you can get TAS (if you really want to know it) from the subscale on the ASI... But the only thing that matters in flying is GS because that determines your ETE which determines your landing fuel on board (reserves) etc. With a GPS you don't need TAS, and without a GPS you actually need GS but to get GS from TAS you need to know the wind but without radio nav you have no way to find out the wind (short of doing an accurate calibration by overflying 100% known features).

[batninth]

24Carrot
The thing I like least about my whizz wheel is the poor printing. 2 x 3 = 6.07 according to mine (your answer may vary). Being old enough to remember proper slide rules at uni, I took it back to the shop, where we found mine was the most accurate they had. They also assured me it was accurate enough for air work, "even CPL".

At the time we used slide rules, wasn't there a story going around about the absent minded physicist who when asked to multiply 2 by 3 picked up his slide rule and answered "5.9"without thinking.

To be honest, this whole accuracy thing is a bit of a joke. I don't know about the other licences, but on the nav exam I took for NPPL(M) we had to fill in a worksheet with our calculations for heading, wind correction ect which was marked. I can't remember the accuracy required but I made a 1 degree mistake & then promulgated it through all the subsequent calculations. As the instructor said at the time, how could you actually fly 017 anyway on a compass, you'd most likely fly to the nearest 5 degeree increment & then correct as you went along from landmarks.

Getting a 1% error on a whizz wheel isn't the end of the world. What I would suggest is that trying to fly & do the mental arithmatic in your head is probably more prone to error, at least the whizz wheel gives you an answer in the right place to within the necessary 5%.

[24Carrot]

Getting a 1% error on a whizz wheel isn't the end of the world. What I would suggest is that trying to fly & do the mental arithmatic in your head is probably more prone to error, at least the whizz wheel gives you an answer in the right place to within the necessary 5%.I agree with your point about the 1% accuracy, but it would have cost them so little more to print the thing properly.

In the event I needed to do a wind calc while flying my GA bimbles around the SE of the UK, (an unplanned diversion perhaps?) I would use a clockface fraction of max drift, ie I would use mental arithmetic while flying. But as an enthusiastic user of charts, navaids, and GPS, I would hope my exposure to the result would be limited.

Even on the ground I find the whizz wheel to be completely over-engineered. The circular slide rule does nothing more than a cheap calculator (solar powered if you like), and a list of conversion factors.

For CAS to TAS you can use 1-6-6 (TAS is 1% higher for every 6 flight levels and 6C over 15C), but at my altitudes I always get about the same TAS anyhow. Even TAS 10% error on a 50 nm leg is only a few minutes change in ETA, and a poor wind forecast can do that.

On the other side the circular slide lets you subtract track from wind heading. Big deal. The up and down slide allows you to calculate for different TAS, but as I mentioned above my TAS doesn't vary much. So I drew a simple graphic for my
TAS, which means I can just read off the WCA and GS. It is on a piece of paper so I actually could use it in the cockpit, I guess.

My entire nav kit (apart from charts) is: calculator, pens, a folding plotter, and a few sheets of paper - the whole lot weighs less than the whizz wheel, and fits in a smaller space.

Other people may do more adventurous flying than me and need the wheel, and some may just love it, and good luck to them, but this is what works for me.

[hhobbit]

Actually you can do most whizzy type calcs in yer noggin with a bit of practice. You probably memorise some phone numbers, try memorising: 1/6, 1/3, 1/2, 2/3, 3/4, 0.9, .95, 0.99, 1. These are quick and dirty sines 10-20-30deg etc. which can be used with the 1/60 rule for wind corrections. Add/subtract the tailwind and work out ETEs.

If you ever have insomnia this works far better than counting sheep:ok:

[Them thar hills]

Whizz wheel AND a Morgen Timescale would be fine.... ( older readers will remember )
:)

[TWR]

But the only thing that matters in flying is GS because that determines your ETE which determines your landing fuel on board (reserves) etc. With a GPS you don't need TAS, and without a GPS you actually need GS but to get GS from TAS you need to know the wind but without radio nav you have no way to find out the wind (short of doing an accurate calibration by overflying 100% known features).

Then how do you know you are flying the TAS you filed in your flightplan ?

[IO540]

Then how do you know you are flying the TAS you filed in your flightplan ?

Can you explain why this actually matters (GA context)?

You arrive when you arrive, plus or minus not a lot - unless you are doing some 1000nm epic journey in which case you will have appropriate fuel instrumentation.

[Final 3 Greens]

Then how do you know you are flying the TAS you filed in your flightplan ?

