Training fixes
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have been folowing this thread with interest including a few posts.
I was flying today. The mission was only an hour, cloud base around 1,300 feet, viz maybe 4K. Like Drauk I didnt hear a single Pan but I did have a Speedbird on the wrong frequency.
On the occasions I have used guard for the odd genuine training fix with other pilots (I admit not very often) I have not heard all these calls so it was interesting to listen out for an hour. I should have expected around 40 calls in that time.
I too would be very interested to know WWW where you get your figures from??:confused
I was flying today. The mission was only an hour, cloud base around 1,300 feet, viz maybe 4K. Like Drauk I didnt hear a single Pan but I did have a Speedbird on the wrong frequency.
On the occasions I have used guard for the odd genuine training fix with other pilots (I admit not very often) I have not heard all these calls so it was interesting to listen out for an hour. I should have expected around 40 calls in that time.
I too would be very interested to know WWW where you get your figures from??:confused
Last edited by Fuji Abound; 11th Sep 2005 at 20:59.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You got to learn to take www with a pinch of salt.
Last time he ventured into the domain of the 'heroes of the PFA' he was ranting on about how we all needed to install mode S because
I genuinely don't think he likes light aircraft pilots unless they are students providing hours for instructors so they can get into the airlines.
Last time he ventured into the domain of the 'heroes of the PFA' he was ranting on about how we all needed to install mode S because
Hundreds and thousands of times a day airliners at 9,000ft are being spuriously vectored around and held high/low because of someone chugging around with their ModeA in a C152. I regularly get "avoiding action - turn right, right heading 180, unknown traffic no height information 3 miles in your 1 o' clock"...
Suddenly 50odd tons of airliner is cranking round a steep (for us) turn with people falling over in the cabin and two pilots scrunching their faces up expecting a loud bang.
Suddenly 50odd tons of airliner is cranking round a steep (for us) turn with people falling over in the cabin and two pilots scrunching their faces up expecting a loud bang.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Hundreds and thousands of times"
Conservatively that is 104 every 90 seconds - it is not really surprising they get their frequencies confused.
Still, never a dull moment.
Conservatively that is 104 every 90 seconds - it is not really surprising they get their frequencies confused.
Still, never a dull moment.
Last edited by Fuji Abound; 11th Sep 2005 at 22:09.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glad to see this debate is not straying into the realms of childishness.
Airlines may not pay tax on fuel, but who pays for ATC in this country? It certainly isn't G/A. Oh that's right, it's paid for by the airlines........ F3G, you might not, but I certainly whinge about how much tax we have to pay on AVGAS, one of the reasons we are just about to get a diesel machine.
However, the argument about who pays for what and who doesn't is utterly spurious in this situation, personally I have no idea what the statistics are and to be frank I'm not sure I care.
The simple point is this. If you think you are lost or in trouble in any way, ask for help. You can always downgrade if things get better, but at least if there is a problem, then the people who may be able to help you are already aware of any difficulties.
It is not the fact that people use this service that bothers me, but the fact that it is regarded as an aid. I've said it before and I'll say it again, PPL's would be far more advised in getting their general standard on navigation up, than thinking up ways of covering over the cracks.
The general consensus amongst examiners and the CAA is that the standard of nav skills in the PPL world is very poor. Maybe it over-reliance on aids such as GPS? Or just that Navigation is being badly taught in schools? Whatever it is the facts are clear, more people than ever are bouncing into control zones and busting danger areas.
We fly in very congested airspace in this country, where unlike a lot of other countries it is very, very easy to make mistakes. We have lots of areas where light aircarft can have a very large (and usually negative) effect on commercial Ops. Whilst I have every sympathy for the G/A community (being part of it helps!) it can be hugely frustrating if you are screaming along at 250kts+ and you all of a sudden have to take avoiding action, because someone can't be bothered to put their transponder on ALT, mind you even then it doesn't always help, since the altitude readout is still unverified.
There will always be problems between commercial traffic and G/A, since their goals and requirements are totally different.
Anyway back to the point, If you are monitoring 121.5, you won't hear every call from light a/c, simply because their radios aren't powerful enough, but you'll certainly hear an awful lot more commercial traffic because of the power output and altitude of the transmissions. So it isn't really any kind of argument to say "I heard this whilst I was flying" therefore it's gospel.
I certainly know that people use this service and don't admit to being on trouble, since I talk to pilots and have often heard the boast about not admitting to being lost, but somehow pulling a fast one by getting help from D&D under the guise of a 'training fix' whilst in reality not having a clue where they were.
