GPS PPL Syllabus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GPS PPL Syllabus
Rather than hijack the other thread, I thought I'd start a new one.
Whenever people talk about GPS here, many suggest that some sort of gps training should be included in the PPL syllabus.
I'm just wondering what people think should be included?
Personally I think that all pilots should be thought to navigate without a gps first. Only after they have mastered that, should they be introduced to a gps. I'm not convinced that they need to do any more than a single flight, if even that, with a gps, during their PPL course.
However, they should be thought about the various functions, and reports that are available, what the various abbreviations mean, and in particular, the best way of using their unit. They should also be thought about the importance of having a backup plan, and keeping the database updated.
One obvious problem is the fact that there are so many different unit available, which are being updated on such a regular basis. It would be unfair to expect all students or flight schools to buy the same one, or for all instructors or examiners to know about all the units.
I would suggest that most of what needs to be thought about gps usage could actually be done on the ground. Perhaps as part of the pre skills test ground briefing, the student would have to demonstrate to the PPL examiner that they could input a flight plan, what the different items on the display meant, how strong their signal way, and how up-to-date the database is? This could all be done on a single school owned gps.
What do others thinks?
Whenever people talk about GPS here, many suggest that some sort of gps training should be included in the PPL syllabus.
I'm just wondering what people think should be included?
Personally I think that all pilots should be thought to navigate without a gps first. Only after they have mastered that, should they be introduced to a gps. I'm not convinced that they need to do any more than a single flight, if even that, with a gps, during their PPL course.
However, they should be thought about the various functions, and reports that are available, what the various abbreviations mean, and in particular, the best way of using their unit. They should also be thought about the importance of having a backup plan, and keeping the database updated.
One obvious problem is the fact that there are so many different unit available, which are being updated on such a regular basis. It would be unfair to expect all students or flight schools to buy the same one, or for all instructors or examiners to know about all the units.
I would suggest that most of what needs to be thought about gps usage could actually be done on the ground. Perhaps as part of the pre skills test ground briefing, the student would have to demonstrate to the PPL examiner that they could input a flight plan, what the different items on the display meant, how strong their signal way, and how up-to-date the database is? This could all be done on a single school owned gps.
What do others thinks?
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The aircraft that I fly all have a panel mounted GPS. I found that the best way to learn how to use them was by downloading a free simulator from the manufacturers website.
I still fill out a FULL plog when I go flying, just as I was taught for the PPL syllabus. But find that programming the route, CAREFULLY into the GPS can serve as a useful backup.
I still fill out a FULL plog when I go flying, just as I was taught for the PPL syllabus. But find that programming the route, CAREFULLY into the GPS can serve as a useful backup.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree.
However I am very negative about the chances of anything happening. Too many vested interests.
The Ontrack report (which incidentally I think is a poor piece of statistics; a lot of the categories of causes are highly unprofessional) states that of the infringements surveyed only 18% were using a moving map GPS. The report's writers even bravely suggest that GPS should be included in the PPL. Yet, all the official farts at the top of this game keep saying that as many people with GPS as without are busting airspace, even saying that the rising infringments demonstrates GPS mis-use.
As for improving nav generally, the training industry isn't going to go for that because they don't want a more expensive PPL. They would fiercely resist the obvious (and IMV the most useful) piece of progress: mandatory panel mount GPS installation. Then there is the pretence that if you teach dead reckoning properly, and ram it down peoples' throats with a hammer, GPS will quietly go away....
I actually think that if aviation was invented today, nobody would come up with the stupid slide rule, and the whole edifice propping up dead reckoning. The logical way to navigate a plane is fully IFR. Plot a route on a computer, load it into a GPS, and follow the GPS track. That's how instrument pilots do it, but the "VFR" bit of GA is a separate army fighting its own battle.
It's interesting to look at how the FAA approaches this. You can do your PPL (or the IR) in a really basic plane. They can't stop you. But if you turn up for a checkride in a C172 with an autopilot and a GNS430, the examiner will expect you to know how to use the AP, and how to use the 430 for basic nav (or for flying a GPS approach if it's an IR checkride). So, somebody who is determined to be a luddite can just make sure they pick a school that has only basic planes.
So, not even the FAA have put GPS into the syllabus. They have side-stepped the issue of flying school opposition by insisting on equipment knowledge on the checkride, and they know that customer pressure will gradually make schools install the equipment. This is not something that could be done here in the UK, where most punters are skint so the market is fiercely price sensitive. Here, it would work only on owner pilots but they usually have their licenses already.
And if anybody would like to, I am sure the FAA would. The USA has a bit of a problem with wealthy pilots buying nice new planes (definitely not a problem in the UK) with avionics they don't understand. Here in the UK it's just the same (harder in fact because so few instructors know anything about the stuff) but the pilot numbers are far too small to show up.
Finally, is the CAA still in this business? I know EASA have not yet taken over FCL but perhaps it is only through EASA that anything might happen.
However I am very negative about the chances of anything happening. Too many vested interests.
The Ontrack report (which incidentally I think is a poor piece of statistics; a lot of the categories of causes are highly unprofessional) states that of the infringements surveyed only 18% were using a moving map GPS. The report's writers even bravely suggest that GPS should be included in the PPL. Yet, all the official farts at the top of this game keep saying that as many people with GPS as without are busting airspace, even saying that the rising infringments demonstrates GPS mis-use.
As for improving nav generally, the training industry isn't going to go for that because they don't want a more expensive PPL. They would fiercely resist the obvious (and IMV the most useful) piece of progress: mandatory panel mount GPS installation. Then there is the pretence that if you teach dead reckoning properly, and ram it down peoples' throats with a hammer, GPS will quietly go away....
I actually think that if aviation was invented today, nobody would come up with the stupid slide rule, and the whole edifice propping up dead reckoning. The logical way to navigate a plane is fully IFR. Plot a route on a computer, load it into a GPS, and follow the GPS track. That's how instrument pilots do it, but the "VFR" bit of GA is a separate army fighting its own battle.
It's interesting to look at how the FAA approaches this. You can do your PPL (or the IR) in a really basic plane. They can't stop you. But if you turn up for a checkride in a C172 with an autopilot and a GNS430, the examiner will expect you to know how to use the AP, and how to use the 430 for basic nav (or for flying a GPS approach if it's an IR checkride). So, somebody who is determined to be a luddite can just make sure they pick a school that has only basic planes.
So, not even the FAA have put GPS into the syllabus. They have side-stepped the issue of flying school opposition by insisting on equipment knowledge on the checkride, and they know that customer pressure will gradually make schools install the equipment. This is not something that could be done here in the UK, where most punters are skint so the market is fiercely price sensitive. Here, it would work only on owner pilots but they usually have their licenses already.
And if anybody would like to, I am sure the FAA would. The USA has a bit of a problem with wealthy pilots buying nice new planes (definitely not a problem in the UK) with avionics they don't understand. Here in the UK it's just the same (harder in fact because so few instructors know anything about the stuff) but the pilot numbers are far too small to show up.
Finally, is the CAA still in this business? I know EASA have not yet taken over FCL but perhaps it is only through EASA that anything might happen.
Last edited by IO540; 24th Jan 2006 at 14:05.
Why do it if it's not fun?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At my school, I have recently started a drive to get lowish-hours PPLs (100-250 hours) to spend time with an instructor, improving their skills beyond what they learnt for the PPL syllabus, by introducing an advanced course. By building the course out of a series of modules, I have allowed PPLs to pick and choose the modules which they feel they would most benefit from, so that I can customise the course for each person.
One of our school's aircraft has a panel-mounted GPS, so therefore one of the modules which I have given people the option of taking is in use of the GPS for VFR navigation. This would consist of planning a route, entering the route into the GPS, and then flying the route both with and without autopilot, including altering the route during flight (bypassing a waypoint, or diverting around some weather), using the GPS to back up the visual navigation.
The total number of people who have so far expressed an interest in learning to use the GPS? Erm.... zero. (But as soon as I can convince someone to do it, I'll report back on how it goes!)
FFF
------------
One of our school's aircraft has a panel-mounted GPS, so therefore one of the modules which I have given people the option of taking is in use of the GPS for VFR navigation. This would consist of planning a route, entering the route into the GPS, and then flying the route both with and without autopilot, including altering the route during flight (bypassing a waypoint, or diverting around some weather), using the GPS to back up the visual navigation.
The total number of people who have so far expressed an interest in learning to use the GPS? Erm.... zero. (But as soon as I can convince someone to do it, I'll report back on how it goes!)
FFF
------------
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a problem with GPS in that there are many styles of units on the market and an array of ways of accessing their functions. This is the antithesis of most other light aircraft equipment where one VOR or VOR/GS looks and functions much like any other.
That said part of the PPL syllabus should introduce pilots to the type of equipment they might commonly expect to find in a light aircraft - and increasingly that will include a GPS unit. That introduction should give them an overview of the capabilities of a modern moving map GPS and should include a resume of the main functions you would expect the unit to provide and the pitfalls with their use.
