Student Diversion

[chaders]

Whilst at work today monitoring 121.5 I heard a student who had become lost on a Navex. D&D handled it in a professional manner as always and steared him to Cranfield. I hope the young man made it down without incident.

[alex90]

Good to hear someone was taught well enough to be able to not only admit when lost, but also know the correct procedure to follow when lost. I heard it was a little misty / hazy in places, maybe not his time to go just yet... :)

[Piltdown Man]

This was a learning exercise with hopefully an excellent outcome. The student's actions are to be applauded. But the interesting question is how do we now teach people to become "un-lost?" I can't recall ever being taught or learning such a procedure. I've been "lost" quite a few times, like missing Australia by 90 miles and a planned landfall point by a similar amount on a different day. I even went to the wrong airfield on my CPL NAV test (& passed!) All without navaids or moving maps. So I was wondering how do we teach people nowadays?

PM

[Gertrude the Wombat]

how do we now teach people to become "un-lost?" I can't recall ever being taught or learning such a procedure.
There was one in my PPL text books (remember them? - bits of dead tree) ... and there's a procedure for getting un-lost in the club's flying order book which every renter has to read and sign every year.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Surely "lost procedure" is a standard part of nav? I certainly teach it, and have used it myself when, for example, doing long distance microlight trips and becoming temporarily uncertain of position.

G

[BEagle]

Traditional 'lost procedure' was fine and dandy in the days of Tiger Moths when there were few airways and even less controlled airspace about which to worry.

These days the best course of action is to admit to yourself that you're lost, then get on the radio and ask for help. Otherwise you stand every chance of becoming an infringement statistic in most of the UK.

The student diversion to Cranfield was a classic example of what people should be taught!

[tmmorris]

Indeed. And operating near to that bit of airspace myself, our club SOP is the same - get on the radio to D&D.

Doesn't D&D stand for distress and diversion?

[Gertrude the Wombat]

These days the best course of action is to admit to yourself that you're lost, then get on the radio and ask for help.Which is no doubt why the club's FOB includes (amongst other stuff)

If radio serviceable, call nearest suitable airfield with radar/VDF to obtain fix/QDM

...

If, after carrying out the procedure above with no success ...

Make a PAN call on emergency frequency 121.5 stating predicament
Personally if I lose the picture - and I can't be that lost, I knew where I was two minutes ago for heaven's sake! - I look around for a bit first before calling for help.

[stevelup]

If we were using appropriate technology and not teaching 18th century navigation techniques, no-one would ever get lost in the first place.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

If we were using appropriate technology and not teaching 18th century navigation techniques, no-one would ever get lost in the first place.

The danger there is that they'd be permanently lost, but the technology wouldn't be - if properly operated. Then one day the technology fails and.....

[Jonzarno]

........ You call D&D? :8

[DLT1939]

To answer the OP, yes he did get down safely. But we nearly met him without warning as we climbed away on a missed approach under a procedural service from Cranfield. It was about 15mins after sunset so perhaps that was the reason for the diversion.

[chaders]

To answer the OP, yes he did get down safely. But we nearly met him without warning as we climbed away on a missed approach under a procedural service from Cranfield. It was about 15mins after sunset so perhaps that was the reason for the diversion.

Ahh was it already twilight on the surface. I was up at 380 so still in the sun as it was unfolding. Glad he got down safely. Using D&D incase of getting lost was something I taught and practiced with all my students before letting them loose. Glad it worked out for him.

[mary meagher]

Eighteenth century navigation techniques work when your fancy gadgets let you down. But the 20th century radio is really nice to have when temporarily uncertain of your position near controlled airspace! The student in this case did exactly right, and got sorted. I've been there.

And once I was there flying IMC in the US, (with an Instrument Rating) Filed a flight plan, climbed up into the murk, viz about 20 feet all round, no problem, being followed on radar of course and separated from other traffic....except the radio went very quiet. too quiet.

This does get your attention. We are trained in case of radio failure to follow your flight plan, and everybody is in theory supposed to get out of your way. Except I can never remember which code to key into the transponder....

