The Quality of your Instruction…
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bristol, UK
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WWW,
Would you be a 'grey-haired PPL instructor' then, as the mention of GPS seems to have brought you out in a nasty rash!
Maybe your fore-fathers were similarly opposed to the Spinning Jenny!!
Would you be a 'grey-haired PPL instructor' then, as the mention of GPS seems to have brought you out in a nasty rash!
Maybe your fore-fathers were similarly opposed to the Spinning Jenny!!
Shall we all have a hug now and go down the pub?
Much better than the semolina we so often get on Private Flying.
Stir, stir, stir...
Nah - I have a spanking 6 month old Garmin GPS PilotIII in my flightbag. Amazing piece of kit - much more accurate than the kit in the works motor.
But then I had over 1000 VFR hours logged before I bought it.
Mind you I did get lost on my CPL navex for about 10 minutes - mistook Huntigdon for St Ives as I recall. Happens to everyone.
Cheers
WWW
But then I had over 1000 VFR hours logged before I bought it.
Mind you I did get lost on my CPL navex for about 10 minutes - mistook Huntigdon for St Ives as I recall. Happens to everyone.
Cheers
WWW
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And go charging through controlled airspace with their noses firmly glued to a tiny GPS screen usually relaying data from a long out of date database
Actually, no, most high-time pilots use GPS and VOR/DME concurrently.
I don't know your occupation but your view is common among PPL instructors. Most of them rarely venture beyond the nearest folds in their chart.
Mind you I did get lost on my CPL navex for about 10 minutes - mistook Huntigdon for St Ives as I recall. Happens to everyone.
Actually, NO, it happens only if you've made a navigation error. (I never got lost on my QXC etc, but I did that in fantastic visibility and often in view of the coast and some massive land features.) The landmarks you mention did not change position. The trick is to navigate in a manner which makes an error (especially a GROSS error like you describe, in terms of distance bad enough to land someone in very serious trouble if they are close to CAS to start with) improbable. Visual navigation does not meet this requirement, because there is a variety of small and large errors which can easily be made.
Visual navigation is all that can be practically taught within a 45-hr PPL, given the condition of flying school planes and lack of equipment. But that is nothing to do with the fact that it is also the easiest way to get lost. As you found yourself.
I will accept someone having a go at GPS if used within the existing PPL training framework; there's really not a good place for it. But after that, everything changes.
Actually, no, most high-time pilots use GPS and VOR/DME concurrently.
I don't know your occupation but your view is common among PPL instructors. Most of them rarely venture beyond the nearest folds in their chart.
Mind you I did get lost on my CPL navex for about 10 minutes - mistook Huntigdon for St Ives as I recall. Happens to everyone.
Actually, NO, it happens only if you've made a navigation error. (I never got lost on my QXC etc, but I did that in fantastic visibility and often in view of the coast and some massive land features.) The landmarks you mention did not change position. The trick is to navigate in a manner which makes an error (especially a GROSS error like you describe, in terms of distance bad enough to land someone in very serious trouble if they are close to CAS to start with) improbable. Visual navigation does not meet this requirement, because there is a variety of small and large errors which can easily be made.
Visual navigation is all that can be practically taught within a 45-hr PPL, given the condition of flying school planes and lack of equipment. But that is nothing to do with the fact that it is also the easiest way to get lost. As you found yourself.
I will accept someone having a go at GPS if used within the existing PPL training framework; there's really not a good place for it. But after that, everything changes.
Last edited by IO540; 11th Oct 2003 at 00:27.
Maybe my view is common among PPL instructors. I'm also an IRI and airline pilot as it happens so its a view shared not exclusively in PPL schools.
Everyone gets lost from time to time and anyone who says they haven't is a liar.
I'm not saying basic use of VORDMENDB can't be taught in the 45hr course. I cover it all in two one hour sorties towards the end of the course usually under the umbrella of 'skilltest preparation'.
You've GOT to be able to confidently navigate without recourse to radio aids in my opinion. Handheld GPS can and does fail. It is jammed from time to time by the military. Radio aids do go inop.
Remember a B777 still has an e-type compass and a stopwatch. Boeing wouldn't put them there without a reason.