That is the attitude I object to, trying to hoodwink an excellent services to cover their own inadequacies. Not on and in my case leads to a swift 'chat' about not taking the p*ss.
By all means use the service if you are genuinely lost and need help or to confirm where you think you are, but just don't boast about how clever you are afterwards to the CFI. All I'm thinking is what a prat, not what a clever chap.
Airlines may not pay tax on fuel, but who pays for ATC in this country? It certainly isn't G/A. Oh that's right, it's paid for by the airlines........ F3G, you might not, but I certainly whinge about how much tax we have to pay on AVGAS, one of the reasons we are just about to get a diesel machine.
However, the argument about who pays for what and who doesn't is utterly spurious in this situation, personally I have no idea what the statistics are and to be frank I'm not sure I care.
The simple point is this. If you think you are lost or in trouble in any way, ask for help. You can always downgrade if things get better, but at least if there is a problem, then the people who may be able to help you are already aware of any difficulties.
It is not the fact that people use this service that bothers me, but the fact that it is regarded as an aid. I've said it before and I'll say it again, PPL's would be far more advised in getting their general standard on navigation up, than thinking up ways of covering over the cracks.
The general consensus amongst examiners and the CAA is that the standard of nav skills in the PPL world is very poor. Maybe it over-reliance on aids such as GPS? Or just that Navigation is being badly taught in schools? Whatever it is the facts are clear, more people than ever are bouncing into control zones and busting danger areas.
We fly in very congested airspace in this country, where unlike a lot of other countries it is very, very easy to make mistakes. We have lots of areas where light aircarft can have a very large (and usually negative) effect on commercial Ops. Whilst I have every sympathy for the G/A community (being part of it helps!) it can be hugely frustrating if you are screaming along at 250kts+ and you all of a sudden have to take avoiding action, because someone can't be bothered to put their transponder on ALT, mind you even then it doesn't always help, since the altitude readout is still unverified.
There will always be problems between commercial traffic and G/A, since their goals and requirements are totally different.
Anyway back to the point, If you are monitoring 121.5, you won't hear every call from light a/c, simply because their radios aren't powerful enough, but you'll certainly hear an awful lot more commercial traffic because of the power output and altitude of the transmissions. So it isn't really any kind of argument to say "I heard this whilst I was flying" therefore it's gospel.
I certainly know that people use this service and don't admit to being on trouble, since I talk to pilots and have often heard the boast about not admitting to being lost, but somehow pulling a fast one by getting help from D&D under the guise of a 'training fix' whilst in reality not having a clue where they were.
That is the attitude I object to, trying to hoodwink an excellent services to cover their own inadequacies. Not on and in my case leads to a swift 'chat' about not taking the p*ss.
By all means use the service if you are genuinely lost and need help or to confirm where you think you are, but just don't boast about how clever you are afterwards to the CFI. All I'm thinking is what a prat, not what a clever chap.
Guest
Posts: n/a
SAS
If you re-read my post that first mentions tax on avgas, you will see that I used it as an analogy to parody WWWs ludicrous comments about a PPLs use of training fixes causing a disaster. Having consulted to major airlines, I am aware of their contribution towards ATC and for that matter the airport and pax taxes too.
Other than that, I tend to agree with everything else that you say.
Airlines may not pay tax on fuel, but who pays for ATC in this country? It certainly isn't G/A. Oh that's right, it's paid for by the airlines........ F3G, you might not, but I certainly whinge about how much tax we have to pay on AVGAS, one of the reasons we are just about to get a diesel machine.
Other than that, I tend to agree with everything else that you say.
I do like a healthy debate. Saw Again Slowly has my position spot on.
Airliners going off guard then missing a frequecy change IS IS IS a serious flight safety hazard and the reason so many aren't on Guard in Northern Europe is the high level of GA Training Fix and its evil twin Practice Pan in the UK FIR. Its way above my pay grade to sort the problem but I hope someone will look into it soon.
Cheers
WWW
Airliners going off guard then missing a frequecy change IS IS IS a serious flight safety hazard and the reason so many aren't on Guard in Northern Europe is the high level of GA Training Fix and its evil twin Practice Pan in the UK FIR. Its way above my pay grade to sort the problem but I hope someone will look into it soon.
Cheers
WWW
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SAS
No doubt in my mind that nav is poorly addressed in PPL training, but it's not because of over reliance on GPS.
GPS is just about never used in PPL training (fair enough, not in the syllabus) and I would suggest a simple (if impractical) experiment:
Get a 100 PPLs (chosen to be a representative sample of experience of real PPLs) to fly a decent x/c route, through some real airspace issues, e.g. Goodwood to Prestwick. In the winter, in a standard non-deiced aircraft.
Well within their PPL privileges!
Get 50 of them to blindly follow a moving map GPS while remaining at/above the planned MSA and not looking at the ground at all, for the whole route. No chart permitted aboard the aircraft, either.
Get 50 of them to navigate using dead reckoning as they've been taught.
Which group do you think will bust more airspace?
Which group do you think will have more fatal accidents along the way?
I think the answer is obvious.
"We" teach navigation as it was in 1920, with no CAS, and in the days when flying was done by real (generally wealthy) men wearing leather caps and goggles, in cloth covered biplanes, who liked danger, excitement, who got admired by the press and the public for doing wild things (even if 99.9% of the public could not afford to do these things). This favourable situation lasted, in one form or another, till about 40 years ago.
But everything else has changed.
Today's PPLs are pretty average people, and most can't even afford a decent headset.
The training industry, what's left of it given the above rather significant constraint, is keen to strip £8000 off everyone who walks through the door - can't blame them, if I was running a school I'd probably be doing the same.
The CAA (the only organisation with the oversight to do anything about this) isn't bothered. They run safety seminars telling people to not fly into hills - especially not with a GPS.
No doubt in my mind that nav is poorly addressed in PPL training, but it's not because of over reliance on GPS.
GPS is just about never used in PPL training (fair enough, not in the syllabus) and I would suggest a simple (if impractical) experiment:
Get a 100 PPLs (chosen to be a representative sample of experience of real PPLs) to fly a decent x/c route, through some real airspace issues, e.g. Goodwood to Prestwick. In the winter, in a standard non-deiced aircraft.
Well within their PPL privileges!
Get 50 of them to blindly follow a moving map GPS while remaining at/above the planned MSA and not looking at the ground at all, for the whole route. No chart permitted aboard the aircraft, either.
Get 50 of them to navigate using dead reckoning as they've been taught.
Which group do you think will bust more airspace?
Which group do you think will have more fatal accidents along the way?
I think the answer is obvious.
"We" teach navigation as it was in 1920, with no CAS, and in the days when flying was done by real (generally wealthy) men wearing leather caps and goggles, in cloth covered biplanes, who liked danger, excitement, who got admired by the press and the public for doing wild things (even if 99.9% of the public could not afford to do these things). This favourable situation lasted, in one form or another, till about 40 years ago.
But everything else has changed.
Today's PPLs are pretty average people, and most can't even afford a decent headset.
The training industry, what's left of it given the above rather significant constraint, is keen to strip £8000 off everyone who walks through the door - can't blame them, if I was running a school I'd probably be doing the same.
The CAA (the only organisation with the oversight to do anything about this) isn't bothered. They run safety seminars telling people to not fly into hills - especially not with a GPS.
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IO540
I can see the thrust of your argument, however ...
So what makes you think such PPLs will be able to afford to have their GPS database updated to show CAS boundary changes every AIRAC cycle ??
I can see the thrust of your argument, however ...
Get 50 of them to blindly follow a moving map GPS while remaining at/above the planned MSA and not looking at the ground at all, for the whole route. No chart permitted aboard the aircraft, either.
Today's PPLs are pretty average people, and most can't even afford a decent headset.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
None of this logically makes any sense at all!
WWW is objecting to pilots asking for a training fix when they are lost and is suggesting that the vast majority of training fixes are really from pilots who are lost or who are "nearly" lost.
If a pilot is lost or nearly lost he needs to make the call on 121.5. We all agree on that. We also agree the pilot should own up to being lost, although some of us argue being uncertain of your position in contrast to totally lost doesn’t warrant a full pan. We also seem to agree that the vast majority of the calls aren’t pilots wanting a genuine training fix - in other words those that know their position accurately.
The argument for me is therefore nonsense because we have an allegedly huge number of pilots who are lost or nearly lost who should be making the call in the interests of everyone’s safety and yet we are proposing to legislate against them doing so. Who is running the asylum??!!
Whether all these pilots should be lost or nearly lost is a totally different matter. Clearly they should not. Who is to blame - well I am afraid it has to be the FIs. The fact of the matter is get the training right and the problem will go away.
I have one analogy. When we are new pilots we have our fare share of go arounds. No one asks if these are practise go arounds or are because the landing is looking a bit iffy! In either case they do take up valuable ATC time but we recognise there necessity. Of course we could only permit a go around with a FI aboard unless it was a real go around
"Anyway back to the point, If you are monitoring 121.5, you won't hear every call from light a/c, simply because their radios aren't powerful enough, but you'll certainly hear an awful lot more commercial traffic because of the power output and altitude of the transmissions. So it isn't really any kind of argument to say "I heard this whilst I was flying" therefore it's gospel."
You are of course correct BUT it still doesn’t explain why the numbers of calls are so much fewer than suggested.
WWW is objecting to pilots asking for a training fix when they are lost and is suggesting that the vast majority of training fixes are really from pilots who are lost or who are "nearly" lost.
If a pilot is lost or nearly lost he needs to make the call on 121.5. We all agree on that. We also agree the pilot should own up to being lost, although some of us argue being uncertain of your position in contrast to totally lost doesn’t warrant a full pan. We also seem to agree that the vast majority of the calls aren’t pilots wanting a genuine training fix - in other words those that know their position accurately.
The argument for me is therefore nonsense because we have an allegedly huge number of pilots who are lost or nearly lost who should be making the call in the interests of everyone’s safety and yet we are proposing to legislate against them doing so. Who is running the asylum??!!
Whether all these pilots should be lost or nearly lost is a totally different matter. Clearly they should not. Who is to blame - well I am afraid it has to be the FIs. The fact of the matter is get the training right and the problem will go away.
I have one analogy. When we are new pilots we have our fare share of go arounds. No one asks if these are practise go arounds or are because the landing is looking a bit iffy! In either case they do take up valuable ATC time but we recognise there necessity. Of course we could only permit a go around with a FI aboard unless it was a real go around
"Anyway back to the point, If you are monitoring 121.5, you won't hear every call from light a/c, simply because their radios aren't powerful enough, but you'll certainly hear an awful lot more commercial traffic because of the power output and altitude of the transmissions. So it isn't really any kind of argument to say "I heard this whilst I was flying" therefore it's gospel."
You are of course correct BUT it still doesn’t explain why the numbers of calls are so much fewer than suggested.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Say again slowly,
You say
"It is not the fact that people use this service that bothers me, but the fact that it is regarded as an aid."
Then you say
"By all means use the service if you are genuinely lost and need help or to confirm where you think you are"
There is a contradiction in there somewhere.
"So it isn't really any kind of argument to say "I heard this whilst I was flying" therefore it's gospel."
But that is the basis of www's argument. Besides, you might not hear the spamcan but you will hear the D&D side. Just out of interest, how often do you hear GA calls on 121.5, either practice pans or asking for training fixes (or the ground station replying).
What I think is interesting, and probably goes to the root of this debate and the problems GA has in the UK, is when you say
"There will always be problems between commercial traffic and G/A, since their goals and requirements are totally different."
An interesting attitude, and one I think is totally wrong. Look across the sea and you will find places where GA and non GA live side by side in almost perfect harmony. Of course if one side has contempt for the other then there will never be agreement, which appears to be the situation here.
www,
Healthy debate is fine, so why don't you enter into one? If you blunder in here telling people they are talking 'horse****, then make apparently wild claims and on questioning cannot justify them (or ignore the questions) you cannot complain if you lose some credibility.
You say
"It is not the fact that people use this service that bothers me, but the fact that it is regarded as an aid."
Then you say
"By all means use the service if you are genuinely lost and need help or to confirm where you think you are"
There is a contradiction in there somewhere.
"So it isn't really any kind of argument to say "I heard this whilst I was flying" therefore it's gospel."
But that is the basis of www's argument. Besides, you might not hear the spamcan but you will hear the D&D side. Just out of interest, how often do you hear GA calls on 121.5, either practice pans or asking for training fixes (or the ground station replying).
What I think is interesting, and probably goes to the root of this debate and the problems GA has in the UK, is when you say
"There will always be problems between commercial traffic and G/A, since their goals and requirements are totally different."
An interesting attitude, and one I think is totally wrong. Look across the sea and you will find places where GA and non GA live side by side in almost perfect harmony. Of course if one side has contempt for the other then there will never be agreement, which appears to be the situation here.
www,
Healthy debate is fine, so why don't you enter into one? If you blunder in here telling people they are talking 'horse****, then make apparently wild claims and on questioning cannot justify them (or ignore the questions) you cannot complain if you lose some credibility.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PPRuNe Radar
I was hoping that my requirement to not carry a chart would be taken as intended (very obviously tongue in cheek) to illustrate the ludicrous double standard that exists in GA.