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Radio failure - 7600. Someone gave me a great way to remember that. Remember the song '76 trombones'?

Just visualise all those trombones blasting away.... but no-one can hear them!

[Maoraigh1]

7 5 taken alive. 7 6 in a fix. 7 7 going to heaven. FAA mnemonic???

[BigEndBob]

Something that doesn't get considered much is a student getting lost in the circuit (or anyone else!).
Years ago a student was asked to extend downwind to let a twin in first.
By the time the afiso said it was ok to turn base the student had completely lost site of the airfield. Twas a bit hazy.
Lucky to have VDF on site, the student was asked to call and given hdg's.

[foxmoth]

But the interesting question is how do we now teach people to become "un-lost?" I can't recall ever being taught or learning such a procedure

I would be surprised if a student was not taught basic lost procedure, whilst I would agree that a call to D&D is abvisable, Sod's law says that at some time those who rely on electronics will at some time have an electrical failure, at that point they not only get lost because the GPS has failed but they cannot call on the radio because that has failed as well, this is when having learnt the basics come into their own!:ok:

[malcolmf]

Which is why having a stand alone iPad is also a good idea!

[Whopity]

By the time the afiso said it was ok to turn base
Lucky to have VDF on site, the student was asked to call and given hdg's.AFISO acting as a Controller and using VDF; seems highly improper to me!
If we were using appropriate technology and not teaching 18th century navigation techniques, no-one would ever get lost in the first place. Appropriate trechnology involves using the bit between your ears, whikch unlike the plastic brain was around long before the 18th century!

[Big Pistons Forever]

Good on the student to use all the resources available to help himself. Too bad he did not have a GPS which would have instantaneously eliminated his positional uncertainty.......

I find it discouraging that the GPS vs traditional navigation always seems to be a binary argument. GPS can fail so never use it. Using GPS suddenly makes your brain mush and therefore you will be helpless if it ever fails

The fact is GPS systems provide the most accurate and most useful navigation information available. Not the least of which the nearest airport function can literally be a life saver.

The problem IMO is that instead of incorporating GPS in ab initio navigation along with traditional concepts we utterly ignore it. When I taught PPL's I included the use of GPS but with common sense strategies to both do a constant sanity check on what the box was saying and to keep track of your present position and what the heading required and TTE was.

So when my student is going to an airport North West of where he is now and the GPS says fly a heading of 260 he is going to say "hey that ain't right" . If the GPS fails then he is going to know that if he keeps flying the same heading he is going to be pretty close to his destination and since he was keeping track of his ETE he will know when he is getting close and since he always has the paper chart available and folded for his route of flight he can pick up landmarks to help maintain SA and his track.

I think is high time training moves into the 21 st century. Here is a news flash. PPL's are not stupid. After they graduate they will use the tools that work better, so why not teach them the best way to get the most out of their GPS, as well as prepare them for the pitfalls, as well as the advantages, of GPS as the primary means of getting from A to B

[foxmoth]

Whilst I agree that PPLs should be taught to use GPS I still believe they should know how to work without it and that is what the PPL syllabus currently does, allowing the GPS on all the nav trips does not help when it packs in, first learn to manage without it, then learn how to bring it in.

[Whopity]

Navigation is a skill, GPS may supliment that skill but is not a substitute for it. You could not learn to be a cabinet maker if you only use woodworking machines. Sadly, very few instructors teach students what to do with a GPS if it is fitted to the aircraft.

[Big Pistons Forever]

" GPS"...... first learn to manage without it, then learn how to bring it in.

Except training doesn't do the second part AT ALL. Instead we pretend that GPS doesn't exist and totally ignore it.:ugh:

One of the things I think a lot of people don't think about is why the "traditional" navigation system was developed.

When it was perfected there was no way to know your exact position in real time. So traditional navigation was designed for the case where you only occasionally knew where you were and yet still had to figure out where you had to go.

GPS completely eliminates the central driving force that traditional navigation methods were developed to overcome. With GPS you know within meters exactly where you are and your track and speed all the time.