Cheers
WWW
Everyone gets lost from time to time and anyone who says they haven't is a liar.
I'm not saying basic use of VORDMENDB can't be taught in the 45hr course. I cover it all in two one hour sorties towards the end of the course usually under the umbrella of 'skilltest preparation'.
You've GOT to be able to confidently navigate without recourse to radio aids in my opinion. Handheld GPS can and does fail. It is jammed from time to time by the military. Radio aids do go inop.
Remember a B777 still has an e-type compass and a stopwatch. Boeing wouldn't put them there without a reason.
Cheers
WWW
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I disagree that you should NOT use Navaids at all. If its fitted, you should know how to use it. A GPS doesn't nescessarily lead to pilots bashing through CAS, in fact if its used right it will prevent this.
I agree that a student should NOT use a GPS in general cross country training flights, but if fitted they should know how to use them and when its pertinent to use them (ie when they get lost). This should be included in the instrumentation instruction which is required,and should be carried out before solo X/C's in my opinion. Get a Lat and Long of the display and draw your fix on the chart. Same goes for conventional navaids, find the radial, find a DME, draw the fix on the chart. Its pretty easy,most student pilots will have the nescessary brain power to do this.....In fact in the future its going to be essential for Private pilots to know how to use a GPS. Had a look in an OMF Symphony yesterday, lovely 2 seater modern 152 equivalent, its instrumentation consisted of twin Garmin 430's......
Cheers
EA
I agree that a student should NOT use a GPS in general cross country training flights, but if fitted they should know how to use them and when its pertinent to use them (ie when they get lost). This should be included in the instrumentation instruction which is required,and should be carried out before solo X/C's in my opinion. Get a Lat and Long of the display and draw your fix on the chart. Same goes for conventional navaids, find the radial, find a DME, draw the fix on the chart. Its pretty easy,most student pilots will have the nescessary brain power to do this.....In fact in the future its going to be essential for Private pilots to know how to use a GPS. Had a look in an OMF Symphony yesterday, lovely 2 seater modern 152 equivalent, its instrumentation consisted of twin Garmin 430's......
Cheers
EA
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Human nature being what it is, no basic training a/c should have GPS fitted. If you get lost or "temporarily unsure of your position" you should be able to get out of it without having to resort to modern technology. I don't agree that low time students should know every in and out before they go off on their own. The basics yes but there is enough for them to think about already.
I agree wholeheartedly with WWW that stude's should not go near a GPS until they have mastered maps.
IO540 the reason you get instructors jumping up and down about GPS (and I'm nowhere near being grey) is that it does degrade the basic skills, just read GASIL etc. for tales of people calling D&D because their GPS has failed.
Get the basics right and then we'll teach you how to put the cream on top. That's speaking as PPL, CPL instructor and IRI. If you 'aint got the first bit right you're wasting my time and YOUR money. Who would do circuits without doing climbing and descending first???
I agree wholeheartedly with WWW that stude's should not go near a GPS until they have mastered maps.
IO540 the reason you get instructors jumping up and down about GPS (and I'm nowhere near being grey) is that it does degrade the basic skills, just read GASIL etc. for tales of people calling D&D because their GPS has failed.
Get the basics right and then we'll teach you how to put the cream on top. That's speaking as PPL, CPL instructor and IRI. If you 'aint got the first bit right you're wasting my time and YOUR money. Who would do circuits without doing climbing and descending first???
If you show a student how to use the navaids prior to him completing his solo navexs then you don't ever know if the only thing getting him around was the navaids.
If he is using them he is cheating himself and setting himself up to fail the skilltest.
Even if he does know how to use them I don't like the idea of Bloggs being out in the open air for the first, second or third time with his head down, frown upon face, twiddling with the nav kit.
Its a recipe for spiral dive, stall or collision.
What he should be doing is drawing a circle and then following the Lost Procedure.
WWW
If he is using them he is cheating himself and setting himself up to fail the skilltest.
Even if he does know how to use them I don't like the idea of Bloggs being out in the open air for the first, second or third time with his head down, frown upon face, twiddling with the nav kit.
Its a recipe for spiral dive, stall or collision.
What he should be doing is drawing a circle and then following the Lost Procedure.
