IFR GPS??

[englishal]

Is GPS (obviously an IFR approved GPS receiver) approved for IFR operations in the UK or Europe yet, either en-route or approach...?

Cheers

[OzExpat]

Dunno about the UK or Europe but in this part of the world, it's approved as a primary means navaid for enroute use and a supplementary means navaid for approach. I don't think we've been going alone on this, so I guess it'll be much the same situation in most other parts of the planet.

[ShyTorque]

In UK the CAA still require ground based aids as primary nav equipment.

Not this new-fangled space stuff. It will never catch on..... :rolleyes:

[englishal]

Hmm..Yep I've flown IFR in the States using GPS, its great. Also great for making approaches, especially when coupled to the Autopilot ;)

Just wondered when / if the UK would catch up, would rather use GPS instead of NDBs any day ! I believe the US is going to stop using VORs in 2007....

Cheers

[Zeke]

Dont see why the CAA would be in any rush, its very hard to be out of range of ground based aids, and the conventional RNAV equipment works on VOR/DME.

[Squawk7777]

When are the authorities planning to introduce the "user fees" :mad: (I remember something about it during my ground school)

Does the ex-Soviet GPS (GLONSS??) still exist? If so, can civilians use it? :eek:

[ 03 December 2001: Message edited by: Squawk7777 ]

[Squawk7777]

... are there any GPS approaches in Europe? :eek:

[Julian]

I have flown GPS approaches in the US as well, you sit there wondering when you undertake your first one but after that...brilliant stuff!!

Come on CAA, about time had some - after all in the US the GPS approaches are only overlays on the old VOR approaches. Get upto spped boys!

Julian.

[OzExpat]

Squawk7777... the expression is GLONASS, so you were pretty close. Latest info I have is that there's a few of them left and there's a plan to get the whole constellation back into service. Plans exist to launch replacement SVs but I have forgotten the time frame described in the briefing I got on them last June!

The new generation GLONASS satellites will be more GPS friendly too, apparently. Not sure if this means it will be compatible wih the next generation of GPS equipment that the US plans to launch.

But there's also plans for a third full constellation. This one by the French. First launch is still some years away but it will also be GPS compatible. Clearly there are exciting times ahead. Maybe the good ol' UK CAA is merely "awaiting developments"? :eek:

[radeng]

I'm told that officially, there are still plans to introduce MLS (Microwave Landing System) although with the way GPS has developed, I cannot for the life of me see why. Could be that having got some frequencies allocated, they don't want to let them go even though they are not being used.

I remember the big fuss about which MLS system to go for - back when I was an apprentice in the 1960's - and as far as I'm aware, there's still only a very few installations.

[Squawk7777]

About MLS: I started a thread about it (MLS - dead or alive?), but only got a few answers. The latest I read about MLS is that Europe plans to keep them alive - as an alternative to GPS, since it is primarily a military installation.

The only "personal" problem I have with GPS is not the system itself, but the attitude of some people. I used to flight instruct quite a bit, and met a lot of people who did not want to learn NDBs and VORs. Since most receivers come with moving maps (ugh!) they don't really aid to situational awareness. Seems that GPS will allow idiots to fly... :rolleyes:

Sad days ahead? :eek:

[radeng]

My understanding is that the main manufacturers of the ground equipment were Wilcox in the US, but they pulled out sometime back, and there isn't an European manufacturer. I've heard that NATO have plans for it, but not being in the military side of electronics very much these days, I'm not up to date. Why the military should wanta non GPS system, other than to have a European option if the US decided to pull the plug for any reason, I don't know. But since real GPS substitution for ILS/MLS should be done with differential GPS, I'm not sure there's necessarily a problem. Anyway, when the European variation of GPS satellites go up in a few years, the argument just won't be there. Further, I would have thought that from a military viewpoint, a landing system capable of much faster provision in forward areas would have been advantageous.

MLS is probably one of the better kept secrets these days.....

[englishal]

Sqwark777,

Realistically though, why bother to learn NDBs and VORs, when a small hand held GPS unit WILL aid situational awareness (for the VFR pilot - how many of them get lost?). Even when flying IFR I always have the GPS switched on, it costs nothing, and one glance will tell me so much useful information, not least Ground speed. It is far more accurate than NDB / VOR navigation, and in my experience suffers far less down time - I have worked in an industry using GPS as a primary means of navigation for years, and have never seen it go down, at least not for more than a few seconds.

I think that during flight training, and especially instrument training, students should be taught the benefits of using GPS. Although VOR / NDB navigation is excellent, there will come a time (rapidly approaching I might add) when these nav aids will disappear, and GPS / GLONASS / EUROPS or whatever will become the substitute...