The problem is that GPS creates new and different chalenges to safe navigation. all of which we by design refuse to teach to new pilots. How stupid is that. :rolleyes:

[abgd]

The problem is that GPS creates new and different chalenges to safe navigation.

After I got my PPL I bought an airspace aware. I turned it on. It screams at me whenever I'm about to infringe airspace. It shows me where I am at all times (except when it runs out of batteries) superimposed on the same map as I am using for navigation.

I still do my flight planning the traditional way. What am I missing?

[ChrisJ800]

My first solo to the Cranfield training area in the 80's as a teenager with maybe 10 hours total time (glider conversion) I got temporarily uncertain of position, but we were trained to request a QDM so did so. Slight raised eyebrow from the CFI on landing as a few minutes over time, but no other consequence. If it happened today I would use my smart phone GPS first!

[foxmoth]

Except training doesn't do the second part AT ALL. Instead we pretend that GPS doesn't exist and totally ignore it.
I certainly agree it should be part of the training, but there is nothing to prevent a student from asking to be taught this, in fact quite a good lesson to do while waiting for the licence to come through the post.

[TopBunk]

Which code to set?

I use HRM (Her Royal Majesty) as a reminder.

In sequence 7500,7600, 7700.

H= Hijack
R = Radio
M= Mayday

Works for me

[Whopity]

With GPS you know within meters exactly where you are and your track and speed all the time.So why do we still use Waypoints?

[Big Pistons Forever]

So why do we still use Waypoints?

For exactly the same reason you use waypoints when navigating the traditional way.

[Crash one]

Whopity

With GPS you know within meters exactly where you are and your track and speed all the time.

So why do we still use Waypoints?


If the GPS route planner allowed the input of bendy lines to avoid airspace DAs etc you wouldn't need to.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

It screams at me whenever I'm about to infringe airspace.
The G1000 does that.

It screams at you if you're ten minutes away from busting airspace.

Which means that over southern England it's pretty well always screaming at you.

Which means I ignore it.

Useful, eh?

[RatherBeFlying]

If you don't begin navigation training with chart, compass and clock, the student will be naturally reluctant to invest effort once he's hooked on GPS magic.

Transits to and from the practice areas are a much neglected opportunity to plot a course on the chart and determine heading and ETA. By the time cross country comes up, the student would have it nailed:ok:

[Big Pistons Forever]

The G1000 does that.

It screams at you if you're ten minutes away from busting airspace.

Which means that over southern England it's pretty well always screaming at you.

Which means I ignore it.

Useful, eh?

I think you rather made my point. If the G 1000 is screaming at you then it is not set up properly. It is an extremely capable unit but there is a bit of an art getting it set to give you the right amount of the right kind of information at the right time.

To properly use the G 1000 system you need to be properly taught by some one who is not only technically smart but operationally smart too, so that the unit works for you, not the other way around.

Finally the G 1000 is an FMS optimized for IFR flight. It is not the best tool for VFR low level flying, one of the tablet apps is much better for this application.

Again this speaks to understanding the capabilities as well as the limitations of GPS navigators, something you could start to get in ab initio, but won't, thanks to institutional inertia and the over supply of Luddites in the training system.:ugh:

[flybymike]

So given the simple and highly intuitive GPS units and software programmes which are available these days, and the fact that they can still never the less significantly differ from one another in their method of planning input, set up and operation, what specific form of training is it suggested should be given for GPS use (specifically excluding anything which would in any event be covered in a conventional non GPS flight planning environment?)

[Big Pistons Forever]

, what specific form of training is it suggested should be given for GPS use (specifically excluding anything which would in any event be covered in a conventional non GPS flight planning environment?)

To properly use a GPS based navigation program you need a good SOP that will avoid the Gotcha's.

So in broad strokes.

!) What are my flight planning considerations for todays flight. These include weather, wind, terrain, airspace, alternate landing field; considerations ?

2) After considering point 1, what route do I want to plan before I get into the airplane ?

3) How am I going to enter that route, ie how will I use the flight plan function of the GPS navigator ?

4) How am I going to preflight the navigator, ie how will I ensure the database is current, the flight plan I loaded is sensible, the unit is functional (eg battery life ) ?