WWW
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Io
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No axe to grind, nobody to insult. Just to say I had several instructors - found it beneficial. I wasn't allowed to solo until I had passed Met' and Air Law. Wasn't allowed to go on my QXC until I had passed my R/T.
I was taught that go/ no go decisions were down to me. I waited seven months to go on my QXC. I religiously booked a triple slot each week and each week I didn't go because of bad wx. I would discuss the likelihood of my flight with my FI and the CFI. I'm glad I did it that way. The only downside was, I flew the route dual in September 02 and finally did it solo in April 03. During that time I had lost familiarity with the route.
I don't need to read between the lines of previous posts to know that I am not a natural born pilot, but I do feel that my school has enabled me to be a safe pilot. I am glad they applied the belt and braces approach with my training.
As for Radio Nav Aids; I didn't get taught to use them fully until after my QXC. Had I struggled I would have used 121.5 and looked for a diversion. I felt I had enough to concentrate on that day as it was.
I got my PPL in May 03 in a Robin HR200. I'm now converting to a Warrior and know that I have a lot to learn still.
That's my input.
Oh yes! I think WWW has made very good points, albeit in a slightly caustic and amusing way.
Hope the Moderator doesn't bin the thread. It makes a change from all things pink popping up all of the time
I was taught that go/ no go decisions were down to me. I waited seven months to go on my QXC. I religiously booked a triple slot each week and each week I didn't go because of bad wx. I would discuss the likelihood of my flight with my FI and the CFI. I'm glad I did it that way. The only downside was, I flew the route dual in September 02 and finally did it solo in April 03. During that time I had lost familiarity with the route.
I don't need to read between the lines of previous posts to know that I am not a natural born pilot, but I do feel that my school has enabled me to be a safe pilot. I am glad they applied the belt and braces approach with my training.
As for Radio Nav Aids; I didn't get taught to use them fully until after my QXC. Had I struggled I would have used 121.5 and looked for a diversion. I felt I had enough to concentrate on that day as it was.
I got my PPL in May 03 in a Robin HR200. I'm now converting to a Warrior and know that I have a lot to learn still.
That's my input.
Oh yes! I think WWW has made very good points, albeit in a slightly caustic and amusing way.
Hope the Moderator doesn't bin the thread. It makes a change from all things pink popping up all of the time
The Original Whirly
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't get all this. Are some of you really thinking clearly? What is this pink, semolina, etc rubbish people keep going on about? Anyone would think a normal thread on this forum consisted of little old ladies genteely agreeing with each other all the time. That's utter crap. There are some good discussions, even arguments. But they're usually conducted in an intelligent, logical fashion, and people usually have something to say. Or to put it another way, they argue with what people say; they don't put down the person. That didn't happen here. WWW criticised Phoenix because of what he'd said on another thread, because his experiences seemed unbelievable, and because he reminded WWW of a certain type of student. And some of you think that makes this into a good argument, that it's the way PPRuNe ought to be!!!!!!!!!!!! Well, my thoughts on that would certainly make BRL bin this thread.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WWW
Remember a B777 still has an e-type compass and a stopwatch. Boeing wouldn't put them there without a reason.
They are there because the FAA says so. Is there a failure mode on a 777 where you would lose ALL your navigation instruments (including radios) and still have enough electrically powered stuff left working to be able to fly and land the aircraft? And if so, how likely is it to happen?
SAS
IO540 the reason you get instructors jumping up and down about GPS (and I'm nowhere near being grey) is that it does degrade the basic skills, just read GASIL etc. for tales of people calling D&D because their GPS has failed.
I accept GPS cannot realistically be taught in the 45-hr PPL course. Especially as the average student takes 50-60hrs already, and many schools would not have the money to fit out their planes.
I do read GASIL for what it is worth, been to the CAA safety presentations, etc. These are mostly aimed at 10hr/year pilots flying WW2-equipped aircraft - probably the majority of the fatal accident statistics which is why the CAA and D&D plug away at the same stuff everywhere they go. If your GPS packs up you immediately fall back onto VOR/DME (which you've been using all along, concurrently). If you get a total electrical failure then you can't call 121.50 either, so you've got to carry a handheld radio, otherwise you better hope to either be in VMC or be able to descend into VMC above the MSA. I carry a handheld GPS and a handheld radio - as well as having all the stuff in the plane.
