Do I Need a GPS?

[GrassStrip]

Okay here is the deal.

I am shortly about to complete my 60th hour. (For insurance purposes at my club I cannot fly solo until I have 60 hours). So I currently fly with an instructor and basically try to perfect my skills (and I must say I’m thoroughly enjoying the whole experience!).

My instructor simply sits there and offers bits and pieces of advice and reinforces what I’ve already learned.

However once I pass the magical 60 hour mark, I will be released to the skies once more on my own to explore the beautiful UK. This is coming to the crux of my question. Once I don't have an instructor with me, I will be relying on my own knowledge of the local area. Now I don't have a problem with my navigation, in fact I quite enjoy the challenge.

My weakness lies in identifying my current position in relation to an airfield , a vrp or a town. As I’m quite new to the local area (I gained my ppl at the other end of the country) when approaching a matz or an airfield, giving my rough position (which I know they don't expect to be perfect) ends up with me doing a lot of head down working out on my map.

Also to be honest I've always been against getting a GPS, they are expensive and most experienced pilots (from what I gather) tend to think they make you lazy and erode your navigation skills. But now I'm wondering if I should perhaps purchase a simple unit, which will make giving position reports and estimated times a bit easier and could also be a useful backup to check my navigation. Especially in these first 10 or 20 hours when I’m solo again and I imagine my workload will be quite high.

I am currently flying a rental aircraft (C150) so if I did purchase a GPS, where would I fit an aerial? Is it worth doing? Which one would you recommend (bearing in mind I won’t need it to be too flash as it would really only be a back up for me to double check I am where I think I am).

All opinions welcome…

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

It sounds to me as if you need to get a bit of solo navigation practice before even thinking about a GPS. If I were you, I'd only consider a GPS once I was fully confident in my ability to navigate by map and compass. Once you have these skills to a reasonable standard, a GPS can make life easier. But if you go staright to GPS before being fully confident at basic nav, you may never achieve good basic nav skills and that will be a major hole in your skills as a pilot.

It really is true that a GPS should only ever be an aid to navigation, not the primary means.

Once you start flying around on your own, it probably won't take long to aquire these skills.

SSD

[dublinpilot]

You obviously have some navigation skills if you have your ppl. You say you're not worried about your navigation as such, but have difficulty in pin pointing your position on a very local basis.

I think we all have problems locating and identifing small airfields and vrp's that we haven't been to before, so don't be too concerned about that.

Personally I recently got a gps unit, and program my route into it, turn it on when i go flying, and then put it aside, and proceed with my plog and map. Like you I enjoy the challenge of navigation.

However the time comes when I expect to be over a town, and all that I'm over is a small collection of buildings. I believe I'm over the correct place, and continue to the next point but at the same time thinking what if that was the wrong town, then where would I be now? A quick glance at the GPS would confirm if I'd made the correct assumption, and put my mind at ease and reduce the mental calculations. I've found that it has not improved my navigation, as there was nothing wrong with it, but it has improved my confidence in my navigation. It's great to be able to check it, if you are in doubt, but I wouldn't follow the little line if I was you. You'll only lose your confidence in your navigaton.

As for an aerial, you can buy ones that stick to the window with a suction pad. I have only used my gps for a small number of flights, but haven't had a problem with losing the signal once this aerial is connected.


Hope that helps.

dp

[FNG]

I think that the advice offered by SSD and Dublinpilot is very sensible. GPS is something which you could integrate into your navigational armoury once you are confident with your deduced reckoning skills which, as you rightly point out, are very satisfying to use (it's always rewarding to look at your watch and say "the airfield should be just over...there" and it is).

After a few years of flying around without any GPS, the aircraft which I currently fly is fitted with a fairly posh GPS which has many features I have not, so far, spent the time to learn about. I switch on the moving map display and glance at it from time to time as a back up/error check, but otherwise don't really use it. I appreciate that there are many positive features of GPS for use in visual navigation and fuel management, which can help with workload and accuracy and enhance safety, and not every pilot using a GPS fits the head-down-press-on-regardless-why-do-I-need-windows stereotype, but perhaps if you get into GPS too early on in your PPL flying there's a risk of unwittingly turning into one of of those.

[Tinstaafl]

The question revolves around whether or not the GPS is an aid or a crutch. If an aid then that presupposes that you can manage effectively without it. That in turn requires some amount of experience & practice to improve and gain confidence in your skills.

[cgjog182]

Navigation is pretty easy in my area, given the islands, mountains, etc. but I'd hate to navigate using just charts on the prairies (Saskatchewan, Iowa) where one farm field looks like another.

Being skilled also means using all tools at hand. Purists may demand dead reckoning but they probably get lost a lot. These days with security so tight, wouldn't it be a better idea to really know where you are.

I've been using a handheld GPS for ten years. I mainly use it as a secondary for IFR flying. Wouldn't want to be without it. Got mine wired in to the bus bar in my a/c so I don't have to feed it batteries. Antenna is mounted on the glareshield. A few wires but tie down straps make the situation much tidier.

My first unit was a Garmin 95. Got pretty familiar with it and actually gave a few seminars on it's use at my flying club. I've got the 195 now and it's all one really needs. The best feature is the HSI. All the manufacturers make good units, though, so see if you can look at the various ones at an aviation show. Once you learn one manufacturer's protocol, you can slide into any brand with ease.

I've been most successful with Tropic Aero in Fort Lauderdale and GPS World in the Chicago area. See Trade-A-Plane.

The first time the weather goes south, it's bumpy, and you have that uncomfortable feeling you might need a place to land now....and you don't know where you are, you'll wish you had one. Spend the money!

Fred

[IO540]

GrassStrip

You asked for opinions, so...

The vast majority of fresh PPLs, about 90-95%, chuck it in before their first renewal, and most do so with only 10-20 hours post-PPL. It is highly likely that you will be one of those. If you want to continue flying, then (assuming you've got the money) you need to minimise your workload and minimise your airspace busts to maximise your enjoyment.

Visual nav is indeed pretty hard, until so you have so many hours you can fly with your eyes shut (well almost). And even then it is often very hard to POSITIVELY identify a piece of forest or a lake among many others which look just the same. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

There appear to be two main sorts of private pilots:

Group A - These often got their license many years ago, fly only locally or to places they've been to many times, fly only on nice days. Not really interested in actually going somewhere for a purpose (other than a beer, on a nice day). These usually dislike GPS, often intensely. They don't need one because of the flying they do and/or because they know every shed under the routes they regularly fly. Occassionally they venture into bad weather, get lost, bring down half the D&D services, and sometimes they get squeezed between clouds and hills... They are frequently "uncertain of position" - the officially approved name for being lost.

Group B - These want to go to new and interesting places. They progress to instrument flying (you have to to actually go anywhere for real in the UK) and they use radio nav (VOR/DME) and GPS all together. These are the minority but they clock up the most hours, and very very rarely get lost.

If you go to one of the CAA safety seminars, it will be painfully obvious after about 10 mins which group the material is aimed at. Actually the last CAA man told me so...

GPS is perfectly OK for primary navigation. It is far more accurate, reliable and resistant to gross errors than anything else (including visual nav). You always need a backup of course, and visual nav is your backup in VMC. You use the TWO TOGETHER.

There are some clowns who reportedly use a GPS solely without planning the flight so they have no backup. They give GPS a bad name. But you've got to remember that if you fly into a hill and die and you used visual nav, that's officially permitted. If you flew a perfectly straight line into the same hill because you were tracking a GPS, that's not officially permitted and will be used for years afterwards as an example of how evil GPS is

However if you really think that a GPS costs too much then you are unlikely to ever acquire enough currency for any of this to matter. When I used to self fly hire the usual school junk, with decrepit avionics, the first things I bought were a GPS and a decent headset.

[DFC]

The important thing is that with regard to position, the GPS does not tell you anything you don't know already.......especially when using the moving map.....the only diference is that the position where the GPS thinks it is can be a little clearer becuase very few towns in Europe have their name laid out beside them.

Also even if the GPS tells you where you are know, you still have to navigate from there to where you want to go.

So by all means get a GPS but I would not let the GPS become the Captain of my aircraft!!!

As for local area navigation........that is usually the hardest of all because you are operating in a relatively confined area and are trying to navigate as accurately as possible often ad-hoc and with little time available for correction.....................Remember three rules;

1. Aviate, Navigate, Communicate
2. Keep ahead of the aircraft even if this means stopping progress for a while to get things together -orbit, hold, whatever.
3. Use the big picture. I once declared to my instructor that I was lost......he simply turned round and said that I could not be lost as I had not left the country so I should start there and work down from that.......today, I see many pilots fretting over what the village passing under the nose is when 1 O'Clock at 3nm is a massive town with two motorways!!

Until you are familiar with your local area....work out some "standard Arrival/Departure routes" that will help you get to and from the airfield. Also measure how far a certain feature on that route is from the airfield and use that feature to trigger the joining call because you already know the distance and direction.

Finally,

The most likely way of getting lost is not paying enough attention to heading and time.

For say a C150, the most you will ever drift is 2/3 or so of the windspeed at height in degrees. So if you make absolutely no correction for a 30Kt wind, you will drift by a maximum of 20degrees. That is 20nm off track in 60nm..........but it is only 5nm off in 15nm...............so provided that you check your position every 10 minutes, you will never be more that 5nm off track unless there is a crosswind of more than 30Kt....................5nm isn't that far off.....and that's after 10 minutes.............if you make no correction for wind but check your position every 5 minutes, you will never be more than 2.5nm off track............Now do you really need a GPS?

Having said all that, a GPS can be a great tool for backing up ETAs and suchlike for ATS especially when they ask for an ETA miles down the road.

Regards,

DFC

[FNG]

I0540, your division of the PPL world into two groups seems a little rigid, especially as your group A appears to be shorthand for "all those ppls whose interests in flying are not the same as my own" (and who are, by implication, therefore clueless numpties). It is possible with a little thought to travel to interesting places without instrument qualifications or a GPS. I have somehow blundered my way to tiny airfields in the middle of nowhere in featureless parts of France using DR and/or VOR/DME navigation (but mainly DR), but I suppose I was just lucky, and probably ought to turn myself in to the nearest available CAA rep as a menace to aviation.

Instrument flying, and doing lots of touring in kitted-up machines, are great aspects of our hobby, but they aren't for everyone, and GrassStrip may not yet have decided which variant(s) of GA flying he or she is most interested in. I like travelling to interesting places, but am mainly interested in exploring the handling of aeroplanes, so I do a lot of local flights during which I look upwards in order to see the ground, or try out different variants of cranky old aeroplane. I haven't yet ruled out getting an IMC, for all of the good reasons often discussed here, but know that I have no interest in doing for fun, on my own and for nothing what most instrument pilots do in pairs and for money. I'm not knocking anyone who wants to do that, hoorah for choice, but which of your classes does this put me into?


PS: is visual navigation really that hard, if you've been taught it properly? I'm not saying that it doesn't require careful planning and concentration, but if you fly from point A on accurate heading X at accurate speed Y for accurately timed minutes Z, checking for errors and drift as you go, then you will, repeat will be at desired point B. If you're planning a trip over the Sahara, prudence dictates the use of all available aids, but in the UK at least it is usually possible to choose as turning points features that will have sufficient lead-ins or confirmatory features to ensure correct identification, and selecting such features is part of intelligent route planning.

One of the great things about flying in general is that it's something you can, if you choose, at least sometimes do all by yourself, entirely free of outside agencies and influences. Whether travelling on foot in the mountains, under sail on the ocean, or on wings in the air, figuring out where you are using traditional skills which emphasise planning and self reliance is in my opinion simply more fun than being told where you are by a piece of space furniture whizzing around the planet. If you've got the GPS in your pocket in case you get into trouble, that's great, but it can also be great if it turns out that you don't need it.

[MLS-12D]

GrassStrip, I agree with dublinpilot: "I think we all have problems locating and identifing small airfields and vrp's that we haven't been to before, so don't be too concerned about that. "

I don't like the idea of you constantly referring to a GPS to make position reports etc. But the idea of purchasing a small, relatively cheap unit to use as a backup for keeping track of your DTG, etc., makes sense.

I don't own a GPS myself, but will probably purchase one soon, as my wife is uncomfortable going x-country without one.

[hoey5o]

Dont bother, so may people, who wont admit it, become dependent on them. Learn and practice the old skills and you will become so much better and so much more confident.
I once watched a PPL tootle off to the west on a cross country only to return 15 minutes later. I asked what the problem was and he said his GPS had failed. I didnt know whether to laugh or cry !!

[englishal]

I tend to use Radio nav (VOR / NDB etc), backed up by visual nav (if able), backed up by GPS....I think everyone who wants to go somewhere should have one onboard an aircraft, if for nothing else, peace of mind. You could consider it a bit of safety equipment.

As for position reports, they're perfect for that. When London info request "whats your estimate for ORTAC" you can look at the screen and read off an exact figure.

The important thing is not to rely on any one system 100% (what if the vis becomes crap, what if the VOR receiver dies, what if the GPS batteries go flat etc.), but to use every available system to compliment the others.....