There is a huge gulf between the training, and what is expected of today's pilots in terms of navigation.
I was hoping that my requirement to not carry a chart would be taken as intended (very obviously tongue in cheek) to illustrate the ludicrous double standard that exists in GA.
There is a huge gulf between the training, and what is expected of today's pilots in terms of navigation.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no place for contempt amongst aviators of any kind, be they airline pilots or PPL's.
I try and see it from both sides (as an airline jockey and FI). WWW's argument is his, not mine, I can only talk about the points I put across.
My argument about aids is to not use D&D like a VOR or GPS, but as the emergency service it really is.
One analogy is, would you call an ambulance because you had a minor cut? No I hope not, they have better things to be worrying about. But if you have cut yourself with a bandsaw and there's claret everywhere, then get them there as fast as possible. It may not be serious, but the uncertainty means you need to ask for help.
If you are a 'little bit lost' i.e pretty much know where you are, but are unable to identify a feature, don't automatically go for 121.5. Think about it. Are you likely to break into a zone? Is there any chance of going into a danger area? Have you even checked wether the danger areas are active? Are you running out of juice? Why are you unsure of your position? Check your DI, Compass, Hdg, MSA, PLOG to see if you just made a silly error.
Are there any features that would allow you to work out your position?
If at that point you still can't work out where you are, then you are lost, Call D&D. Until you've done all you can yourself why do you think you are lost?
Our licences allow us to fly all over the world if we wish, if you are reliant on one service such as D&D to get you out of trouble, then what do you do if you go somewhere that doesn't have the service? D&D are a back up for when you are in trouble. Getting a bit unsure on a navex doesn't really count as 'trouble' in my book. Take some responsiblity and work it out for yourself using the methods that you should have been taught.
IO,
I think GPS is the single best thing that has happened to G/A since the Wright Bros. thought it might be fun try this flying lark.
I personally always have a handheld GPS in my bag and think everyone should know how to use the things properly. an extract from a recent trainingcom.
I heartily agree with it's sentiments.
On last thing from Fuji
The training of students in some places is not as good as it should be, but PPL's are licenced pilots themselves and it should be their responsibility to ensure that their skills are up to scratch. After all, do you blame driving instructors for some of the idiots that clog up our roads?
People forget over time and if they don't keep up to date and practice the skills required, then it doesn't matter if the best FI in the world has taught you, you will be crap. End of!
I try and see it from both sides (as an airline jockey and FI). WWW's argument is his, not mine, I can only talk about the points I put across.
My argument about aids is to not use D&D like a VOR or GPS, but as the emergency service it really is.
One analogy is, would you call an ambulance because you had a minor cut? No I hope not, they have better things to be worrying about. But if you have cut yourself with a bandsaw and there's claret everywhere, then get them there as fast as possible. It may not be serious, but the uncertainty means you need to ask for help.
If you are a 'little bit lost' i.e pretty much know where you are, but are unable to identify a feature, don't automatically go for 121.5. Think about it. Are you likely to break into a zone? Is there any chance of going into a danger area? Have you even checked wether the danger areas are active? Are you running out of juice? Why are you unsure of your position? Check your DI, Compass, Hdg, MSA, PLOG to see if you just made a silly error.
Are there any features that would allow you to work out your position?
If at that point you still can't work out where you are, then you are lost, Call D&D. Until you've done all you can yourself why do you think you are lost?
Our licences allow us to fly all over the world if we wish, if you are reliant on one service such as D&D to get you out of trouble, then what do you do if you go somewhere that doesn't have the service? D&D are a back up for when you are in trouble. Getting a bit unsure on a navex doesn't really count as 'trouble' in my book. Take some responsiblity and work it out for yourself using the methods that you should have been taught.
IO,
I think GPS is the single best thing that has happened to G/A since the Wright Bros. thought it might be fun try this flying lark.
I personally always have a handheld GPS in my bag and think everyone should know how to use the things properly. an extract from a recent trainingcom.
TRAINING IN THE USE OF GPS GPS systems are becoming commonplace but their misuse is equally common. Flying schools of all types, are encouraged to offer training in the use of GPS. If students wish to fly with GPS, there is an opportunity to teach them to use it properly – don’t ignore it! GPS training should not be at the expense of other syllabus training in navigation and the use of radio aids. For guidance see LASORS (Safety Sense 25) and AIC 93 / 2002 (Pink 41).
