PPL conversion from EFT
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Waddo
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EFT conversion to PPL
Ol,
If you are still hanging onto your thread, whilst others are having a good old bun fight as to how best one should nav from A to B, may I suggest that you give us a bell at Waddo Flying Club; we have "converted" many EFT studes at minimum cost and to the highest of standards!!!
Regards
PS - Daltons? MDR?? whats wrong with Jeppson F Star guys!! 2006!!
If you are still hanging onto your thread, whilst others are having a good old bun fight as to how best one should nav from A to B, may I suggest that you give us a bell at Waddo Flying Club; we have "converted" many EFT studes at minimum cost and to the highest of standards!!!
Regards
PS - Daltons? MDR?? whats wrong with Jeppson F Star guys!! 2006!!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Not at home as usual
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm currently instructing on one of our new spangly EFT Sqns. We teach MDR to include a timing error correction per minute and also teach to fly at TAS above 2000ft. If they subsequently don't use it, it's because they're lazy and clearly haven't been beaten enough. These techniques work just as well as a Dalton computer because when the wind isn't as advertised they can easily adjust their calculations accordingly whilst keeping their head out of the cockpit.
Now back to beating more students.
Now back to beating more students.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Up there somewhere
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can see where Beags is coming from. Not all UAS studes learn/are taught the early late scneario/ground speed MDR and therefore would be unable to apply it to sucessfully complete the PPL nav to the accuracy required and gained by the Dalton comp. I have seen the 'ballpark' teach used a lot (If you are in the right ballpark, you are fine - what defines the ballpark however....!)
I learned first on the Dalton (PPL) and then learnt MDR (on the UAS). I much prefer MDR, however that is possibly because I am able to apply the GS calculations to adjust arrival times for the next event. It is even easier when you are tall enough to sneak a look at the GPS
I learned first on the Dalton (PPL) and then learnt MDR (on the UAS). I much prefer MDR, however that is possibly because I am able to apply the GS calculations to adjust arrival times for the next event. It is even easier when you are tall enough to sneak a look at the GPS
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: on my own planet
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beags, would I be correct if I assumed that PPL students are taught to apply MDR techniques to the Dalton Confuser headings/times?
Perhaps the difference between PPL and EFT navigation techniques derive from the differing situations the pilot will be in at the end of each course. PPL will want to fly around the country for pleasure etc, EFT will be progressing to new, faster, more complex aircraft where, at least on some types, flying per se is a minimal part of the job, it is operating the aircraft where the focus lies. On these type of aircraft, navigation is done by a computer, allowing the pilot (crew) to concentrate on operating.
JMHO
Perhaps the difference between PPL and EFT navigation techniques derive from the differing situations the pilot will be in at the end of each course. PPL will want to fly around the country for pleasure etc, EFT will be progressing to new, faster, more complex aircraft where, at least on some types, flying per se is a minimal part of the job, it is operating the aircraft where the focus lies. On these type of aircraft, navigation is done by a computer, allowing the pilot (crew) to concentrate on operating.
JMHO
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: shrewsbury
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having originally been taught to nav plan using the whirly wheel, I subsequently was converted to the MDR technique.
Having taught more students than I care to mention using both methods I can say this.
1. Both techniques work well providing the forecast wind is reasonably accurate.
2. If the wind is not as forecast then I find that MDR students can work out a sensible correction very quickly because they seem to be in a better mental mode. The same applies for unplanned diversions.
3. MDR students, on the whole, seem to have far more time to devote to lookout and are ahead of the aeroplane.
4. MDR students seem to sweat a lot less.
I am not trying to say BEags is wrong (perish the thought), this is just a comparison based on my own experience. The MDR technique is amazingly accurate even at 90kts in the mighty Vigilant.
The Dalton is not dead. Students should learn both techniques in my opinion. As I hope BEags will agree, the most important aspect of any Navex is in the planning, whichever method is used. Any stude who mentally flies the route before the wheels leave the ground rarely gets uncertain of their position.
Having taught more students than I care to mention using both methods I can say this.
1. Both techniques work well providing the forecast wind is reasonably accurate.
2. If the wind is not as forecast then I find that MDR students can work out a sensible correction very quickly because they seem to be in a better mental mode. The same applies for unplanned diversions.
3. MDR students, on the whole, seem to have far more time to devote to lookout and are ahead of the aeroplane.
4. MDR students seem to sweat a lot less.
I am not trying to say BEags is wrong (perish the thought), this is just a comparison based on my own experience. The MDR technique is amazingly accurate even at 90kts in the mighty Vigilant.
The Dalton is not dead. Students should learn both techniques in my opinion. As I hope BEags will agree, the most important aspect of any Navex is in the planning, whichever method is used. Any stude who mentally flies the route before the wheels leave the ground rarely gets uncertain of their position.
Well, in part I agree with some of the last posts.
Basically, I am all in favour of the excellent MDR techniques being used for in flight corrections and diversions. But for pre-flight planning, to me it seems sensible to minimise the sources of error before you strap the aircraft to your bum. By a few minutes of proper planning.
Whether you use a whizz-wheel or its electronic sibling, throwing the wind/temp onto a pre-planned track and IAS to obtain Hdg and G/S does not take that long. Probably less time than another coffee or leafing through GQ...unless it features Keira Knightley, that is...
(Assuming that you're still allowed to do that unless the PC-nazis have banned it? 'twas Mayfair in my day.......
