The Wizwheel, time to say good bye?
hfd - we will probably need a list of 'approved clients' to keep site-plod happy. MAC-address flitering is hardly very difficult and gives us the association proof we might one day need.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: South Norfolk, England
Age: 58
Posts: 1,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blimey ... I'm only 40 but feel old when I hear about all this about outdated navigation, aeroplanes, engines, ect ect ... yadda yadda yawn yawn! Just as much as IO540 gets frustrated with all the knocking of new thinking, I get frustrated with all the knocking of traditional stuff! (Bloody hell, flying was only 60 years old when I was born "how long has man been around"?)
The whizz wheel for all it's draw backs is essentially a very accurate and clever bit of kit. Run down the batteries, throw in some nasty atmospherics or even a dodgy time in the middle east, and all of a sudden that GPS isn't as good as you thought (but the whizz wheel still works!).
Perhaps I'm IO540's nemisis, but I'm sure if we met, we'd probably get on well. Why? we both love flying ... but maybe from entirely different ends of the spectrum. I'm sorry IO540 but you sometimes make me boil with all your "Let's drag flying into the 20st century" stuff (you may not have noticed but the 20th century has passed BTW). Lot's of what you say in subsequent posts makes a lot of sense ... but that first post was simply a virtual copy of numerous knocks of "traditional" flying you have made in other forums over the last year or so! Sorry, I digress ...
Yep, I'm kind of a traditionalist. I like to fly open cockpit, slow draggy (but fun) airframes around the sky. I've been flying years, but have relatively few hours cos I'm not made of money, and funnily enough having said all that I have, I rarely use the whizz wheel. Most of my nav is ... draw a line on the map, mark in a big arrow showing wind direction and speed and then play it by ear. Yikes! .... but (so far) I've never been lost and find I'm rarely far out.
My point is (in the most protacted and round about way) that there are no hard and fast rules. I still think you should learn about the whizz wheel, as it teaches the fundamentals and it's then there if you want to carry on using it. If you later want to embrace or enhance your nav with modern aids then great, but why sacrifice the basics to do this? Don't be suckered into thinking that more and more money thrown at a problem will fix it ... there are many out there who want to fly, navigate and challenge their brains, rather than just burn money on flash, fast kit and a big pointy thing that takes away all the brain effort.
SS
PS ... Shhhhh! Just set myself up with a PDA and GPS as I had to have the former for work. Show's I'm not a complete luddite ... but perhaps just a slight hippocrate
The whizz wheel for all it's draw backs is essentially a very accurate and clever bit of kit. Run down the batteries, throw in some nasty atmospherics or even a dodgy time in the middle east, and all of a sudden that GPS isn't as good as you thought (but the whizz wheel still works!).
Perhaps I'm IO540's nemisis, but I'm sure if we met, we'd probably get on well. Why? we both love flying ... but maybe from entirely different ends of the spectrum. I'm sorry IO540 but you sometimes make me boil with all your "Let's drag flying into the 20st century" stuff (you may not have noticed but the 20th century has passed BTW). Lot's of what you say in subsequent posts makes a lot of sense ... but that first post was simply a virtual copy of numerous knocks of "traditional" flying you have made in other forums over the last year or so! Sorry, I digress ...
Yep, I'm kind of a traditionalist. I like to fly open cockpit, slow draggy (but fun) airframes around the sky. I've been flying years, but have relatively few hours cos I'm not made of money, and funnily enough having said all that I have, I rarely use the whizz wheel. Most of my nav is ... draw a line on the map, mark in a big arrow showing wind direction and speed and then play it by ear. Yikes! .... but (so far) I've never been lost and find I'm rarely far out.