5) For non panel mounted units, how am I going to place it so that it is convenient but not a distraction ?

6) What presentation am I going to use. North Up ? track up ? What navigational information is most important to me and how is it displayed ?

7) In flight what system am I going to use to backup the GPS. A periodic PLOG entry ?, a tick mark on a paper map ?, a geographic reference that is going in the right direction ?


So with a bit of training we could develop good habits that leverages the navigational accuracy of GPS for safer flying, or just have new PPL's buy their first magic box and hit, Direct to enter :hmm:, minds blissfully unencumbered, by conscious effort on the part of flight training providers with any useful instruction :ugh:

[Simon T]

Out of interest, how do commercial pilots navigate?

We all trust our lives to them, one would have thought we'd be happy with their method?

Simon

[oggers]

Out of interest, how do commercial pilots navigate?

Local knowledge
Pilotage
DR
Radio aids
Handheld GPS
RNAV
Vectors and steers from ATC

Mainly.

[flybymike]

Big Pistons, dealing with the numbered items in your list in turn, I specifically asked what GPS training could be offered which would not be covered by conventional non GPS training.

1. These are normal flight planning considerations and not Specific to use of GPS.

2. So is this.

3. That will depend on each individual GPS unit. It is not realistic to train for the use of every conceivable type of unit.

4. Is it necessary to train for the blindingly obvious? (I.e don't take off with a flat battery in the GPS)

Not using out of date charts and data is part of normal flight planning as is ensuring a sensible flight plan.

5. Is it necessary to train someone where to place a portable unit in the cockpit? Different units and different cockpits will have different requirements which can only be assessed based on individual circumstances. Pilots must ultimately make their own minds up.

6. North up or track up is a personal choice and pilots and instructors will never agree on which is best. Which data to present on the screen is a good point but also often a matter of personal preference and the abilities of the individual unit itself. It is not possible to train for the use of all units.

7. This brings us back to normal non GPS flight planning again.

I don't decry navigation training in any way, but there is only so much specific training which can usefully be given for the use of GPS which would not have been covered in "normal" heading/distance/time/chart non GPS training. Pilots who have attentively taken on board normal navigation techniques should in most cases be perfectly capable of figuring out how to sensibly use a typical portable GPS unit using common sense and an instruction book. Complex built in aircraft specific systems like G1000 will obviously require specific software training whether by instruction manual. Face to face, video, simulator or whatever.

[abgd]

I would very much agree with flybymike. Anybody who is bright enough to plan and navigate a flight by hand should be able to teach themselves to use a handheld GPS, and any fool can see the value in one. The converse isn't true.

[foxmoth]

Out of interest, how do commercial pilots navigate?

Certainly in the Airbus I navigate by entering the route into the computer and allowing the autopilot to follow the magenta line, there are checks done to ensure that what I have entered is correct and we have a paper log to back it up.
What I also have though is the basic skills that, if all that failed I would still be able to work out where I was going - and that started with what I learnt during my PPL training!
To me there is no argument against GPS once you have learnt the basics, it is replacing the basics with GPS that I disagree with.

[flyems]

'ICE' is my reminder for the transponder:

7500 - 'I'nterference
7600 - 'C'ommunication
7700 - 'E'mergency

[Big Pistons Forever]

To me there is no argument against GPS once you have learnt the basics, it is replacing the basics with GPS that I disagree with.

That is the question reduced to a binary choice again. In PPL training GPS Bad ! anywhere, anytime, Basic nav GOOD ! all the time, everywhere :ugh:

I certainly never suggested that the basics not be taught first and I have not seen any other instructor say that either.

What I did say is rather than pretending GPS doesn't exist in the PPL course I think that it should be introduced after the basic concepts. Done properly it reinforces good navigational practices.

[foxmoth]

That is the question reduced to a binary choice again. In PPL training GPS Bad ! anywhere, anytime, Basic nav GOOD ! all the time, everywhere


Certainly NOT what I was saying, if you read my earlier posts I agreed with including GPS in PPL training.:bored: