Mmmmm... GPS for confidence (for low hours peeps!)

[Hersham Boy]

People - I'm a convert and I thought I share my thoughts with the other less hours-positive folk out there...

I bought a GPS in the US a while ago (Garmin GPS196) and the first real opportunity to take it up and give it a whirl presented itself this weekend. And, boy, what a difference.

I flew two trips - one local navex and a longer jolly with a mate to Essex from Redhill. Basically, I mounted the unit on the right hand yolk and used my chart with all the usual lines and nav plan created using the good old methods... and referred to the GPS as a second source of info (eg. estimates for turning points for radio calls).

Just having the GPS there makes a big difference to confidence in terms of airspace/DA etc. avoidance, concerns about 'tempo unsure of position' situations and spotting unfamiliar airfields nice and early to ensure good joining procedures...

On the return leg of the Essex trip, I swapped the unit over to LHS and used it as primary navigation. I estimate workload to have decreased by around 20-30% (less time matching ground to chart, faster and more accurate position reports etc.)... all of which I could then split between keeping a better lookout and enjoying the trip.

Final point - vis was down to, I guess, 6k in places between Redhill and Essex. With a second method of navigation, this was quite manageable (I'd have turned back in minutes if encountering this with only Dead Reckoning to rely on, but that may just be me) and the extra capacity for lookout meant I had the necessary increased time for spotting fellow murk-wanderers.

I realise that GPS being easier to use is obvious, but I hadn't appreciated just how much difference a readily available piece of kit would make to the amount of time I could spend aviating, rather than navigating, and the increased confidence it would inspire when combined with the trad methods of planning/navigating (ie. chart, lines and whiz wheel).

Hersh

[IO540]

Welcome to the 20th century (I know it's the 21st now)

A GPS is a great workload reducer. Everybody should have one, it should be a modern moving map model, every plane should have one installed (with a proper rooftop aerial), and the training should be in the PPL.

[Papa Charlie]

HB,

Like you I have found using a GPS a godsend. I still draw lines on the map etc but where it is so good is distance/time to next waypoint. This is soooo useful when calling positions to airfields, flight info services etc. When London Info (for example) ask you your current position you can be really smug and tell them so accurately!

With experience you'll probably change the settings a few times for what is displayed on each page to suit your method of navigation and R/T calls.

Just remember to keep the batteries charged up and keep a spare set of AA's in your flight bag!

[Fly Stimulator]

When London Info (for example) ask you your current position you can be really smug and tell them so accurately!

You can tell when somebody has just got a new GPS -

ATC: G-XXXX state your position please

G-XXXX: 7.345232 miles north of LYD, estimating the coast at 12 minutes and seventeen point four seconds past the hour

[Whiskey Kilo Wanderer]

GPS's, don't fly without 'em

Another useful function of GPS is giving ground speed.
If you are bashing a head wind on approach and the windsock on the ground is hanging limp, you are probably going to hit wind shear somewhere down finals.
It’s really useful for farm strip flying, where the windsock may not be up and there’s no obvious preferred runway direction. Just make sure you have set the GPS to the same units as the ASI. It saves thinking time.

Cheap DME:
If ATC asks for your DME from a particular VOR, use the GOTO NEAREST function to give the distance to the nearest VOR’s. Obviously it will be horizontal rather than slant range, but near enough.

Safe Flying
WKW

[DRJAD]

I quite agree its useful as a tertiary navigation system.

I find, though, that in a hired club aircraft, without an expensive yoke clamp mount, it can be a distraction to manipulate the thing. I tend, therefore, most frequently to use it as a post-flight analysis of my route, etc..

It would certainly be good if there was an element in the PPL syllabus dealing with use of a GPS system, and its pitfalls.

[mad_jock]

Are but what would the training be like?

I didn't use a gps until I learned the joys of RNAV.

For alot of instructors it would belike the blind leading the blind. Even if they knew one type, there is tons of them now. And most are way outside a FI's salary.

I know some clubs do safety nights. Perfect time for GPS learning.

Also we have enough to cover in the time with out trying to get some poor old 50 years olds head round a "electric thingy"

MJ

[Papa Charlie]

Also we have enough to cover in the time with out trying to get some poor old 50 years olds head round a "electric thingy"

Hang about, some of us over 50's are bl00dy good at electronic thingy's and gizmos.

By the way - know any good suppliers of radio valves - just can't seem to get them anymore?