Cheers :)

[Julian]

777 - If your students dont want to leanr VO|R because they have bought themselves a GPS its down to you as the instructor to drum into them that they need to learn them. Try switching their GPS off on them and ask them to get back - that'll soon wake em up!

If they were doing the GPS approach into somewhere and it failed or more commonly if they dont get RAIM on the approach he is stuffed !!! He will end up falling back on another type of approach.

Julian.

[Bally Heck]

GPS is great. Problem is it is owned, operated, serviced, controlled and paid for by the USA. If we all become dependant on it then the USA has a foreign policy weapon second only to it's fleet of aircraft carriers. It puts George W or his successors in a win win situation if they want any other nation to toe their line.

A good triple IRS may be more expensive, but George can't touch it.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

SQUAWK7777:

I am puzzeled by a couple of your remarks.

What do you mean GPS allows idiots to fly?

And why do you think a moving map does not provide situational awareness?

Are you trying to convince us that the ADF and VOR provide better situational awareness and more precise navigational information?

Maybe we should throw away our computers and dig out our slide rules and really be accurate?

.............................................

:D The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no. :D

[Squawk7777]

Everybody hang on here...

I am NOT saying that GPS is bad etc., it is a great system and I use it every single time I fly. And it is much more accurate than NDB, VOR, DME/DME fixes etc. :p

About the situational awareness: I don't think that it "aids" to your situational awareness (s.a). I have had a few students when I used to flight instruct that soley relied on their GPS. When I switched it off in flight (IMC and VMC) I noticed a huge rise in "un-relaxation" (if there's such a word) etc. When I quizzed the students about their s.a. most of them took a long time to show me where they were. GPS displays your situatiuonal awareness, rather then letting your brain do the work...

It is kinda like teaching math. You could ask the same question: Why bother teaching doing math in your head or on the paper if you have got a calculator?

Well, you gotta know the basics and know how to apply them before you use a more advanced system, right?

About handheld GPS systems: They are great, no doubt about it, and most of them have probably more functions than a build-in unit. But seeing people relying soley on it, frightens me a bit :o

As you can read I am not really talking about would-be pro-pilots. I am talking about GA pilots here. At the end of the day, you don't want a small plane crossing your nose, because Mr. Bonanza forgot to charge the batteries of his GPS and is now totally lost...

About your comment "throwing our computers away and using old style-tools". What is wrong with that? I am not saying that we shouldn't use GPS. When I took the CAA ATPL NAV exams, I had to apply plotting (in 97 that was). Now, who in 1997 was still using plotting and DME/DME fixing etc.? You still have to know the basics...

At least I still kinda have an idea what to do, should the GPS fail when I am flying in the middle of nowhere.

But if GPS will be our sole navaid in a few years, I see a problem without having some back-up nav system, esp. for approaches

[ 04 December 2001: Message edited by: Squawk7777 ]

[Julian]

Anyone know if us 'Euros' are still intending to put our own GPS system in place? Or has it dies a death?

Julian.

[OzExpat]

Thought you all might like to know that, today, I got a bit of an update on GNSS implementation around the world. The European system, named Galileo, still seems to be on track. First SV to be launched around 2007.

Of even more interest to our UK friends, it seems that UK CAA is finally starting to come on board with GPS. They've been doing lots of their own R+D of late, just like every other responsible aviation regulator should do. They know that they're dragging the chain on GPS, but their interest has been sparked by the French Galileo project.

I may have more info in another 24 hours as I'll be at a major GNSS Implementation Team meeting here tomorrow. Will let you know if anything else comes out of it that will be of general interest.

Now then ... someone on this thread was asking about how it might be possible to get into trouble using GPS. It really IS very easy ... if you'd heard about all the incidents that I've heard, thru official channels, you might get some interest in using VORs, NDBs and DMEs as well as the old fashioned map ( :eek: ) from time to time.

[south coast]

gps...a life saver if you are flying in africa...was flying in the congo for the UN and it was all on gps...all the copper cabling had been stolen from nav aids...crazy part of the world, atc still ask you to call established on the localiser even though the vor/ils transmitter has not worked in 30 years....in africa gps is a no go item...well, almost!

[OzExpat]

Bally Heck... your statement ignores a major, fundamental reality. There are far more uses for GPS than just civil or even military aviation (and missile) use. The clock signals provide a very accurate time reference that is used in many different ways right around the world.

