Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Flying Instructors & Examiners
Reload this Page >

Examiners: items for in flight diversion

Flying Instructors & Examiners A place for instructors to communicate with one another because some of them get a bit tired of the attitude that instructing is the lowest form of aviation, as seems to prevail on some of the other forums!

Examiners: items for in flight diversion

Old 5th Jul 2009, 22:22
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Harpenden
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
My examiner said he wanted to see a line on the chart and I was to get us to the destination.

The idea of trying to use a whizz wheel in a 150 with 2 POB is a bit scary, add in a bumpy ride in summer weather and I think you'd have a problem.

Try 'diversion Planning' by Martyn Smith. It's not the only method, possibly not the best thereis, but it's a system and it works.
Thirty06 is offline  
Old 5th Jul 2009, 23:17
  #22 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Using the whizz wheel in a 150 whilst doing an exam is most certainly doable although most awkward. Although if one was to draw a line, set a rough heading and trim correctly then I see no reason as to why a person could not use the CRP-5 to work out an accurate GS and use a plotter to get a more accurate heading and apply variation etc. should take no more than 45sec with the wheel.
redout is offline  
Old 6th Jul 2009, 06:08
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 6,583
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
I find it interesting that no one has mentioned the standard closing angle method of regaining track
The thread is about diversion technique not navigation technique but as you ask! This is a military method that works well for fast aircraft that have a good reason for staying on track. It can be difficult for some PPL students who may finish up flying a saw tooth pattern because they fail to correct properly, or may result in them getting further off track because they fail to turn back on after a 30 degree correction. They also forget to correct the timing. I have seen more problems with this method than advantages.

There is no requirement in the PPL test to regain track, only to navigate to the turning point.

Keep it simple! Remember you have got to teach the student how to do it.

Using the whizz wheel in a 150 whilst doing an exam is most certainly doable
And totally detrimental to LOOKOUT! As an Examiner that's not what I want to see!

Last edited by Whopity; 6th Jul 2009 at 06:19.
Whopity is offline  
Old 6th Jul 2009, 17:49
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Down south
Posts: 671
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Hi Whopity

I take it you are a PPL examiner. I am interested in your comments as I have heard several people say, including a senior examiner, that the standard closing angle method is now an expected method of VFR navigation as it gets the aircraft back on the planned track quickly rather than fly a 'new' track to the turning point.

I am not saying that I agree if it is better or not, but I am interested in current views re what method is expected, (if any)

Thanks
bingofuel is offline  
Old 6th Jul 2009, 18:23
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Bingo, I'm not so sure the CAA would be so prescriptive. They wouldn't endorse feature crawling but any of the other methods would probably meet with approval. For them to favour a particular technique may be seen as starting down the slippery sloe. What next - preference of wing-down to crabbing for crosswind landing? Or how about "point and power" over "power for flightpath, pitch for speed"?

See what I mean?
Cows getting bigger is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2009, 13:21
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Down south
Posts: 671
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Yes, I agree. Teach a student whatever method works for that student. However, I think the SCA reared its head a few years ago when nav was a major feature in test failure and it was put forward as the 'cure all' by some.
I am aware it is a military method, from CFS and had to be adapted to work at typical GA aircraft speeds, which in itself made me wonder about its suitability.
Personally, I would like to think that an examiner has the ability to understand several techniques and can test a student on their chosen method. As long as it is a 'method' and not feature crawling I see no reason why it should not be acceptable.
bingofuel is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2009, 14:37
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: notts
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Nav techniques

As an examiner it is clear to me that you must test on the basis of the recognisable navigation technique to be used and stated by the candidate prior to flying.

However i'm sure that the CAA Chief Examiner, Pat Lander has said (I cannot find the reference) that the preferred techniques were those that regained track. That makes sense to me taking into account the increasing number of airspace infringements made worse by the increasing allocation of controlled airspace of course.

NATS are complaining bitterly with regard to Stanstead infringments which occur not only but extensively along the western side where aircraft are sqeezed between Stanstead and Luton airspace. SCA techniques will be more likely to cause an infringement where the intended track allows little variation for a track made good and a revised closing angle track could be insufficient to remain clear.

The planned track must always be the best one.
homeguard is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2009, 15:53
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 6,583
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
I am interested in your comments as I have heard several people say, including a senior examiner, that the standard closing angle method is now an expected method of VFR navigation
Expected by who? It is certainly expected by those who teach it but it is not the CAAs job to prescribe methods. I have certainly taught at a school that prescribes SCA and so have seen many people use it. Its an excellent military technique but not suited to all so I prefer some of the simpler methods.

For the purpose of test, the candidate is required to demonstrate a method of navigation whereby the aircraft is flown using a series of headings deduced logically.
Whopity is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2009, 17:02
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Pat lander and regaining track

Homeguard, I vaguely recollect something similar. For the life of me I can't find a source document (good bit of Trainingcom refresher reading though )
Cows getting bigger is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.