How about looking at the ASI and then correcting to TAS?

And I agree with IO540, why does it matter in thsi context?

[IO540]

And another thing... in "advanced" piston GA one flies a given engine power setting, not a given IAS, TAS, GS or whatever.

That power setting will give you some IAS value which drops off as you climb (non turbocharged context). Curiously though, for a given LOP fuel flow, the TAS is very nearly maintained over altitude. The upshot is that - so long as one remains LOP, and especially if WOT (wide open throttle) - the MPG in constant or zero wind is essentially independent of altitude. The mathematical explanation for that is interesting but somewhat beyond me, but this is what I find on long distance flights.

[jimmygill]

Can you explain why this actually matters (GA context)?

You arrive when you arrive, plus or minus not a lot - unless you are doing some 1000nm epic journey in which case you will have appropriate fuel instrumentation.

@IO540

In non radar environment, you may have to tell the ATC of there is deviation in your ETA by more than 3 minutes at certain fixes.

I don't have experience of flying in non-radar environments, but I guess I should know my TAS and should be able to calculate my ETA within 3 minutes.

[TWR]

Can you explain why this actually matters (GA context)?

Sure.

How about applying the rules ?

You file a flightplan (when required) and you adhere to it.
Now, how can you report a change of 5% or more in TAS if you
don't know your TAS? I know 5% on our speeds is peanuts, but that is not
the point.

And don't get me started on fuel planning WITHOUT those fancy fuel computers...

[IO540]

In non radar environment, you may have to tell the ATC of there is deviation in your ETA by more than 3 minutes at certain fixes.I guess I should know my TAS and should be able to calculate my ETA within 3 minutes.Irrelevant to GA flight, because you won't be able to achieve 3 mins over the kind of legs IFR ATC hand out - say 200nm DCT.

Almost the only people who ask one's ETA to any waypoint are London Information, when you are on your PPL QXC, and everybody listening feels sorry for you while you rummage around trying to work it out :)

Also not achievable unless you know your GS (which in your airliner you always do) and to know that accurately you have to know the wind, which you don't have...

You file a flightplan (when required) and you adhere to it.
Now, how can you report a change of 5% or more in TAS if you
don't know your TAS? I know 5% on our speeds is peanuts, but that is not
the point. Irrelevant to GA flight. Are you a CAA IR examiner, retired approximately 10 years ago, by any chance?

One does indeed give a TAS figure on the flight plan but this will be at the expected power setting; for me it might be 150kt. But if one has to climb to FL190 instead of FL130 (due weather) any resulting timings go out of the window.

So, you will now ask... what about the lost comms situation? You have to arrive at the IAP at the filed time. The reality is that in the total absence of ground based nav, nobody is going to achieve this. And if you have ground based nav (GPS, DME etc) then you have an ETA to each waypoint anyway. And the proper way to deal with lost comms (which in a GA context will usually mean a total loss of electrics i.e. all nav, prob90 above a 100% overcast) is to carry a handheld radio. Plus a 2nd GPS of course. Then you have covered all the bases with a realistic backup.

The way things are done in real-world IFR has long ago moved on. Europe is 99% tactically radar managed, and GA flies in a huge empty void (say FL100-200) where you can fly 1000nm and not spot a single plane anywhere near, laterally or vertically. Nobody actually cares when exactly you arrive; Eurocontrol deliver real time flight tracking. ATC routinely give you shortcuts ~ 150-200nm long which chuck your planned route out of the window - as far as any ETA accuracy is concerned. With each such shortcut, your ETA might come back 20 mins, so you smile and work on the next one :)

fuel planning WITHOUT those fancy fuel computers... You really must be a retired CAA examiner :) How can you know the flow rate without a ............. fuel flowmeter?

[Johnm]

I bought a CRP5 for my IR training and exams, never used it. A £5 electronic calulator did all I needed, CRP5 now sold to ATPL candidate.

CRP1 never used since I got my PPL given to a friend who is learning to fly.

Preflight planning done by Navbox if VFR, Eurocontrol validation tools if IFR, in flight all GPS, though I tune in VORs and DME and check 'em if they're around en route.

Carry battery GPS and radio in case of need.

[Droopystop]

Is it any wonder people give up private flying........

A simple tool fundamental to the ppl is written off as useless, antique and so on. How's that for a downer?

Whether or not it should be fundamental to the ppl is irrelevant. Flight planning is not rocket science. It can be done in your head. Which rather makes the computer somewhat of a sledgehammer to crack a nut. But that doesn't matter. Engineers and scientists moved on from slide rules because maths moved on and computing power made more accurate and detailed analysis viable.