This would achieve two significant and obvious steps forward. Firstly, it would expose all pilots to the use of GPS and give them a good insight into what a capable aid to navigation GPS provides and secondly it would ensure they were aware as with most things there are steps pilots need to take to ensure the equipment is used reliably and safely.
I find the suggestion that there is insufficient time in the syllabus extraordinary. To achieve these objective I doubt more than an hour or two at most of ground school is needed combined with using a GPS in the air on one of the navex excercises.
They key is to make students aware of the use and advantages of GPS AND their pitfalls rather than students being fed the usual misinformed views from either the pro or anti GPS brigades in the local flying school bar.
That said part of the PPL syllabus should introduce pilots to the type of equipment they might commonly expect to find in a light aircraft - and increasingly that will include a GPS unit. That introduction should give them an overview of the capabilities of a modern moving map GPS and should include a resume of the main functions you would expect the unit to provide and the pitfalls with their use.
This would achieve two significant and obvious steps forward. Firstly, it would expose all pilots to the use of GPS and give them a good insight into what a capable aid to navigation GPS provides and secondly it would ensure they were aware as with most things there are steps pilots need to take to ensure the equipment is used reliably and safely.
I find the suggestion that there is insufficient time in the syllabus extraordinary. To achieve these objective I doubt more than an hour or two at most of ground school is needed combined with using a GPS in the air on one of the navex excercises.
They key is to make students aware of the use and advantages of GPS AND their pitfalls rather than students being fed the usual misinformed views from either the pro or anti GPS brigades in the local flying school bar.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most PPL renters would use some sort of handheld gps, I would suspect.
Those who have expensive panel mounted ones, I suspect would tend to be the more exerienced pilots, who can afford their own aircraft.
Most of the PPL training aircraft won't have expensive panel mounted equipment, and as IO540 points out, schools simply won't pay to have it fitted.
But surely a lot of work could be down on the ground, with say one garmin 196 or similar owned by the school for practical demonstrations.
A student could learn how to properly use it with two hours ground instruction, and maybe another 2 hours of "playing time". Total cost addition to the PPL course would be two hours instructors time.
I'm inclinded to think that even that, would be a big improvement on the current situation. Am I wrong?
Those who have expensive panel mounted ones, I suspect would tend to be the more exerienced pilots, who can afford their own aircraft.
Most of the PPL training aircraft won't have expensive panel mounted equipment, and as IO540 points out, schools simply won't pay to have it fitted.
But surely a lot of work could be down on the ground, with say one garmin 196 or similar owned by the school for practical demonstrations.
A student could learn how to properly use it with two hours ground instruction, and maybe another 2 hours of "playing time". Total cost addition to the PPL course would be two hours instructors time.
I'm inclinded to think that even that, would be a big improvement on the current situation. Am I wrong?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GPS isn't on the PPL syllabus in the States but GPS use is widespread in GA. I don't think GPS is required to fly an airplane safely so no need to have it in the PPL which already cuts corners in order to get people through before they get bored of being a student. GPS are so easy to use you can pick it up yourself, as evidenced by the lack of formal teaching in the States. What the UK needs is for the CAA to embrace GPS technology and its use in the GA environment. GPS has been proven to be safe, extremely accurate and extremely useful in the US. The CAA needs to allow pilots to use GPS as they see fit, then pilots can decide whether they use it or not.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst I initially thought it was a good idea, do we actually need it on the sylabus?
After all, its not that complicated. Surely if people are having problems then they should seek help and advise, but should it be mandatory for those of that have got the hang of it to waste an hour of dual training flying with a GPS?
And who would train the trainers?
Much better to organise your own club night, held by those that can use them, for those that would like help. A group talk followed by some one to one on the troubling specifics would be a good club night.
After all, its not that complicated. Surely if people are having problems then they should seek help and advise, but should it be mandatory for those of that have got the hang of it to waste an hour of dual training flying with a GPS?
And who would train the trainers?
Much better to organise your own club night, held by those that can use them, for those that would like help. A group talk followed by some one to one on the troubling specifics would be a good club night.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's interesting to look at how the FAA approaches this. You can do your PPL (or the IR) in a really basic plane. They can't stop you. But if you turn up for a checkride in a C172 with an autopilot and a GNS430, the examiner will expect you to know how to use the AP, and how to use the 430 for basic nav (or for flying a GPS approach if it's an IR checkride).
This is true of the Instrument Rating but not I think of the Private Pilots checkride.
A panel GPS of some type is almost standard in flying clubs and rental fleets in the US. Most people can do the basics (enter a flightplan and follow the straight line), few know all the ins and outs. But even the basics are a great help in keeping you out of trouble around restricted airspace.
This is true of the Instrument Rating but not I think of the Private Pilots checkride.
A panel GPS of some type is almost standard in flying clubs and rental fleets in the US. Most people can do the basics (enter a flightplan and follow the straight line), few know all the ins and outs. But even the basics are a great help in keeping you out of trouble around restricted airspace.
"The logical way to navigate a plane is fully IFR."
Never in a hundred years.
You can play airliners for as long as you like, IO540, but the vast majority of UK PPL flying will remain Day VFR. Thankfully.
And it's 'aeroplane' - NEVER 'plane'!
Never in a hundred years.
You can play airliners for as long as you like, IO540, but the vast majority of UK PPL flying will remain Day VFR. Thankfully.
And it's 'aeroplane' - NEVER 'plane'!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"but should it be mandatory for those of that have got the hang of it to waste an hour of dual training flying with a GPS?"
Who said anything about wasting an hour??
During a navex demonstrate the use of a moving map GPS to the pilot, there is plenty of time when no other teaching is going on and it exposes the pilot to what he might be missing if he does not fly with a GPS and at least will permit him to make an informed decision!
"After all, its not that complicated."
Its not but there are some obvious pitfalls with the use of a GPS. Tell the student what these pitfalls are and test his knowledge of these because you can be assured this is one aspect the manufacturers are not good at highlighting and then there is all the misinformed rubbish written and spoken about GPS.
Who said anything about wasting an hour??
During a navex demonstrate the use of a moving map GPS to the pilot, there is plenty of time when no other teaching is going on and it exposes the pilot to what he might be missing if he does not fly with a GPS and at least will permit him to make an informed decision!
"After all, its not that complicated."
Its not but there are some obvious pitfalls with the use of a GPS. Tell the student what these pitfalls are and test his knowledge of these because you can be assured this is one aspect the manufacturers are not good at highlighting and then there is all the misinformed rubbish written and spoken about GPS.
I'm a low houred pilot, and the one man band who is my instructor-owner has a Garmin fitted to his 150.
I can't afford to fly as often as I'd like, and so there's an element of re-learning how it works every time I fly.
This position in my view potentially invites the 'radar assisted collisions' that became a little too regular in the sailing world when radars became affordable and widespread. So I don't use it. I feel I should, in an 80 kt aeroplane, be able to navigate with a map, compass and watch.
Said it now haven't I!
CG
I can't afford to fly as often as I'd like, and so there's an element of re-learning how it works every time I fly.
This position in my view potentially invites the 'radar assisted collisions' that became a little too regular in the sailing world when radars became affordable and widespread. So I don't use it. I feel I should, in an 80 kt aeroplane, be able to navigate with a map, compass and watch.
Said it now haven't I!
CG
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Charliegolf
Ok but let me put this question.
I would guess you have not yet got lost or if you have the instructor has helped out. Maybe when you qualify you never will.
However I have seen pilots lost on more than a few occasions - really lost. I have seen them searching for familiar ground features, fixating on the ground whilst doing so, fixating on the map hoping it will tell them where they are and if they do find inspiration struggling with various contraptions to help them plan where they are going. Finally they break the lead and all
ensues.
Of course I hope you never get lost.
However if you do remember one button on the GPS (usually marked ON/OFF) will tell you where you are and one other button (usually marked NRST) will give you some options of where you might want to go.
If that is all too complicated .. .. ..
Ok but let me put this question.
I would guess you have not yet got lost or if you have the instructor has helped out. Maybe when you qualify you never will.
However I have seen pilots lost on more than a few occasions - really lost. I have seen them searching for familiar ground features, fixating on the ground whilst doing so, fixating on the map hoping it will tell them where they are and if they do find inspiration struggling with various contraptions to help them plan where they are going. Finally they break the lead and all
ensues.Of course I hope you never get lost.
However if you do remember one button on the GPS (usually marked ON/OFF) will tell you where you are and one other button (usually marked NRST) will give you some options of where you might want to go.
If that is all too complicated .. .. ..
Fuji
Of course I've been lost, (and have a licence already by the way) but whilst using simple functions is not 'too complicated' as you put it; neither is basic nav with aids that are unlikely to fail. Looking out is, I've always thought, better than looking in.
Each to his own.
CG
Of course I've been lost, (and have a licence already by the way) but whilst using simple functions is not 'too complicated' as you put it; neither is basic nav with aids that are unlikely to fail. Looking out is, I've always thought, better than looking in.
Each to his own.
CG
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Norfolk UK
Age: 80
Posts: 1,200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I may have posted this somewhere before!
My wife and I have sailed extensively around north Europe.
We had Radar,GPS,chart plotter,autopilot,wind vane etc all linked together, it was like having an extra crew-member on board and relieved long stretches of helming etc.
We always set a radar safety "ring" around the boat which we usually fixed at 5 miles,anything coming into range triggered an alarm so we would never have a radar assisted collision.
Re GPS on the boat,it was invaluable and I think that it is also really useful in a plane,you can always swith it off,but I bet you don't!
We always kept an hourly log and chart postion update to check that all was correct and in case we had a power failure.
I think anything that can get your head out of the cockpit is a safety bonus,
I am still a student and find I can spend a bit of time head down on chart locating my postion on the chart,OK only a couple of seconds at a time but still not looking out.
I've not been lost yet but quite confused once when at low tide Blakeney Point looked nothing like it normally does.
I was pretty sure of my position from previous fixes and carried on ,it all worked out OK but a GPS would have relieved some of the doubt.
I fly with friends who use GPS and they swear by it,but also mak sure where they are via the chart.
When I get my licence I hope to fly vintage planes, and will definitley investigate some sort of portable GPS that I can take from plane to plane.
Lister
My wife and I have sailed extensively around north Europe.
We had Radar,GPS,chart plotter,autopilot,wind vane etc all linked together, it was like having an extra crew-member on board and relieved long stretches of helming etc.
We always set a radar safety "ring" around the boat which we usually fixed at 5 miles,anything coming into range triggered an alarm so we would never have a radar assisted collision.
Re GPS on the boat,it was invaluable and I think that it is also really useful in a plane,you can always swith it off,but I bet you don't!
We always kept an hourly log and chart postion update to check that all was correct and in case we had a power failure.
I think anything that can get your head out of the cockpit is a safety bonus,
I am still a student and find I can spend a bit of time head down on chart locating my postion on the chart,OK only a couple of seconds at a time but still not looking out.
I've not been lost yet but quite confused once when at low tide Blakeney Point looked nothing like it normally does.
I was pretty sure of my position from previous fixes and carried on ,it all worked out OK but a GPS would have relieved some of the doubt.
I fly with friends who use GPS and they swear by it,but also mak sure where they are via the chart.
When I get my licence I hope to fly vintage planes, and will definitley investigate some sort of portable GPS that I can take from plane to plane.
Lister
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A colleague who has some sort of yacht masters certificate (2 year course?, I know nothing about sailing) tells me the GPS "issue" was more or less settled in sailing about 10 years ago, and now they just use it.
I suppose that the sailing community doesn't have the huge respect for rules, many of them unbelievably obscure, which aviation generally has. It doesn't have the problem of everybody living in mortal fear of the CAA. This is what creates the present ridiculous atmosphere where some PPL reads some bull in some magazine about GPS being illegal for primary navigation or whatever, and gets really worried about it, starts to hide the GPS in a bag and pretend that it is used as a backup only, switched off until needed, etc.
I suppose that the sailing community doesn't have the huge respect for rules, many of them unbelievably obscure, which aviation generally has. It doesn't have the problem of everybody living in mortal fear of the CAA. This is what creates the present ridiculous atmosphere where some PPL reads some bull in some magazine about GPS being illegal for primary navigation or whatever, and gets really worried about it, starts to hide the GPS in a bag and pretend that it is used as a backup only, switched off until needed, etc.
Not just Yachts IO, the worlds merchant fleet navigates largely by GPS these days, especially when out of radar range of land. GPS data is used by the (relatively) new Ship identification system. (a sort of ADSB for the marine world)
GPS training for Merchant Navy officers is also included within the Electronic Nav Aids course. Despite that, I personally dont think there's a need to mandate GPS training for the PPL. However, if a training aircraft has a panel mount GPS fitted, an instructor should in my view ensure that the student knows how to use it before letting him loose away from the circuit.
GPS training for Merchant Navy officers is also included within the Electronic Nav Aids course. Despite that, I personally dont think there's a need to mandate GPS training for the PPL. However, if a training aircraft has a panel mount GPS fitted, an instructor should in my view ensure that the student knows how to use it before letting him loose away from the circuit.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by IO540
I suppose that the sailing community doesn't have the huge respect for rules, many of them unbelievably obscure, which aviation generally has. It doesn't have the problem of everybody living in mortal fear of the CAA. This is what creates the present ridiculous atmosphere where some PPL reads some bull in some magazine about GPS being illegal for primary navigation or whatever, and gets really worried about it, starts to hide the GPS in a bag and pretend that it is used as a backup only, switched off until needed, etc.
The likelihood, therefore, of being "lost" at sea is greater than that of being lost at 2000+ feet on a VFR day where more ground features are visible through the window