)
Get rid of as many errors as you can pre-departure, then amend for in-flight factors whether they happen to be caused by lying MetOs, inaccurate flying, the Flying Prevention Branch, avoiding the bounce or whatever.
Isn't that reasonable?
OK - Keira Knightley again:
Basically, I am all in favour of the excellent MDR techniques being used for in flight corrections and diversions. But for pre-flight planning, to me it seems sensible to minimise the sources of error before you strap the aircraft to your bum. By a few minutes of proper planning.
Whether you use a whizz-wheel or its electronic sibling, throwing the wind/temp onto a pre-planned track and IAS to obtain Hdg and G/S does not take that long. Probably less time than another coffee or leafing through GQ...unless it features Keira Knightley, that is...
(Assuming that you're still allowed to do that unless the PC-nazis have banned it? 'twas Mayfair in my day.......) Get rid of as many errors as you can pre-departure, then amend for in-flight factors whether they happen to be caused by lying MetOs, inaccurate flying, the Flying Prevention Branch, avoiding the bounce or whatever.
Isn't that reasonable?
OK - Keira Knightley again:
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beags,
I definitely agree with your sentiment about minimising errors before you get airborne, however, having recently been through the EFT course (DE not UAS) there seems to be a number of anomalies which prevent the keenest of students from doing so:
1. The Dalton is still taught on ground school, but even at this stage you are warned that you will never use it again in anger - why not either use it when you get to the flying or stop it completely and save the good old taxpayer a few bob.
2. At groundschool, Dalton and estimation methods for IAS/TAS conversions are taught, yet the unit where I did the course just flew 120 IAS on a route with planned 120 TAS timings. I queried this several times and was told the difference is negligible and not to worry!
Despite these things, I did get the feeling that although you are taught the most accurate techniques, you will not learn much about pilot nav if you have a pefect plan and fly it without ever being early/late or off track. Maybe some illustrious QFI can let us into a secret that we're supposed to get a bit lost to demonstrate our mental agility or something
Or is it just that once we leave the simple stuff behind it becomes more irrelevant so why spend so much time (relatively speaking).
And I definitely agree with the previous comments about map crawling. It may be that this has gone on with UAS studes, who do not get the benefit of ground school and the illustrious nav guru therein however myself and my course mates were certainly taught well enough to have the confidence to put the map away, fly accurately and look out. And some of the QFIs would have punched us anyway if we did otherwise
I definitely agree with your sentiment about minimising errors before you get airborne, however, having recently been through the EFT course (DE not UAS) there seems to be a number of anomalies which prevent the keenest of students from doing so:
1. The Dalton is still taught on ground school, but even at this stage you are warned that you will never use it again in anger - why not either use it when you get to the flying or stop it completely and save the good old taxpayer a few bob.
2. At groundschool, Dalton and estimation methods for IAS/TAS conversions are taught, yet the unit where I did the course just flew 120 IAS on a route with planned 120 TAS timings. I queried this several times and was told the difference is negligible and not to worry!
Despite these things, I did get the feeling that although you are taught the most accurate techniques, you will not learn much about pilot nav if you have a pefect plan and fly it without ever being early/late or off track. Maybe some illustrious QFI can let us into a secret that we're supposed to get a bit lost to demonstrate our mental agility or something
Or is it just that once we leave the simple stuff behind it becomes more irrelevant so why spend so much time (relatively speaking).
And I definitely agree with the previous comments about map crawling. It may be that this has gone on with UAS studes, who do not get the benefit of ground school and the illustrious nav guru therein
however myself and my course mates were certainly taught well enough to have the confidence to put the map away, fly accurately and look out. And some of the QFIs would have punched us anyway if we did otherwise
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back to topic
Almost forgot why i looked at this thread in the first place. 
The 2 exams required are programmed during pre-EFT groundschool if students wish to do them, so there is no cost and little extra time involved.
Post FHT, subject to ac and QFI availability, you are generally asked if you want to do the XC nav, so except Med/Flying Club Membership/Conversion there is no cost.
Amongst my colleagues and others I know elsewhere these is a very high take up rate. Even if someone is not going on to join a club and get the full licence, why not do the XC anyway as it's effectively a free trip and good experience as there is no solo landaway in the EFT syllabus.
The 2 exams required are programmed during pre-EFT groundschool if students wish to do them, so there is no cost and little extra time involved.
Post FHT, subject to ac and QFI availability, you are generally asked if you want to do the XC nav, so except Med/Flying Club Membership/Conversion there is no cost.
Amongst my colleagues and others I know elsewhere these is a very high take up rate. Even if someone is not going on to join a club and get the full licence, why not do the XC anyway as it's effectively a free trip and good experience as there is no solo landaway in the EFT syllabus.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Using pre-Nov 2000 flying hours
Has anyone managed to use Bulldog hours towards a PPL? I know I can use them at an FTO (like CABAIR etc) but has anyone used them at a small Service club? In the rules it says you can use them at a "registered facility of approved FTO" (worded EXACTLY like that). Which means big FTO only. I think it should say "registered facility or approved FTO" which would mean I could use it at a small cheap Service flying club.
Yes, you can certainly do the required training at a Service Flying Club.
I have replied rather more comprehensively to your other post on the subject in another thread.
I have replied rather more comprehensively to your other post on the subject in another thread.