You can navigate perfectly well with a whizz wheel. Forecast winds are good enough to get you (the average VFR Private pilot) to the next turning point to within (very few) minutes. We plan flights out to 150 miles over water, returning with just 25 mins in the tanks on forecast winds, so they are not that bad. As I have said before, people don't like the wheel and manual nav because instructors are rubbish at teaching it and students are in too much of a rush to learn it. But I am not sure that really matters either.

Maybe I'm a luddite, but then again I use a computer to plan flights. It's a waste of electricity and paper, but it is slightly quicker (bonus) but requires less thought (potential pothole). Alot of the paper work in my job (commercial helicopter pilot) is working out fuel loads, available payloads and total weights. Not one of us uses a calculator for those sums, because, guess what, it is quicker to do it with a pen and paper.

What I do find the whizz wheel useful for in flight is to plan my following flight since I have to do it (not ops), and very often we don't shut down between flights. The GPS gives the leg times, the whizz wheel gives the fuel required. And since the wheel is pretty much always set to the required fuel burn it is quicker than a calculator.

Use whatever you like to plan your flight. But for the love of flying stop worrying what everyone else uses, stop critising those who don't use the latest technology, don't feel the need to use a computer just because others do and go flying. It really doesn't matter.

[Sir Niall Dementia]

It all seems to come down to your aviation background. I can understand the frustration of a PPL student being forced to learn the wizz wheel when so much technology is available. I can also understand the pro who is forced to use it in flight as one of his flight tests (Prog Check 3 on the ATPL course IIRC)

My day job involves flying either a very high spec jet, or one of several superbly equipped helicopters. Playtime is a wood and fabric wonder with no electrics. I can't imagine flying without a CRP, I use it for gross errror checks on the working tools and to plan on the toy. Modern kit is fantastic, but there are often errors programmed in. For calculating fuel burns it is at least as fast and accurate as the kit in the machines. Also we practise equipment failures in both simulators and in line training which can really only be solved by "old fashioned" pilot nav, so a wizz wheel and the knowledge of how to use it becomes essential.

IO540; over the last 20 years I have noticed a diminuation of situational awareness amongst young and relatively inexperienced CPL pilots (by inexperienced I mean less than 2500 hours) which I put down to a reliance on technology and not enough time looking out of the window and being aware of the controlled airspace and landmarks around them. Switch off the moving maps and their knowledge of the countryside shrinks to no-where near enough for the job we do. A final line check on a heli in this company includes doing the trip to an OS six figure grid without moving map as it is an MEL item marked as "Not required."

[usedtofly]

Right then............here goes !!!

The debate here seems to primarily be whizzwheel or gps................what the hell happend to basic common sense and gross error checks fer chris sakes?

When I taught studes I would advise them to become familiar with the whizzwheel just to pass the written paper, as for flight planning I would teach them to plan without one. Too many times it is easy to make a mistake that does not show up until too late (drift correction wrong side, fuel flow in Imperial instead of US, that kinda stuff).

To fly a simple a/c vfr all you need is a stop watch, compass and a chart. Work out the max drift and apply on the hoof using the clock code. As for fuel don't get too excited about it, round up and keep it simple. I could go on and on blah blah blah.

I fly twin turbine now with all glass cockpit, but for gross error checks or point to point nav on a sunny day I still use simple mental DR and round up the numbers, it works every time!

Use a whizz wheel if it makes you feel better but personally I think they are a waste of time and detract from sheer bloody common sense!

Flying light aircraft aint exactly rocket science!

K.I.S.S !!

UTF :E (ducking for cover)

[Mark1234]

For my money, the last 3 posts (droopystop, SND and usedtofly) pretty much hit it - common sense. Whizz wheel isn't the be all and end all, nor should it be banned from the cockpit.

I'm sure it can be replaced by mental calculation, but the same generation (mine) that can't comprehend a slide rule aren't generally great at mental arithmetic either - personally it takes less of my attention to use mine (jepp circular variety), than to work it out in my head. I also mark up the wind dot, and if I should divert, change the plan etc, it's the work of seconds to get a drift figure. Again, it's the easy factor. And if I was flying in Australia, without a GPS, I would want my head examined :ugh: At the very least I would carry a satellite phone. I think Iridium is the only option down there; you can pick them up for about £1500, or less on Ebay, which is about the cost of a cheap liferaft and cheap at 10x the price in terms of survival value. Plus an ELT, obviously. Anybody crossing large swathes of uninhabited terrain without a backup for a backup is an idiot, but applying these principles to normal GA is way over the top. You'd have every PPL flying with a tent and food/water for 10 days http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/smile.gif I know a number of Australian pilots and they all went fully "modern" many years ago

Examine away..