My point is (in the most protacted and round about way) that there are no hard and fast rules. I still think you should learn about the whizz wheel, as it teaches the fundamentals and it's then there if you want to carry on using it. If you later want to embrace or enhance your nav with modern aids then great, but why sacrifice the basics to do this? Don't be suckered into thinking that more and more money thrown at a problem will fix it ... there are many out there who want to fly, navigate and challenge their brains, rather than just burn money on flash, fast kit and a big pointy thing that takes away all the brain effort.
SS
PS ... Shhhhh! Just set myself up with a PDA and GPS as I had to have the former for work. Show's I'm not a complete luddite ... but perhaps just a slight hippocrate
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beagle
IMHO there is only one reason to care who uses the access point: somebody downloading child porn, or transferring some other illegal material (e.g. posting something on pprune that is a breach of the Official Secrets Act
).
The flying club isn't going to be liable in such cases, any more than an internet cafe would be. Your liability starts only once you become notified of the alleged offence, and then you can do something about it. I doubt a flying club would be targeted; I count over 80 access points over a 10 mile drive with a PDA running Netstumbler and 2/3 of them are wide open, so some perv only has to drive another 100 yards.
Plain WEP security, with the password written openly on the club notice board, would do just fine.
shortstripper
I am sure we would get on just fine There is a place for everybody in GA.
However I fundamentally disagree that the circular slide rule is a useful teaching aid for anything whatsoever.
The slide rule has two sides.
One side is a conventional slide rule, as was used by all real engineers for mult/div throughout the first half of the 20th century. It also just happens to have supposedly handy markings on it for common conversions e.g. 0.72kg=1 litre of avgas, but nearly all people that use it don't know this. They never used a slide rule so don't know this and really believe it is a dedicated aviation converter of some sort. In this context, any pocket calculator is vastly better, and most people have those coming out of their ears, and they don't stop working when the Americans drop a load of bombs in the Midle East.
The other side is a specialised calculator for solving the wind triangle. It's accurate to better than 1 degree. But as with all computers, garbage in = garbage out. Do you know the typical error in the Form 214 today? I give you a challenge: Pick any day when there is any significant wind at say 5000ft (most days in the UK), get up there (with a GPS, no other way practical to do it) and measure the actual wind. Then apply the F214 error to the calculation done with the slide rule. How much better or worse would a simple rule of thumb (e.g. max drift = 1/2 the wind, at typical spamcan speeds) be? I think you would be suprised. On the average day, the accuracy of the slide rule is totally wasted.
The other crucial point is that always flies a heading, even if using a GPS. This facilitates a fallback toother nav methods. I had to do that once, for 2 minutes, off Italy, in 5 years of flying with GPS.
IMHO there is only one reason to care who uses the access point: somebody downloading child porn, or transferring some other illegal material (e.g. posting something on pprune that is a breach of the Official Secrets Act
).The flying club isn't going to be liable in such cases, any more than an internet cafe would be. Your liability starts only once you become notified of the alleged offence, and then you can do something about it. I doubt a flying club would be targeted; I count over 80 access points over a 10 mile drive with a PDA running Netstumbler and 2/3 of them are wide open, so some perv only has to drive another 100 yards.
Plain WEP security, with the password written openly on the club notice board, would do just fine.
shortstripper
I am sure we would get on just fine
There is a place for everybody in GA. However I fundamentally disagree that the circular slide rule is a useful teaching aid for anything whatsoever.
The slide rule has two sides.
One side is a conventional slide rule, as was used by all real engineers for mult/div throughout the first half of the 20th century. It also just happens to have supposedly handy markings on it for common conversions e.g. 0.72kg=1 litre of avgas, but nearly all people that use it don't know this. They never used a slide rule so don't know this and really believe it is a dedicated aviation converter of some sort. In this context, any pocket calculator is vastly better, and most people have those coming out of their ears, and they don't stop working when the Americans drop a load of bombs in the Midle East.