Indeed, the greatest user of GPS technology is US private enterprise. That is a very powerful lobby group so I believe it's very safe to say that George Dubya couldn't interfere with it, or use it to hold the rest of the world to ransom even if he wanted to. Likewise for the US DoD!

[OzExpat]

Bally... and I'm also gunna take issue with you about the triple IRS comment. Not only are they going out of fashion around the world, they will die completely with the advent of GPS receivers certified under TSO 146. This is a new standard and, as yet, no manufacturers have applied for certification under it, but it's only a matter of time.

You will ultimately find that a combination GPS/INS box is highly likely to satisfy all navigation requirements, without the need for ANY conventional navaids. It has been projected, by many GPS technology insiders, that such a box will end up so cheap that even private operators will have one.

Yes, this is all still a ways off yet, but it will happen because the aviation industry, as a whole, recognises the cost savings that will be possible. There will, therefore, be a whole new set of "basics" to learn. Meantime, yes, it's a good idea to keep up with the current basics because of the need to always have a back-up plan in case things turn to worms.

But the future, in regard to GPS/INS is closer than you might think. This, in turn, means that the future of IRS will likely be much shorter than you might hope.

[radeng]

A further advantage of moving to a GPS/INS with maybe differential GPS for real precision is that it will free up radio frequencies. Admittedly, nobody who has a frequency allocation ever wants to give it up - even if they're not using it! - but in the long term, that could have advantages all round - and doubtless the ITU would be happy to get some more spectrum available.

[englishal]

....differential GPS is not nescessary anymore as the selective availibility has been removed....unless you want sub 10m accuracy that is....

:)

[radeng]

Don't you need sub 10m accuracy for auto landings, though? Once you have that with differential GPS, surely you can get away without precision ILS?

[twistedenginestarter]

May I remind everyone that GPS is a wonderful thing but is only 98% reliable/available. Are you going to risk 240 fare-paying lives on that?

Other aids are prone to faults but their failures are isolated.

GPS is excellent as a non-critical aid but you are going to have to keep your VORs tuned in for the foreseeable future.

[OzExpat]

radeng... correct, but I heard something today that, if true, has the potential to kill the precision GPS concept above Cat 1 standard.

I will conveys the comments I heard, but bear in mind that I have not yet been able to confirm them...

It is said that George W Bush has stated that GPS will not achieve "sole means" usage status; AND
US airlines are hotly opposed to the FAA's beloved Wide Area Augmentation System (aka WAAS).


If GPS really won't ever meet "sole means" use criteria, the WAAS program is dead. If that dies, you'll still need ILS for Cat 2 and 3 approaches. If US airline companies don't want WAAS, they will be thrilled by the President's statement (if he made the statement a all, of course).

This will leave GPS as an enroute and non-precision navaid, without any other infrastructure, but maybe with a need to be linked to an INS for enroute long haul ops. GPS will be capable of Cat 1 precision approaches, but only with a Ground Based Augmentation System (aka GBAS). That could be a bit expensive for airports that only have two runways that are precision approach capable.

The cards could well and truly be in the air now but, like I said before, haven't been able to confirm it yet. Maybe someone else has heard something along these lines?

[englishal]

98% reliable is pretty good. How many times have you been given in NOTAMS that a nav-aid or two is down or the glide slope is out? or DME is U/S.....

[ShyTorque]

OzExpat,

With regard to the information you posted on 4 Dec!

If the UK CAA are going to rely on this proposed French system - I hope it's more reliable than their ATC and their cross-channel ferries!

"Sorry, mes amis, but today we are going on strike and we don't want you coming 'ere. Zut Alors! We will switch our GPS off so you cannot find us!"

:D

[OzExpat]

ShyT... a rumour has reached me about the French Galileo project too. Dunno how true this one is either but I'm told that the French are looking for money from other EU countries to fund the project. Seems that they aren't getting any takers tho, as most EU countries are happy enough with the free use of GPS, albeit somewhat limited at times.

If this is true, the Galileo project will be in some doubt. I'm told to expect a "major decision" on it from the French, sometime this month, or next. If it dies, I'm not sure where that will leave the UK CAA's efforts.

[Squawk7777]

Hey! I just came back from PMB. I talked to an AG Pilot up there and he told me that most AG planes are now GPS equipped. Apparently, they have an AG GPS that is MORE precise than an IFR GPS. Can't remember the make :rolleyes: (so much for my long-term memory)

Also the FAA requires this special kind of GPS for all airplanes that are engaged in fire-fighting.

I guess we have to salute those AG planes from now on... :D

[ 10 December 2001: Message edited by: Squawk7777 ]