As regards ex-GPS D&D "customers", there will always be people getting lost doing heading/time/map navigation, getting lost wrongly doing VOR/DME, getting lost wrongly using a GPS. The only difference is that the first category is "OK" because they were doing it "the right way". There is no solution to the first one, other than many hours of practice and currency, and of course good visibility. The other 2 are usually silly procedural errors (flying 80 instead of 180 or creating duff user waypoints on a cheap GPS) which are easy to avoid if you use both systems.
None of this is rocket science.
Most instructors will always dislike GPS because of the above reasons, but it is a huge backward step to insist it should not be used afterwards.
Remember a B777 still has an e-type compass and a stopwatch. Boeing wouldn't put them there without a reason.
They are there because the FAA says so. Is there a failure mode on a 777 where you would lose ALL your navigation instruments (including radios) and still have enough electrically powered stuff left working to be able to fly and land the aircraft? And if so, how likely is it to happen?
SAS
IO540 the reason you get instructors jumping up and down about GPS (and I'm nowhere near being grey) is that it does degrade the basic skills, just read GASIL etc. for tales of people calling D&D because their GPS has failed.
I accept GPS cannot realistically be taught in the 45-hr PPL course. Especially as the average student takes 50-60hrs already, and many schools would not have the money to fit out their planes.
I do read GASIL for what it is worth, been to the CAA safety presentations, etc. These are mostly aimed at 10hr/year pilots flying WW2-equipped aircraft - probably the majority of the fatal accident statistics which is why the CAA and D&D plug away at the same stuff everywhere they go. If your GPS packs up you immediately fall back onto VOR/DME (which you've been using all along, concurrently). If you get a total electrical failure then you can't call 121.50 either, so you've got to carry a handheld radio, otherwise you better hope to either be in VMC or be able to descend into VMC above the MSA. I carry a handheld GPS and a handheld radio - as well as having all the stuff in the plane.
As regards ex-GPS D&D "customers", there will always be people getting lost doing heading/time/map navigation, getting lost wrongly doing VOR/DME, getting lost wrongly using a GPS. The only difference is that the first category is "OK" because they were doing it "the right way". There is no solution to the first one, other than many hours of practice and currency, and of course good visibility. The other 2 are usually silly procedural errors (flying 80 instead of 180 or creating duff user waypoints on a cheap GPS) which are easy to avoid if you use both systems.
None of this is rocket science.
Most instructors will always dislike GPS because of the above reasons, but it is a huge backward step to insist it should not be used afterwards.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IO540, it isn't that I dislike GPS, in fact I think it is a brilliant aid. A real revolution and I for one always have my trusty hand held some where in the a/c.
What I dislike is the over reliance on it. More often than not it has become the primary navigation tool. On more than one occasion I have had people say " I'm off to so and so" when I ask to see there PLOG "Oh it's alright, I've got my GPS."
As an aid it is unbeatable, but it is just that. It does drop out occasionally, usually when you need it most (sod's law).
I don't particularily like the way you say
These are not aimed at one group in particular, I learn something every time I read it, it may seem basic, but the same problems keep cropping up no matter what the experience level. Nobody is above learning.
One final thing, WWW is right, everybody knows the sinking feeling when you realise that you are lost. I have and every pilot I've ever been in contact has at some point, eventually it happens to us all despite(or because of!) the best efforts of technology.
What I dislike is the over reliance on it. More often than not it has become the primary navigation tool. On more than one occasion I have had people say " I'm off to so and so" when I ask to see there PLOG "Oh it's alright, I've got my GPS."
As an aid it is unbeatable, but it is just that. It does drop out occasionally, usually when you need it most (sod's law).
I don't particularily like the way you say
I do read GASIL for what it is worth, been to the CAA safety presentations, etc. These are mostly aimed at 10hr/year pilots flying WW2-equipped aircraft
One final thing, WWW is right, everybody knows the sinking feeling when you realise that you are lost. I have and every pilot I've ever been in contact has at some point, eventually it happens to us all despite(or because of!) the best efforts of technology.
Last edited by Say again s l o w l y; 11th Oct 2003 at 06:07.
Sub Judice Angel Lovegod
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London
Posts: 2,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have had a failure mode in an HS125 whereby the batteries went into series (which they should only do for engine start) thus putting 56v through everything that was expecting 28v. It took out nearly everything that was switched on at the time (including all three inverters, nearly all the avionics, and much else besides.)
I have no idea if such a thing could happen in a 747, but it certainly gave pause for thought on our flight deck.
Compasses and mechanical stopwatches are a good idea.
W
I have no idea if such a thing could happen in a 747, but it certainly gave pause for thought on our flight deck.
Compasses and mechanical stopwatches are a good idea.
W
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi folks,
Well this thread has got a few comments in it now! I have a few replies… It’s now the 11th; I’m answering posts from as far back as 7th!! Apologies.
FlyingForFun: 7/10
The concept of my being invited to consider a ‘go/no-go decision’ at that time was certainly not part of the picture of my tuition then. Perhaps it should have been! But I wasn’t at that level of confidence, and anyway I just wanted to fly. It takes me an hour to drive to this airfield, and once there I like to get in as much as I can.
Your other point about communications, yes I agree. It would certainly help me a lot if one Instructor knew what the other had been doing.
In Altissimus: 7/10
Wow, your first solo landaway and first navex was your QXC?! For whatever reasons, right or wrong, that’s impressive! My QXC was, though, my second solo navex, but my first solo landaway.
I am thinking again about the changing of schools. As I have said, I am going to talk to the CFI…
Wcollins: 7/10
Hear! hear!
Genghis the Engineer: 7/10
For my first solo navex (para #1 of my first posting) I had done none of the exams. For my QXC, I had Air Law but not the others you mentioned. And as I mentioned above, this CB stuff was no part of a go/no-go test. And as you say, even if it had been, the FI should have not let me fly.
Chipmunk2: 7/10
I think that’s the thing, isn’t it - one thinks that the Instructor knows better than the Student.
I am going to tackle the CFI about this. Personally I think he has to bear some of the blame - after all the tuition is supposed to be under his overall direction, I assume. As for the CAA, I will wait to see the outcome of my chat.
Northern Highflyer: 7/10
A short field landing during your skills test, and you hadn’t been shown one? Were you flying out of my school…?!
I don’t see why you should have to be made to feel guilty over changing instructor for your IMCR. One presumes that if your first instructor had been thorough, you would have been happy to stay with him.
Whirlybird: 7/10
Thanks.
I can see now, because of all of the postings, that the experiences I have had have been pretty bad. I thought the quality of my instruction was bad; but I didn’t actually know it was bad - and certainly not how bad. There is a big difference. This was why I posted this thread.
And I guess I can see that because this is such a bad thing to have had happened, a couple of people don’t believe it. That’s their choice. I have sent you a pm btw.
Well, I have now done my QXC without the use of the radio nav aids too! I still feel it would have been nice to have known what a QDM is and how to use one. And if the instruction is this bad and one has to look out for oneself all the more and not be so trusting of the abilities of the Instructors, then I personally felt that Students should know about the nav aids before the QXC - just in case.
You make another very good point - it’s hard to know what you don’t know. I will work on your suggestion.
drauk:
I think it would be more appropriate to deal with the club first and let them hear my complaints. And thank you, yes all I had done up to that point was to give merely the facts of what took place. Not opinions. That was precisely my intention. It was the opinions of others that I was after. I already know mine.
Now to the 8/10…! But a little break and, sadly, some work first… But just one more thing.
I am compiling a list of things that have happened to me at this school, in preparation for my talk with the CFI. I have another question to which I don’t know the answer. Now I know I am going to get a major amount of flak here and be shot down in flames by some who have read my postings in disbelief, but in spite of them, here it is!
At 4,000 feet across the channel, in a PA28… If one of the fuel caps on the wing were to come off - what would be likely to happen? Nothing? The fuel in that wing would be pulled out? A disaster in the making, or nothing too serious?
Thanks everyone.
TP
Well this thread has got a few comments in it now! I have a few replies… It’s now the 11th; I’m answering posts from as far back as 7th!! Apologies.