The other side is a specialised calculator for solving the wind triangle. It's accurate to better than 1 degree. But as with all computers, garbage in = garbage out. Do you know the typical error in the Form 214 today? I give you a challenge: Pick any day when there is any significant wind at say 5000ft (most days in the UK), get up there (with a GPS, no other way practical to do it) and measure the actual wind. Then apply the F214 error to the calculation done with the slide rule. How much better or worse would a simple rule of thumb (e.g. max drift = 1/2 the wind, at typical spamcan speeds) be? I think you would be suprised. On the average day, the accuracy of the slide rule is totally wasted.
The other crucial point is that always flies a heading, even if using a GPS. This facilitates a fallback toother nav methods. I had to do that once, for 2 minutes, off Italy, in 5 years of flying with GPS.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Scottish Highlands
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Electronic whizwheel
Quick question for any FIs in here (or anyone in the know).. I'm still in training and have been using a whizwheel for all my calculations. I know electronic computers are far quicker and easier to use as I've used one too.
Can they be used in JAR-PPL exams as an alternative to the manual CRP whizwheels? I know they can be used in FAA/Canadian exams.
Cheers!
Can they be used in JAR-PPL exams as an alternative to the manual CRP whizwheels? I know they can be used in FAA/Canadian exams.
Cheers!
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by FlyingArab
Can they be used in JAR-PPL exams as an alternative to the manual CRP whizwheels?
----------
Originally Posted by IO540
get up there (with a GPS, no other way practical to do it) and measure the actual wind
While I have no real problem with people who promote modern gadgets, I do have to draw the line at people who clearly can not do anything without them.
Regards,
DFC
TightYorksherMan
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Peak District
Age: 41
Posts: 1,570
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do like using my whiz wheel for wind calculations and groundspeed, however when working out, distance, speed and time I prefer the good old calculator or tappy tappy as referred to by my Gen Nav teacher!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Scottish Highlands
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
whizwheel
The dyslexics among us (including myself) find the manual CRPs very tedious and hard to use. I made right fool of myself the other day by rounding 11.5 to 8!!!!!! I've been doing really well (so I'm told) and progressing fast although I can't/never have trusted myself with maths. I always need to get things cross checked with someone else.. and usually find I've messed up. 
IO540: One side is a conventional slide rule, as was used by all real engineers for mult/div throughout the first half of the 20th century.
A slide rule is an excellent tool (and the CAA require that we teach it, so we teach it) but it requires an ability to estimate and many people do seem to struggle. Personally I would prefer to keep it in the syllabus but I'd rather be a flying instructor than a maths teacher so maybe we need to recognise that society has changed and it's time to allow it to fade away.
The vector triangle solver is great but MDR can be just as accurate and is more suitable for airborne use - so why not use it on the ground too.
HFD
I'm a great advocate of the three drift wind method myself. Especially over the sea. Used to get a black eye from the rubber padding on the drift sight. Showed you were a true old salt, though. Sea - old salt - joke - gettitt?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd love to see a public statement from the CAA explaining the need for the slide rule, over an electronic version.
This is for ground use after all - nobody is expected to use it in the air.
This is for ground use after all - nobody is expected to use it in the air.
I agree entirely. Or even an on-line planning tool. Pre-flight planning doesn't have to be difficult to be completed correctly - and advantage should be taken of modern technology as a safety enhancement.
Another thing I really disagree about is the CAA expecting people to try to remember all the factors to apply for t/o and ldg performance on grass etc in the PPL exams. When I used to instruct on 4-jets, I told folk never to try to remember the various degrades to be applied for 'contaminated runways' - ALWAYS use the book. The CAA produces Safety Sense 7 which lists all such safety factors - but students aren't permitted to use it in their exam. Madness - and a very bad habit to develop.
Any pre-flight planning tool should be simple and easy to use. Because then people will actually use it.
Another thing I really disagree about is the CAA expecting people to try to remember all the factors to apply for t/o and ldg performance on grass etc in the PPL exams. When I used to instruct on 4-jets, I told folk never to try to remember the various degrades to be applied for 'contaminated runways' - ALWAYS use the book. The CAA produces Safety Sense 7 which lists all such safety factors - but students aren't permitted to use it in their exam. Madness - and a very bad habit to develop.
