Pilot Nav

[just another jocky]

Originally Posted by CoffmanStarter

Is AP3456 Vol 7 still in issue or is everything now "on-line" ?

Everything is online these days. As soon as anything is printed it is 'uncontrolled'. They do CD's of 3456 still I think.

[CoffmanStarter]

Thanks JAJ ... Sorry for being an irritant ... this was not my intention ... neither was I attempting to criticise current training methods. My original post was prompted by a genuine interest

I'll go and walk the dog now

Coff.

[BEagle]

For legs of <10mins in lengths, at speeds of 120kts, as long as you choose a decent waypoint, you can be considerably off heading and still not get lost. So it suffices for EFT.

Perhaps. But when applied to a 50 nm PPL Skill Test navigation leg at 90 KIAS, it simply isn't sufficiently accurate to achieve the required limits.

MDR drift calculation is a very necessary skill. But not for accurate ground speed calculation.

When we are in the business of minimising airspace busts, it is essential that all potential sources of pre-flight planning error are minimised, so that the only corrections needed in flight are for actual W/V change.

Leon Jabachjabicz, I concur!

[just another jocky]

@CS - no worries m8, not intended to insult anyone.

@BEags - and I agree that for a PPL, and a 50nm leg at 90KIAS, MDR would not be suitable. But for EFT, MDR is suitable.

[Lima Juliet]

JAJ

I have witnessed both ex-EFT and ex-UAS students struggling with UK/EASA PPL syllabi - they have also become better aviators from the experience. These guys/gals have 50-80 odd mil hours whereas the average civvy PPL stude achieves there UK PPL at ~45hrs (min 32hr course) and EASA at ~60hrs (min 45hr course) - what the hell are they teaching the mil studes!?

Your quote, to me, is quite revealing:

BEagle...for EFT, MDR is absolutely accurate enough, as long as it is calculated and applied correctly. For legs of <10mins in lengths, at speeds of 120kts, as long as you choose a decent waypoint, you can be considerably off heading and still not get lost. So it suffices for EFT. There are only just enough hours in the syllabus for the students to become adept enough at it to go solo. And I'd argue that it is much quicker than the method you propose in pre-flight planning. Takes 30 secs to MDR pre-flight plan - mean the winds off MOMIDS & write it on yr map. Calculations are done in the air.

All (?) front line ac now use integrated GPS/INS computer controlled nav solutions and as such, understanding the intricacies of those systems is surely far more important.

I cannot fathom, as a FJ mate with 1700-odd hours on LINS/GPS systems, how you are going to teach anything of use on Typhoon/Tornado with a Grob's 'system'. Surely, we don't want to build a cadre of HUD/LINS/GPS junkies and want to inculcate the basic skills that have lived with us throughout our flying careers - that has been the best thing about the T1 in recent years in that it has built capacity into our current cadre of jet jocks.

I used to find teaching the vagaries of the Tornado Main Computer and its systems a doddle to today's generation - computers are second nature, whereas whizz-wheels/maps/compass and 'feel' is not (IMHO).

Finally, I heard a horror story of a stude getting lost around Lincolnshire recently - leaving CWZ, only to bong off of CGY and then end up orbiting Humberside asking for help and delaying a commercial departure. Is this really the reputation that the RAF wants to have? No, Sir...

LJ

[Tiger16]

'Twas a decade ago when the powers-that-be told us, the few remaining SH navs, that our skills wouldn't be required in the new world order...

'Twas with some dismay, then, that last year I watched a formation of SH - scheduled for a day VFR trip in CAVOK conditions over familiar UK terrain - cancel their sortie because the No.2's GPS was u/s! To all those who've expressed concerns regarding the over-reliance of new aircrew on technology: you are, without a shadow of a doubt, 100% correct...

[just another jocky]

Leon...I don't have time now to make a point about yr post, except to say I disagree (and I have 3500hrs on the same ac ).

Sorry.