FlyingForFun: 7/10
The concept of my being invited to consider a ‘go/no-go decision’ at that time was certainly not part of the picture of my tuition then. Perhaps it should have been! But I wasn’t at that level of confidence, and anyway I just wanted to fly. It takes me an hour to drive to this airfield, and once there I like to get in as much as I can.
Your other point about communications, yes I agree. It would certainly help me a lot if one Instructor knew what the other had been doing.
In Altissimus: 7/10
Wow, your first solo landaway and first navex was your QXC?! For whatever reasons, right or wrong, that’s impressive! My QXC was, though, my second solo navex, but my first solo landaway.
I am thinking again about the changing of schools. As I have said, I am going to talk to the CFI…
Wcollins: 7/10
A little more clarity about what a QDM is, how it is measured and provided, compared to the triangulation service offered by D & D might help someone who has already been confused.
Genghis the Engineer: 7/10
For my first solo navex (para #1 of my first posting) I had done none of the exams. For my QXC, I had Air Law but not the others you mentioned. And as I mentioned above, this CB stuff was no part of a go/no-go test. And as you say, even if it had been, the FI should have not let me fly.
Chipmunk2: 7/10
I think that’s the thing, isn’t it - one thinks that the Instructor knows better than the Student.
I am going to tackle the CFI about this. Personally I think he has to bear some of the blame - after all the tuition is supposed to be under his overall direction, I assume. As for the CAA, I will wait to see the outcome of my chat.
Northern Highflyer: 7/10
A short field landing during your skills test, and you hadn’t been shown one? Were you flying out of my school…?!
I don’t see why you should have to be made to feel guilty over changing instructor for your IMCR. One presumes that if your first instructor had been thorough, you would have been happy to stay with him.
Whirlybird: 7/10
Thanks.
I can see now, because of all of the postings, that the experiences I have had have been pretty bad. I thought the quality of my instruction was bad; but I didn’t actually know it was bad - and certainly not how bad. There is a big difference. This was why I posted this thread.
And I guess I can see that because this is such a bad thing to have had happened, a couple of people don’t believe it. That’s their choice. I have sent you a pm btw.
Well, I have now done my QXC without the use of the radio nav aids too! I still feel it would have been nice to have known what a QDM is and how to use one. And if the instruction is this bad and one has to look out for oneself all the more and not be so trusting of the abilities of the Instructors, then I personally felt that Students should know about the nav aids before the QXC - just in case.
You make another very good point - it’s hard to know what you don’t know. I will work on your suggestion.
drauk:
I think it would be more appropriate to deal with the club first and let them hear my complaints. And thank you, yes all I had done up to that point was to give merely the facts of what took place. Not opinions. That was precisely my intention. It was the opinions of others that I was after. I already know mine.
Now to the 8/10…! But a little break and, sadly, some work first… But just one more thing.
I am compiling a list of things that have happened to me at this school, in preparation for my talk with the CFI. I have another question to which I don’t know the answer. Now I know I am going to get a major amount of flak here and be shot down in flames by some who have read my postings in disbelief, but in spite of them, here it is!
At 4,000 feet across the channel, in a PA28… If one of the fuel caps on the wing were to come off - what would be likely to happen? Nothing? The fuel in that wing would be pulled out? A disaster in the making, or nothing too serious?
Thanks everyone.
TP
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SAS
More often than not it has become the primary navigation tool. #
I think the biggest problem here is not making a distinction between a GPS being used for PRIMARY navigation (which is absolutely fine, and is the best way because a GPS is far more reliable, accurate, less prone to gross errors) and it being used for SOLE navigation (which is stupid, because any single device can fail).
In VMC, one can perfectly well use a GPS for primary navigation. It works especially well if you load the route into it. And you SHOULD concurrently read the chart;
I know some people don't read the chart but there will always be people who do silly things, and it would be an interesting question whether a careless person with a GPS is less likely to be lost than a careless person without one; I am sure the answer is that having a GPS is better. Of course there is no data to work on because only those who get hopelessly lost and call D&D or somebody are known about, and it is very hard to get hopelessly lost with a moving-map GPS.
In IMC, one uses the GPS as primary and VOR/DME concurrently. This is also by far the best way to navigate in VMC; the two methods tend to eliminate each other's gross errors.