The ELT and water/supplies are a regulatory requirement for remote areas (most of aus, away from the centres of population / east coast). The interior isn't *so* hard, just different. I'd probably want the GPS more around the east coast where there's airspace and restricted areas to dodge.

Irridium I went without, GPS was a garmin etrex (walking) unit in the bottom of my flightbag for backup / emergencies. Nav by whizz wheel, forecast and looking out the window mapreading. Backup ADF/VOR, backup backup the etrex (and plenty of spare batts). Cruise 9000ish vfr.

Sure, as a city type pilot I worried a lot before heading out, but it turns out the dessert isn't so featureless (east of alice at least); the landmarks are few, but they stand out a *lot* better than in populated areas.. see a (dirt) road? It's probably the only one for about 200 miles, etc. Had absolutely no problems navigating, hit ETA's within <5 mins either way over 3-400nm legs, and never more than a few degrees off the nose.

NDBs (and AM radio stations) exist at most significant places - a great backup/funnel on the longer legs, and usually showing a solid needle and audio ident well outside the rated range (it's nice and flat, and cruise was generally as close to 10,000 as practicable / legal.

I'd actually contend that a lot of the australian GA *hire* fleet is fairly ill equipped as moving maps and the like go.. there are some exceptions, and a fair few have GPS, but generally of the somewhat aincient, numeric presentation variety - if you're hiring it's pretty impractical to be up to speed on how each one works, or if it's fitted etc. Of course if you own your own, you'd be daft not to fit the stuff that makes it easy, but it's by no means ubiquitous, or indeed completely necessary.

[Flyingmac]

I take mine on every flight, along with my sextant and chronograph. In case of GPS failure .

[tjfly]

I still use my old crap5 but if someone offered me an alternative I'd take it.

Anyone know of any android applications? :ok:

[BIGJ91]

I still keep mine in my flight bag but use it a great deal less than the 1 in 60 rule but at least I know how to use it though I never did use it in the air even when GPS was a glint in DARPA's eyes.
I actually find something very satisfying about doing the navigation calculations and then finding the waypoints coming up bang on schedule and I've had more bad experiences in the air- one of them very bad indeed- from flying with people who were relying on GPS and getting very distracted when the thing let them down than anything else. I think GPS is great as a back up and as mine are getting very whiskery will very probably buy the new simple moving map as that's what I really want from a GPS. I think though it's far better to use traditional navigation and then have the GPS as a genuine back up to confirm your position than to risk having the wrong course accurate to 1/10 degree. The great advantage of manual navigation plotted on the chart is that common sense has more chances to spot a gross error, also you're not pushing badly ergonomically designed buttons while flying VFR.

[Lance Murdoch]

Six years after gaining my PPL I still use my whizz wheel. Never trust anything that runs on electricity.

[asyncio]

tjfly,
I haven't found any good android apps yet, but since I'm now the proud owner of a Nexus 1, I've been having a go at writing my own graphical wind computer.

Rather that the usual 'type in the numbers' ones, it allows you to set direction by spinning round the whizz wheel, and setting the speed with a 'trim' wheel.

I've put some screenshots of what I've got so far at WindComputer (http://picasaweb.google.com/bloomoo/WindComputer#)

Is this the kind of thing that people would actually want to use if I made it available??

[Whopity]

I learned to use the Dalton MK4A in 1967, I still have it, as well as a MK5A the mini version. I have found it very useful for the past 43 years and have always carried it in my bag. As well as the usual high and low speed slides it has been used with CARP and MEARS Slides, which I doubt anyone has heard of. I like to think of it as a Prayer Wheel that comes in, in times of Desperation.

[FREDAcheck]

I'm sure there are those that would say a prayer wheel is more useful. Nevertheless, my whizz wheel is usually in my bag if I'm going away overnight and don't have a laptop with me.

[liam548]

tjfly,
I haven't found any good android apps yet, but since I'm now the proud owner of a Nexus 1, I've been having a go at writing my own graphical wind computer.

Rather that the usual 'type in the numbers' ones, it allows you to set direction by spinning round the whizz wheel, and setting the speed with a 'trim' wheel.

I've put some screenshots of what I've got so far at WindComputer (http://picasaweb.google.com/bloomoo/WindComputer#)

Is this the kind of thing that people would actually want to use if I made it available??

that looks good. what platform does the nexus 1 run on?