Rgds
EA

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

10540 - Oh dear. I don't fit into either of your categories - and neither do most pilots I know.

SSD

[IO540]

FNG

I was hoping my comments would be taken partially tongue in cheek

if you fly from point A on accurate heading X at accurate speed Y for accurately timed minutes Z, checking for errors and drift as you go

Accurate heading needs an accurate wind forecast. Very hard to fly accurately in turbulence especially in certain aircraft types. Doing so for extended periods can be extremely tiring. Checking for errors needs recognisable features down below - trivial sometimes (e.g. in sight of the coast), very hard at other times.

But I appreciate this is an interminable discussion, because one CAN fly anywhere using purely visual nav - if one is good enough at both aircraft control (so enough of your brain is left over for other stuff) and terrain recognition.

But both these skills are lacking in fresh pilots. I suspect that anyone with enough IQ to pass the PPL exams will be aware of their limitations and, maybe just perhaps, this is a factor in why most people pack it in so quickly. There are many places in UK airspace where you really have to know where you are. Some French airspace (e.g. near LFBZ) is even more complicated due to bits of military areas.

I know GPS cannot be brought into the 45-hour PPL which is at best only barely adequate now. For as long as this is the case, whether everyone should be told to fly "WW1-style" or whether the flying scene should be dragged kicking and screaming into the 20th century, will remain an interminable discussion. Until it is too late.

[FNG]

Don't worry IO540, I had assumed as much, and my response was intended to be partially likewise, whilst, like your post, trying to make a serious point as well. The internet is of course famously un-nuanced. I'm not really a techno-fearing luddite (well, just a bit), just as I know that you're not really a "me, I'm right ace at flying, me, cos I've got all the badges and toys" merchant. Anyway, I am now off for this season's first session of sliding down mountains (note to self: this season I really MUST get checked out at Courchevel), so have a good weekend you lot.

[MLS-12D]

The vast majority of fresh PPLs, about 90-95%, chuck it in before their first renewal, and most do so with only 10-20 hours post-PPL.

I didn't know it was as bad as that, though I'll take your word for it.

Clearly if so many people drop out after making it all the way through to their PPL, there is something seriously wrong with private aviation.

[FlyingForFun]

IO540,

With regard to accurate flying, and to recognising terrain, you said:

But both these skills are lacking in fresh pilots

I agree, to a certain extent. But how are new pilots supposed to gain these skills, if not by using them?

I have never used a GPS in anger. I have one in my aircraft, I very rarely use it, especially not in moving map mode. In VFR conditions, I'd much rather practice flying accurately and recognising terrain. After 300-ish hours, I'm starting to get better at it, but I still make mistakes. Not bad enough mistakes to get me into trouble, but enough that I know I need more practice. Having the GPS is a nice safety feature, but I would never contemplate cancelling a trip because of a lack of VFR.

My advice to GrassStrip would be: if you have money to spare, it would be better spent on more flying than it would on a GPS. Especially at this stage in your flying career.

FFF
-------------

[Fuji Abound]

I have used a moving map GPS pretty much since I started flying. We commonly hear the CAA and others telling us they cannot be relied upon and there are plenty of reasons why this might be so. However my GPS has never failed. To put that in perspective that is in some five or so years, getting on for 1,000 hours, during which one VOR has packed up, one DI has become unreliable, box 1 has failed a few times, and the transponder has produced spurious and unexplained readings. The avionics I refer to are all IFR “approved” panel mounted items, the GPS is not panel mounted, not “approved” but is connected to “mains” power and a good external aerial. For me that says a lot about reliability. I know for sure when flying an NDB in earnest I would far rather fly the “GPS procedure” and monitor the needle than vica versa.

OK so with a few hours under your belt and some instrument experience when the GPS fails it is back to the needles and the mark one eyeball which does very nicely. Thank goodness we have those skills. Flying VMC I think you would be stupid not backing up the GPS with the map on the knee, and in IMC not cross checking the needles against the GPS (or of course the other way around).

Now GrassStrip tells us he is relatively inexperienced and has problems identifying VRPs, towns and airfields. In my view that is hardly surprising – we all did. His skills to will improve by dint of effort, or by doing an instrument rating but it will take time. In that time he may get lost or he may stray into controlled airspace, neither a pleasant experience. If he does, he may decide to give up flying – what a shame.

However if he uses a GPS while it is working it will re-enforce his navigation skills as long as he supports the GPS by verifying the ground against the map, and he will become a better navigator far more quickly, so that when it fails it becomes a minor inconvenience.