Any pre-flight planning tool should be simple and easy to use. Because then people will actually use it.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: england
Posts: 385
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry but I disagree , being a PPL of a massive 75 hrs,and not having used all the new fangled-fly-the-plane-down-the-line GPS stuff, I can see exactly why the whizz wheel is taught. Firstly, it gives a good appreciation of the triangle of velocitys, crosswinds on runways etc, and many of the other calculations used in flying 
It also gets your brain working, and by the very fact that it is an accurate guessing device, you automatically double-check yourself when you get an answer. I know that you should when using an electronic device as well, but I don't think anyone can say they have never just taken the answer off the screen as correct? 
. As with everything, the whizz wheel has its place, just as GPS units do, and as far as i'm concerned is an invaluble and simple (once learnt) bit of kit that should be used
, being a PPL of a massive 75 hrs,and not having used all the new fangled-fly-the-plane-down-the-line GPS stuff, I can see exactly why the whizz wheel is taught. Firstly, it gives a good appreciation of the triangle of velocitys, crosswinds on runways etc, and many of the other calculations used in flying It also gets your brain working, and by the very fact that it is an accurate guessing device, you automatically double-check yourself when you get an answer. I know that you should when using an electronic device as well, but I don't think anyone can say they have never just taken the answer off the screen as correct? . As with everything, the whizz wheel has its place, just as GPS units do, and as far as i'm concerned is an invaluble and simple (once learnt) bit of kit that should be used
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
The same argument happened in the 1970s when pocket and scientific calculators came into fashion. It's certainly sound policy to ensure that the user knows the basis of the caculation in order to understand it and to prevent "rubbish in = rubbish out".
Once the user knows his stuff, why indeed not use modern technology to assist him most of the time? After all, I would never deliberately switch the engine off the engine of my moped unless I wanted to keep my leg muscles in trim.....
I'm firmly of the opinion that the more spare brain cells a pilot can find himself, the better he can think ahead, look out and be a safer flyer.
There is only one real answer...
Coupled FMS (GPS and multiple DME inputs) and a colour moving map with 1:1,000,000 to 1:50,000 zoom facility.
It's magic.
Once the user knows his stuff, why indeed not use modern technology to assist him most of the time? After all, I would never deliberately switch the engine off the engine of my moped unless I wanted to keep my leg muscles in trim.....
I'm firmly of the opinion that the more spare brain cells a pilot can find himself, the better he can think ahead, look out and be a safer flyer.
There is only one real answer...
Coupled FMS (GPS and multiple DME inputs) and a colour moving map with 1:1,000,000 to 1:50,000 zoom facility.
It's magic.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am reliably informed that this same argument was done to death, and eventually killed comprehensively, in sailing.
And in sailing, one likely has a nice big table on which one can (weather permitting) put down a cup of tea, and on which one can spread the charts.
Whereas in aviation, one cannot even use the circular slide rule when airborne. It's purely a ground based torture item, to separate the men who are fit for the privileged Masonic Lodge called "aviation"
from those who obviously are not worthy of it.
Unless you have an autopilot, and if you have one of those then calculating wind drift is the last thing you will need to be doing
There really isn't an objective and rational argument for it anymore, and hasn't been for about 30 years.
And in sailing, one likely has a nice big table on which one can (weather permitting) put down a cup of tea, and on which one can spread the charts.
Whereas in aviation, one cannot even use the circular slide rule when airborne. It's purely a ground based torture item, to separate the men who are fit for the privileged Masonic Lodge called "aviation"
from those who obviously are not worthy of it. Unless you have an autopilot, and if you have one of those then calculating wind drift is the last thing you will need to be doing
There really isn't an objective and rational argument for it anymore, and hasn't been for about 30 years.