On last thing from Fuji
Whether all these pilots should be lost or nearly lost is a totally different matter. Clearly they should not. Who is to blame - well I am afraid it has to be the FIs. The fact of the matter is get the training right and the problem will go away.
People forget over time and if they don't keep up to date and practice the skills required, then it doesn't matter if the best FI in the world has taught you, you will be crap. End of!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"People forget over time and if they don't keep up to date and practice the skills required, then it doesn't matter if the best FI in the world has taught you, you will be crap. End of!"
.. .. .. and that is why, unlike driving a car, we have biannual check rides.
.. .. .. but with driving a car the insurance companies know it is the new drivers who carry the greatest risk and in the same way I would have a bet with you it is mostly the new pilots who get lost. The difference is that if the trainers were doing their job they might get lost less often.
All said and done I guess we have a pretty active fraternity of PPLs in this country. When a pilot gets his license as we all know he is just starting to learn. He will make mistakes. ATPLs on the other hand have well over a thousand hours. Moreover they have some of the best equipment available to ensure accurate navigation. Sadly their are a few ATPLs who forget we all started out the same way.
I personally think it is a bit sad to be so ready to change the legislation a bit like hooting at the learner driver when he stalls at the cross road.
.. .. .. and that is why, unlike driving a car, we have biannual check rides.
.. .. .. but with driving a car the insurance companies know it is the new drivers who carry the greatest risk and in the same way I would have a bet with you it is mostly the new pilots who get lost. The difference is that if the trainers were doing their job they might get lost less often.
All said and done I guess we have a pretty active fraternity of PPLs in this country. When a pilot gets his license as we all know he is just starting to learn. He will make mistakes. ATPLs on the other hand have well over a thousand hours. Moreover they have some of the best equipment available to ensure accurate navigation. Sadly their are a few ATPLs who forget we all started out the same way.
I personally think it is a bit sad to be so ready to change the legislation a bit like hooting at the learner driver when he stalls at the cross road.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Say Again,
ATC exists for the benefit of commercial avaition, not private. So it is just and right that they should pay. In fact, they should pay us for the inconvenience (only kidding). There is the issue of LARS, but then again, without huge amounts of controlled airspace squeezing us into low and/or narrow confines, would we really miss LARS?
Obviously, in many ways private aviation maybe unrecognisable for the worse without commercial aviation, but you get my dift...I hope.
Airlines may not pay tax on fuel, but who pays for ATC in this country? It certainly isn't G/A. Oh that's right, it's paid for by the airlines
Obviously, in many ways private aviation maybe unrecognisable for the worse without commercial aviation, but you get my dift...I hope.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually we don't have a very active PPL fraternity at all in this country. I don't have the figures to hand, but the number of hours flown on average is very low compared to places like the states. Couple that to the very few who revalidate their licences as well, you have a picture that isn't too healthy.
The whys and wherefore's aren't the issue here however.
Just because an ATPL has thousands of hours doesn't mean that they don't make mistakes or are still learning. I for one am very aware of the fact that I don't know it all and there are areas that I should increase my knowledge.
If you think a bi-ennial check ride keeps people safe, then you are sadly mistaken. It is nothing but a very quick snapshot that most of the time doesn't even touch on navigation skills.
I still think it is a bit rich to continually blame instructors for all the ills of the G/A world. Most of us do our best and (hopefully) do a good job in equipping people with the basic skills needed to keep themselves alive in their a/c. Keeping the skill level up is however YOUR responsibility. I will only step in when I see something dangerous or hear about some dodgy practices. I am however always available to my club members if they aren't sure of something or want some help, but not being a mind reader I often have to wait for them to ask.
I'm not so sure that it is new pilots who are busting zones etc. It is a real fact that for most pilots who fly very little, that they are at their best when they ready for test, why? Simply because at that stage you are usually flying intensively and as we all know, the more often you fly, the better you generally are. In my experience, new PPL's are often the ones I worry about least, since I am far more likely to know their capabilities and they seem to be more willing to ask for and listen to any advice.
If you have any proof that this is not the case I would be interested to see the figures.
HWD,
Hopefully ATC exists for the benefit of us all, not just the airlines who are picking up most of the tab. Actually I find it worrying that any group should get priority because of financial reasons, rather than on a needs basis. Not having a decent LARS service any more is a travesty and should be reversed at the earliest possible opportunity. Pigs will fly first unless the RAF suddenly have their budget quadrupled!
The whys and wherefore's aren't the issue here however.
Just because an ATPL has thousands of hours doesn't mean that they don't make mistakes or are still learning. I for one am very aware of the fact that I don't know it all and there are areas that I should increase my knowledge.