[IO540]

DRJAD

For exactly that reason I went for the Skymap 2, not the very much more popular Garmins. The SM2 straps to one's leg and doesn't get in the way. To prolong its 4-hr battery life, I wired it to an external battery pack. I really dislike yoke mounts - given than an external aerial is highly desirable a yoke mount needs to be properly fitted and wired up and most aren't.

mad_jock

Yes, that is one problem. But can such a person get his head around the slide rule? If someboy has problems like that, would you really trust them to do flight planning and fuel calcs correctly? I am nearly 50 myself BTW and don't think any of this is rocket science

I seem to recall AOPA suggested having add-on modules for the basic PPL, done so that they were properly recognised. But without being embraced by ICAO, nothing is ever going to happen. I once asked a CAA presenter about this and he said ICAO are looking at this as a long term project. They probably have to, looking at how many Americans are or will be buying glass cockpit planes immediately after getting a PPL. While Europe may happily live in the 1950s for the next 30 years (while most of the airfields will disappear under housing estates) America is where it all happens, and the training scene there will soon face a fait accompli. Actually the fait accompli is already clearly visible here too, but here the people in charge of regulation have their heads firmly stuck in the sand.

[DRJAD]

Mad_jock,

Several interesting, to me anyway, thoughts from your last comments:

i. I agree largely: using GPS can be a boon, but actually I prefer using radio aids and RNAV if available.

ii. I had in mind a theoretical section of the written navigation part of the syllabus treating of GPS in generic terms, and warning of some possible pitfalls (lack of licence for primary navigation aid, check NOTAMs for jamming trials, etc..)

IO540,

I didn't know the Skymap series had those accessories available. I did have the impression, however, that they are generally rather more expensive than the fairly cheap GPSIII, which I guess a lot of recent PPL gainers who use GPS would have. (Mine was a present, so I cannot reasonably discard its use yet!) The GPSIII battery life seems to be about 12 hrs, so alternative power has not yet seemed to be a problem to me (low usage anyway), but an external aerial would be good!

Papa Charlie,

I had the impression that valves could be had from the former Soviet Union. You've reminded me, must get my "19 Set" refurbished, and could do with some spare EL84s for my old amp.

[mad_jock]

Err I think you will find most 50 years olds are more up to speed with side rules than most half there age. And i always find it the youngsters who want to grab a calculator the older students seem alot happier with old technology which is graphical and they can touch. And its alot easier to see when they have cocked it up as well.

I know it was a generlisation I should have maybe added another few years on.

I am all for a theoretical addition to the nav training in very general terms like the previous post has described. Its all we get at CPL level. And as each unit operates differently its all you can really do. From a practical point of view I am sure anyone who can steer a VOR track can navigate on GPS there is more important things to learn well. Ie Fly a heading for x amount of time etc. Yes use a GPS after you can do the no battery method but only for secondary backup of your primary navigation.

I currently operate 2 types trimbel and Bendix I don't know if you get them in Light aircraft, they are certified for Controlled airspace so are proberly quite expensive. Yes they are great but I still dial in the next vor flip flopping with the next identify it etc etc. Both have completly different operating methods. Different people have different skills, yes i can operate both, load flight routes in etc. Some can't or won't get there heads round it. And its not usual to get a grump from the LHS seat telling you to sort that fecker out when they have manged to get into some mode which you never knew it even had.

I just worry that GPS will for some cause to much head down syndrome. Your VFR get your head up and look out the window look at the view. GPS is there as a backup not a primary. I manged a 1000hours looking out the window without getting lost without a GPS maybe more luck than judgment.

I don't think there should be a lesson as such in the flying side of the PPL if schools want to punt a course for post PPL no problem.

MJ

[Hersham Boy]

I believe that Garmin supply a knee-strap fixture for the 196, if that's the preferred modus operandi...

It certainly comes with a yoke mount that makes the buttons thumb-operable, much like the PTT switch which cuts down some of the head-down nature, I found. I dare say there are yolk designs that it won't fit, though... I does work on the two differetn 152s I've tried it in...

In terms of head-down, you have to look inside the cockpit at any other navaids anyway, right?

[boomerangben]

Yes Gps is great but use it as a get out of jail free card rather than primary nav. Remember to in put your way points before starting up rather than fumbling around once airborn. Great tool but it does not stop you flying into someone else or the ground. The mk 1 eyeball is still the best as used by all good SAR crews.

[IO540]

DRJAD

I know this is anecdotal evidence but I would avoid any GPS whose design is very old, say 10 years, and most of the cheap Garmin models are that old, or close.

While many people have told dark tales of GPS errors of many miles, and certain magazines are always delighted to publish these, nobody has to my knowledge ever come up with more than 2nd or 3rd hand accounts. But where one questions these people, they either don't offer any further information, or they own up to the GPS being some very old product. It would not suprise me if units developed in the early days did have firmware bugs, and the market leaders in this game run their old designs for as long as they can.

boomerangben

I won't get into this age-old debate except to say ...

To fly into the ground you've got to be too low relative to the ground!

In VMC this is done by losing control of the plane (not a navigation issue).

In IMC you need accurate navigation to be able to remain above the MSA. A GPS is by far the most accurate and the most reliable and the least error-prone nav device available to man. Anyone half smart will use it in conjunction with other means, and the "primary/backup" designations which the anti-GPS brigate is so fond of are inapplicable.

But in any conditions, flying by looking for hedges, railways, motorways, etc, and getting the GPS out of the bag only when you are lost and have just flown overhead a big airport with two parallel runways (but with no apparent traffic except a load of 747s at the holding points) is not the time to do it. You get the full benefit only if you use it in conjunction with visual navigation, throughout the flight.