But this debate can go on for ever, because any navigation method other than visual navigation is bound to detract from one's visual skills! A bit like any speed limit above zero will result in deaths.
The CAA presentations are aimed at the basics, in fact the presenter at the last one I went to told me so; they appear to tailor the material to the statistics which is fair enough. They go over and over what is basically PPL revision. I don't knock it and read every word on every page, but I think there is only so many times you can tell somebody to not get distracted and stall after takeoff.
TPR
At 4,000 feet across the channel, in a PA28… If one of the fuel caps on the wing were to come off - what would be likely to happen? Nothing? The fuel in that wing would be pulled out? A disaster in the making, or nothing too serious?
Whatever happens, you should have enough fuel in the other tank to get across the English Channel, anywhere
I would be extremely worried if it was raining though!! That (leaks past filler caps on planes parked outside) I have found is the biggest reason for water in the system. Once I drained out five full-size fuel testers, completely full of water, out of a PA28. When it's 100% water it is easy to think it is just fuel.
More often than not it has become the primary navigation tool. #
I think the biggest problem here is not making a distinction between a GPS being used for PRIMARY navigation (which is absolutely fine, and is the best way because a GPS is far more reliable, accurate, less prone to gross errors) and it being used for SOLE navigation (which is stupid, because any single device can fail).
In VMC, one can perfectly well use a GPS for primary navigation. It works especially well if you load the route into it. And you SHOULD concurrently read the chart;
I know some people don't read the chart but there will always be people who do silly things, and it would be an interesting question whether a careless person with a GPS is less likely to be lost than a careless person without one; I am sure the answer is that having a GPS is better. Of course there is no data to work on because only those who get hopelessly lost and call D&D or somebody are known about, and it is very hard to get hopelessly lost with a moving-map GPS.
In IMC, one uses the GPS as primary and VOR/DME concurrently. This is also by far the best way to navigate in VMC; the two methods tend to eliminate each other's gross errors.
But this debate can go on for ever, because any navigation method other than visual navigation is bound to detract from one's visual skills! A bit like any speed limit above zero will result in deaths.
The CAA presentations are aimed at the basics, in fact the presenter at the last one I went to told me so; they appear to tailor the material to the statistics which is fair enough. They go over and over what is basically PPL revision. I don't knock it and read every word on every page, but I think there is only so many times you can tell somebody to not get distracted and stall after takeoff.
TPR
At 4,000 feet across the channel, in a PA28… If one of the fuel caps on the wing were to come off - what would be likely to happen? Nothing? The fuel in that wing would be pulled out? A disaster in the making, or nothing too serious?
Whatever happens, you should have enough fuel in the other tank to get across the English Channel, anywhere
I would be extremely worried if it was raining though!! That (leaks past filler caps on planes parked outside) I have found is the biggest reason for water in the system. Once I drained out five full-size fuel testers, completely full of water, out of a PA28. When it's 100% water it is easy to think it is just fuel.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi IO540:
Well that's a relief it's not serious anyway. No, no rain. And it didn't actually come off. Instructor #2 did a walk round at Le Touquet and a visual check on the fuel levels, but did not replace the cap on the port wing properly. I noticed it in flight, that it was at a wrong angle. It could have come off; but it didn't.
But, it was another little slip from an Instructor which I wouldn't expect to be made...
TP
Well that's a relief it's not serious anyway. No, no rain. And it didn't actually come off. Instructor #2 did a walk round at Le Touquet and a visual check on the fuel levels, but did not replace the cap on the port wing properly. I noticed it in flight, that it was at a wrong angle. It could have come off; but it didn't.
But, it was another little slip from an Instructor which I wouldn't expect to be made...
TP
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Instructor #2 did a walk round at Le Touquet and a visual check on the fuel levels, but did not replace the cap on the port wing properly. I noticed it in flight
Do other people rely on instructors to check out aircraft?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi GTW:
I had done my check already, and was told to make it a cursory one anyway as the instructor wanted to get a move on and get back. The Instructor then had a quick walk round and looked at the fuel.
TP
I had done my check already, and was told to make it a cursory one anyway as the instructor wanted to get a move on and get back. The Instructor then had a quick walk round and looked at the fuel.
TP