If you think a bi-ennial check ride keeps people safe, then you are sadly mistaken. It is nothing but a very quick snapshot that most of the time doesn't even touch on navigation skills.
I still think it is a bit rich to continually blame instructors for all the ills of the G/A world. Most of us do our best and (hopefully) do a good job in equipping people with the basic skills needed to keep themselves alive in their a/c. Keeping the skill level up is however YOUR responsibility. I will only step in when I see something dangerous or hear about some dodgy practices. I am however always available to my club members if they aren't sure of something or want some help, but not being a mind reader I often have to wait for them to ask.
I'm not so sure that it is new pilots who are busting zones etc. It is a real fact that for most pilots who fly very little, that they are at their best when they ready for test, why? Simply because at that stage you are usually flying intensively and as we all know, the more often you fly, the better you generally are. In my experience, new PPL's are often the ones I worry about least, since I am far more likely to know their capabilities and they seem to be more willing to ask for and listen to any advice.
If you have any proof that this is not the case I would be interested to see the figures.
HWD,
Hopefully ATC exists for the benefit of us all, not just the airlines who are picking up most of the tab. Actually I find it worrying that any group should get priority because of financial reasons, rather than on a needs basis. Not having a decent LARS service any more is a travesty and should be reversed at the earliest possible opportunity. Pigs will fly first unless the RAF suddenly have their budget quadrupled!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SAS
That's not where it should be 
It should be in the panel, with a decent rooftop aerial. A completely different scenario.
Where is the evidence for the mis-use of GPS? I am sure it happens but why throw out the baby with the bathwater?
In particular, and this is what I was getting at in my slightly daft suggestion earlier, are nav errors caused by misunderstanding of a GPS more common than those done while dead reckoning?
The latter cannot possibly be less error prone but, as I am fond of repeating, doing a CFIT while DR is just bad luck whereas doing a CFIT while on GPS is really poor airmanship
We can't have GPS within the existing PPL syllabus because the 45hrs is already too short for most people, so this is a pointless discussion really.... in the meantime, the PPL population is shrinking, partly because people don't come out with the skills they need to go somewhere half interesting.
Anyway, I am off for 2 weeks and 4000 miles, dodging TCUs at FL150 and navigating with GPS as PRIMARY (with VOR/ADF/DME backup on the rare occassions I will find some) the whole time
I personally always have a handheld GPS in my bag
It should be in the panel, with a decent rooftop aerial. A completely different scenario.
TRAINING IN THE USE OF GPS GPS systems are becoming commonplace but their misuse is equally common
In particular, and this is what I was getting at in my slightly daft suggestion earlier, are nav errors caused by misunderstanding of a GPS more common than those done while dead reckoning?
The latter cannot possibly be less error prone but, as I am fond of repeating, doing a CFIT while DR is just bad luck whereas doing a CFIT while on GPS is really poor airmanship
We can't have GPS within the existing PPL syllabus because the 45hrs is already too short for most people, so this is a pointless discussion really.... in the meantime, the PPL population is shrinking, partly because people don't come out with the skills they need to go somewhere half interesting.
Anyway, I am off for 2 weeks and 4000 miles, dodging TCUs at FL150 and navigating with GPS as PRIMARY (with VOR/ADF/DME backup on the rare occassions I will find some) the whole time
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually it is pretty rare that I get the thing out of it's bag, unless I'm going somewhere I don't know that well and even then it really is supplementary, but a fantastic back up.
No nav aid is perfect, though GPS is very, very good. It won't stop you from flying into a mountain, just give you the information that should make it impossible for you to be that stupid!
Personally I think that GPS makes navigation incredibly easy and far safer, but I think the point that Pat Lander was making in the Trainingcom is that GPS units can be relatively complex if you have never used one before. Most people only know how to use the absolute basics and don't know the capabilities of these systems.
If you have an out of date database, then you have no warning of airspace changes etc. (as mentioned by Pprune Radar earlier), I think this is one of the things people need to learn about GPS before they become reliant on it. Often people are unaware of the limitations, especially things such as aerial mountings and what happens when you get near sites that put out alot of radio interference.
If you understand the limitations of any system, then you are a much safer pilot than one who blindly believes that the magic box will always keep you out of trouble.
As an aside, we are about to order a Diamond DA-40 and have been warned off the Garmin 1000 kit by the manufacturers, since the a/c will be used for hire. They are worried because people need a 2 day course in how to use the avionics because they are so different to the norm and that people will get into a lot of trouble. It may be a bit of an over-reaction, but I have to respect their view point.