So what are the pitfalls?

Don’t become over reliant on the GPS. Get into the habit very early on of verifying “features” shown on the GPS with those actually on the ground. If they don’t correlate do something about it!

Be very, very careful entering a course on the GPS – check and recheck the course to steer between waypoints with what you would expect on the map.

Know your GPS thoroughly – learning how to change views or routes etc., is not something to learn in the cockpit – it should be second nature. Anyway time on the ground is free!

Have an escape plan in mind on each leg! For example you may find yourself using the GPS to accurately fly close to an area of controlled air space which you know you mustn’t infringe to get to your destination. OK the GPS packs up. Abort the track you were following unless you are certain of you navigational skills, know the direction in which to turn to take you safely away from controlled airspace and know a track you can follow to get you to an alternate destination if that is what is called for. OK you get lost along the new route, so call the D and D cell, you are truly temporarily uncertain of your position, they will help you out.

Don’t bother with a simple GPS that only gives you a heading or track information. That presents less benefit and far more risk that following the needles, you have got nothing to cross check the GPS against other than your line on the map. Instead, ensure the GPS has a good moving map which provides a wonderful means of relating the GPS information to the map on your knee to the “map” on the ground. The difference between the two is only a few hundred pounds these days and the less experienced you are the better that money is spent!

Now there are those that would say the only way to learn to navigate is the map, the mark 1 and a pencil – some like the challenge, some like to make navigation hard work, and for some this works. However, it seems to me there is much to suggest that in learning any new skill re-enforcement is vital. Being able to re-enforce your map, mark 1 and pencil with the information shown on the GPS provides that re-enforcement – try turning off the GPS every so often – I think you will be surprised how well you do and how much more confident you have become.

Good luck!

[Keef]

Some good advice here. GPS is excellent if used wisely.

If you rely on your unapproved GPS, and get into "difficulties", you can be sure that will be the moment the GPS decides not to work.

There's a sadistic but wise CAA examiner round here. He does my IMC rating renewal every two years. He turns off the GNS430 and the ADF before we start a long session under the hood, doing unusual attitude recoveries and partial panel exercises. After that's done, I have no idea where I am. He then asks me to show him where on the map we are. This is still under the hood, but being visual doesn't always help over East Anglia.

With one VOR it's doable. With two VORs, it's easier. With a DME as well, it's easy. (But it only works if there are navaids in range.) That's a skill I think is worth practising.

If you can't "find" yourself without the GPS, then I'd say don't rely on the GPS as your only backup!

[IO540]

Keef

If you rely on your unapproved GPS, and get into "difficulties", you can be sure that will be the moment the GPS decides not to work

Do you have any evidence that an "unapproved" GPS is any less reliable than an approved one?

What would you call "unapproved"? The FAA has the "IFR approved" category, which basically means it must be panel mounted, has RAIM, has no way of entering a flight plan except via its own front panel (e.g. no RS232), and probably a few other functional requirements. There is, AFAIK, no requirement regarding hardware or software quality or database accuracy (it's all from Jeppesen anyway).

I am completely certain that the build quality of handhelds is better than that of panel mount units.

In Europe, "IFR approved" means nothing. There is the "BRNAV" category, and SOME "IFR approved" units are also BRNAV (e.g. GNSx30, KLN94B). As far as I can tell "BRNAV" is authorised as sole means of navigation at FL095 and above, IFR, with some conditions probably; not really applicable to a UK PPL.

In theory, a RAIM GPS ought to warn if the signal is being jammed in a particular manner such that the satellite fix still computes, but the computed altitude is wrong.

I fly with a KLN94B/KMD550 (cost maybe £10,000) and it's a great piece of kit but I used to fly with a Skymap 2 portable which frankly was just as good for actual navigation (not as pretty and no stormscope display ). It cost £500, one could load the flight plan into it from Navbox thus eliminating a whole load of hassle and possible errors and it was accurate to a few yards including altitude, without exception. Had to use a "suction pad" aerial on the windscreen! I still think this is better than the Garmins because it straps to one's leg; perfect for renting and one only ever occassionally glances at a GPS anyway. The Skymap is now in my emergency bag.

There is no dispute about being able to fly without a GPS; indeed one should VOR/DME concurrently; the workload is trivial and the procedure eliminates practically all gross errors of either method. GPS+visual also works extremely well. If you get a total electrical failure then calling 121.5 is not an option... which takes us to carrying a £300 handheld radio (with a headset adaptor) as an arguably equally sensible precaution.......