[asyncio]

The Nexus 1 uses the latest Android v2.1 release, but I've been writing the app to work with v1.6 and above.
(Although I've since realised there are more phones still running v1.5 than I thought, so I'll have to tweak it to work with that)

[n5296s]

Just catching up with this thread... I agree 100% with IO540.

That said, I DO keep my E6B in my flight bag. Where else would I keep it? If I kept it anywhere else, I'd lose it. And it is very occasionally handy, for example to do IAS->TAS clalculations when sitting on the ground doing flight planning, or recently for litres->gals conversion when buying fuel in Mexico. It's kind of a neat gadget, just not much use in flight.

On the subject of winds aloft forecasts... when I flew back from Mexico last weekend, the forecast was for a nice 10-15 knot tailwind all the way up through California. Guess what? For the first half of the journey it wasn't there at all. For the second half it started to show up, then I was asked to climb from 10000' to 12000', and it turned into a 5 knot headwind - which was quite a surprise. When I got back down to 10000' I had the tailwind again. Odd. But anyway, if I had a flight plan and was expecting to keep within 3 mins on a 3 hour flight based on that kind of winds aloft discrepancy, it would be pretty hopeless.

n5296s

[tjfly]

The Nexus 1 uses the latest Android v2.1 release, but I've been writing the app to work with v1.6 and above.
(Although I've since realised there are more phones still running v1.5 than I thought, so I'll have to tweak it to work with that)


I would be interested in that. I use a Magic with 1.6, might get a 2.1 upgrade? I dont know, but the shots of it so far look great.

[FlyingOfficerKite]

No sooner did I suggest that The current situation where no approved training syllabus is available leaves the knowledge imparted open to variation and level of completeness.
than a leaflet popped out of my GASCo/CHIRP publications, just received in the post, entitled 'Using GPS in Aircraft for Visual Navigation - A syllabus for training, published by the Royal Institute of Navigation.

This is the first 'official' training syllabus I have seen and must be a step in the right direction.

KR

FOK

[douglas.lindsay]

Well, I last used my wheel today... when I PASSED MY PPL SKILLS TEST! (ok, I know, thread is about using it after you've got the license but I had to tell somebody :))

[Shiner Pilot]

Bought mine in 1995,
Used it for PPL then again in 1999 for ATPL and last week for my FAA ATP. Only this time I had no idea how to use it!
I just stared at it for an hour in my hotel room in Houston, thought bugger this and went to the bar...
Any Questions?

SP

[Hugh_Jarse]

It's an invaluable tool, and I'd never fly without mine.

There is no finer tool for whacking a bug climbing around the windscreen : the square bit is excellent for scraping ice off various surfaces : and (holding the square bit) it's great for cutting the pizza sat on the PAX seat.

I also used it recently when trying to fix my position following an electrical failure, and it was fine : although I was surprised to have reached Edinburgh from Elstree only 25 mins after departure, the whizz wheel showed me that I had 200kt tailwinds, so I suppose that accounts for it ...

People have suggested to me that I should upgrade to some sort of electric planning tool. I rang the nice people at GASIL to ask their opinion, and spoke to someone called Commodore Air Vice Marshall (retd) "Dusty" Miller. It took me a while to explain my question to Dusty, but just before they came to take him back to his room he got the hang of it. He said that he supposed we have to move with the times, although he couldn't quite understand exactly how the battery-operated whizz wheel could be any better than the "trusty" manual one ... fair point I suppose ....

[IO540]

Some people on this thread clearly have no respect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtsey) for proper traditional authority.

Society has truly gone to the dogs (http://www.usingenglish.com/reference/idioms/gone+to+the+dogs.html).

We need another world war, to return some kind of proper deferential culture.

[Hugh_Jarse]

Yes, Dusty mentioned all that as well, before barking "where's that damned filly with m'tiffin ?" ....

[mikehallam]

I have carried mine around plus 1/2 mill chart, chinagraph, rule & protractor in my bag since 1970. Makes a basic nav kit.
Never has a flat battery, never needs re-booting.
It's hardly ever used, but always there ready to go -could be a good luck charm ?

mike.

[Flyting]

Found this today:
International Slide Rule Museum (http://www.sliderulemuseum.com/)
has all the oooooold slide/circular/etc rulers with manuals to download

[IO540]

Excellent site :ok:

About time somebody did a "tribute to the slide rule" - like you get tribute bands for Elvis Presley, Beach Boys, Barry Manilow, all the great classics of the 1960s and 70s. Great stuff.