I actually agree with them, even if I am a bit dissappointed myself since I would love to have the glass cockpit version. In fact what we will probably do is that when we get a second one we may have that with all the toys, once our members have got used to using something that is a bit more familiar.
No nav aid is perfect, though GPS is very, very good. It won't stop you from flying into a mountain, just give you the information that should make it impossible for you to be that stupid!
Personally I think that GPS makes navigation incredibly easy and far safer, but I think the point that Pat Lander was making in the Trainingcom is that GPS units can be relatively complex if you have never used one before. Most people only know how to use the absolute basics and don't know the capabilities of these systems.
If you have an out of date database, then you have no warning of airspace changes etc. (as mentioned by Pprune Radar earlier), I think this is one of the things people need to learn about GPS before they become reliant on it. Often people are unaware of the limitations, especially things such as aerial mountings and what happens when you get near sites that put out alot of radio interference.
If you understand the limitations of any system, then you are a much safer pilot than one who blindly believes that the magic box will always keep you out of trouble.
As an aside, we are about to order a Diamond DA-40 and have been warned off the Garmin 1000 kit by the manufacturers, since the a/c will be used for hire. They are worried because people need a 2 day course in how to use the avionics because they are so different to the norm and that people will get into a lot of trouble. It may be a bit of an over-reaction, but I have to respect their view point.
I actually agree with them, even if I am a bit dissappointed myself since I would love to have the glass cockpit version. In fact what we will probably do is that when we get a second one we may have that with all the toys, once our members have got used to using something that is a bit more familiar.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“Actually we don't have a very active PPL fraternity at all in this country.”
Other than the States and Canada - tell me a country with a more active GA fleet?
“Just because an ATPL has thousands of hours doesn't mean that they don't make mistakes or are still learning.”
In fact indirectly that was the point I sought to make. If ATPLs with 1,000s of hours make mistakes, like accidental calls on guard, have a bit of patience with PPLs who neither have the hours or the kit to reduce their workload.
“If you think a bi-ennial check ride keeps people safe, then you are sadly mistaken. It is nothing but a very quick snapshot that most of the time doesn't even touch on navigation skills.”
I accept your point although I think that if this problem is as bad as made out instructors could include some navigation work in the check ride.
“If you have any proof that this is not the case I would be interested to see the figures.”
Agreed and I was hasty in making this assertion. It would be very interesting to know the background of all these pilots who are so frequently getting lost.
Other than the States and Canada - tell me a country with a more active GA fleet?
“Just because an ATPL has thousands of hours doesn't mean that they don't make mistakes or are still learning.”
In fact indirectly that was the point I sought to make. If ATPLs with 1,000s of hours make mistakes, like accidental calls on guard, have a bit of patience with PPLs who neither have the hours or the kit to reduce their workload.
“If you think a bi-ennial check ride keeps people safe, then you are sadly mistaken. It is nothing but a very quick snapshot that most of the time doesn't even touch on navigation skills.”
I accept your point although I think that if this problem is as bad as made out instructors could include some navigation work in the check ride.
“If you have any proof that this is not the case I would be interested to see the figures.”
Agreed and I was hasty in making this assertion. It would be very interesting to know the background of all these pilots who are so frequently getting lost.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
France and Germany.
I have plenty of patience when people make mistakes. If I didn't, then I wouldn't be any good as an instructor! (Some may argue that anyway!!)
Inexperience should not be an excuse for incompetence, in the same way that ignorance of the law makes no difference when in a court. There are basic skills that we all should have. knowing how to read a map and to perform lost procedures are some I feel are pretty essential for any competent pilot. If you can't perform these satisfactorily, then off to D&D you go, just don't try and pretend you aren't lost when in actual fact you are and are probably starting to flap as well.
I agree that Nav should be covered on the bi-ennial, in fact I insist upon it, but this is not mandatory.
I have plenty of patience when people make mistakes. If I didn't, then I wouldn't be any good as an instructor! (Some may argue that anyway!!)
Inexperience should not be an excuse for incompetence, in the same way that ignorance of the law makes no difference when in a court. There are basic skills that we all should have. knowing how to read a map and to perform lost procedures are some I feel are pretty essential for any competent pilot. If you can't perform these satisfactorily, then off to D&D you go, just don't try and pretend you aren't lost when in actual fact you are and are probably starting to flap as well.
I agree that Nav should be covered on the bi-ennial, in fact I insist upon it, but this is not mandatory.