And you shouldn't be entering waypoints. Always go for a moving map model. Anything less is a waste of time and money because you WILL get lost with it.

[BEagle]

I don't subscribe to the 'must have a moving map' comments. Too much eye-candy (to use a non-50 year old duffer's term....cheeky git!) leads to too much 'head-in' time. Also, moving maps are useless without frequent database updates. Not that cheap...

I have panel-mounted Garmins fitted to all our a/c; either GPS150s or GNC250s. The philosophy is to use the CAA chart for primary reference, but to back the geographical route up on the GPS to cross-check dtk and eta values; to confirm track error estimates the GPS CDI bar is used. That way there is no need to update the data base and the VFR-only GPS is being used as a supplementary navigation aid to basic visual techniques.

Always ask yourself how you'd navigate if the GPS failed or if one of the 'new' batteries you fished out to re-load fell onto the floor and rolled away out of reach.....

GPS is an excellent aid, even for us 50+ year olds. But perhaps we're more cautious than playstation digi-yoof when it comes to how best to use VFR-only GPS - or other 'electric thingy' - safely and legally.....

[Whiskey Kilo Wanderer]

More GPS thoughts

One solution to the ’Heads Down’ problem is to have the GPS as near to the sight line for the view of the outside world as possible, without blocking the view. Garmin do a neat beanbag mount for the Pilot III, which sits happily on top of the glare shield. Probably a good idea to keep the GPS away from the compass, if that’s mounted on the glare shield.

I would suggest using the GPS, or at least having it on and operating, every time you fly. That way you will be used to it when you want to use it in anger.

For the ultimate in easy navigation, link the GPS to an iPAQ or similar pocket computer running the Memory-Map software with the CAA charts. That way you are navigating on the same style charts as the paper ones, so there is no confusion about how Controlled Airspace / Danger Areas etc are presented.

Safe Flying.
WKW

[bookworm]

Also, moving maps are useless without frequent database updates. Not that cheap...

I have panel-mounted Garmins fitted to all our a/c; either GPS150s or GNC250s. The philosophy is to use the CAA chart for primary reference, but to back the geographical route up on the GPS to cross-check dtk and eta values; to confirm track error estimates the GPS CDI bar is used. That way there is no need to update the data base and the VFR-only GPS is being used as a supplementary navigation aid to basic visual techniques.

This I don't get. If you use an aeronautical database to program your route, you are just as dependent on an up-to-date database as the moving map user. If you don't use an aeronautical database then you are prone to input errors in uploading coordinates. In either case, a graphic depiction of the route is far more likely to enable you to catch those errors before they become important.

I also don't agree that the "eye-candy" moving map causes more head-in time. It takes less time with a moving map to get the info you need than with a clutter of digits.

[S-Works]

On the moving map GPS units the map is static it is only the databse that is uploaded that changes. Airpspace etc with the moving map is part of the database cycles.

I am just about to take delivery of a Garmin 296 Colour unit that has a colour topo map built in. But changes to airpspace will still be gotten from the monthly downloads. The map itself will be static unless they move a mountain or a lake.

The same goes for my GNS430.

For those interested the GNS430 is getting a colour topo map from some time this summer. It will require a software update and the map will go into the second card slot on the unit. The benefits of the merger with UPS and the access to the MX technology!

[Hersham Boy]

On the issue of moving map and waypoints, I'm a little confused. The 196 does have moving map, but I still prograamed some waypoints in before I left the house as a couple of turning points I wanted to use weren't in the database... so I user programmed them and then added them to my route. Is this not the right way to use it?

I actually used a couple of different screens in flight - the HSI main page for the main part of the nav, and I'd flick to the map (with a mini HSI on it) to check what 'that town' was against the chart, or to give an accurate position report to Southend Radar... I found I could change screen with my thumb and not even go head-down... So I found the moving map a useful cross check but didn't need to fixate on it...

The database issue is another thing that's got me a little confused... CAA charts only get updated once a year (I think - but it's certainly not more than a couple of times a year, right?) and most people use those to plan and fly routes and avoid airspace etc. So why do I have to update my 196 every month (at $35 a month)?

And if I decide to use some flight planning software such as Jepp Flightstar to make programming waypoints and routes less labout intensive, do I have to update that as well (at more expense!)?

Do I not just need the most up-to-date map to be the one I'm looking at in the cockpit?

Hersh

[S-Works]

The Jepp database contains, frequencies, airfield information. airspace and even instrument procedures and that is what you update each month.

Most of the database is pretty useless to the VFR pilot apart from airspace and freqencies and airfield/nav aid codes. For an IMC pilot it is a usefull back up to the steam guages on an IFR flight and approach.

Even when flying VFR I tend to fly airfiled/radio nav points and having a database that you can just enter the ICAO codes from cuts out the mistakes that occur with user waypoints.