VFR navigation question
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I gather the answer is that often they didn't.
It's also very easy to find coastal airfields. Just fly along the coast.
But those days were different. You could fing a feature on the coast and then zoom off on a heading. There was no CAS; I am sure a military pilot could fly freely.
Also, there is little or no terrain in the south of England. You could descend to say 500ft, and fly around at random, and the chance of hitting anything is very small (obviously not around Shoreham etc so make that 1000ft around there). The typical warm front cloudbase is 500-600ft, no lower. At 2000ft there is nothing to hit for hundreds of miles, unless you get incredibly unlucky. I guess they would make some effort to descend over the sea - much as many people do today.
If those battles had been done over Switzerland, I don't see how they would have got back down without navaids, radar or DF.
Today's cross country nav is a lot more regimented (regardless of what method you use) and if you get it wrong, a lot of **** hits the fan.
It's also very easy to find coastal airfields. Just fly along the coast.
But those days were different. You could fing a feature on the coast and then zoom off on a heading. There was no CAS; I am sure a military pilot could fly freely.
Also, there is little or no terrain in the south of England. You could descend to say 500ft, and fly around at random, and the chance of hitting anything is very small (obviously not around Shoreham etc so make that 1000ft around there). The typical warm front cloudbase is 500-600ft, no lower. At 2000ft there is nothing to hit for hundreds of miles, unless you get incredibly unlucky. I guess they would make some effort to descend over the sea - much as many people do today.
If those battles had been done over Switzerland, I don't see how they would have got back down without navaids, radar or DF.
Today's cross country nav is a lot more regimented (regardless of what method you use) and if you get it wrong, a lot of **** hits the fan.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: South Norfolk, England
Age: 58
Posts: 1,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So you are right, WR, there is no data on correlation between nav methods and busts, but that's none has been collected.
I've nothing against GPS; in fact I've just started using a PDA/GPS as it's a lot easier in my cramped open cockpit. It seems very good I must say, although I did overlay a route pointing to Lasham instead of Popham on my first try (don't ask why
, but it was on a route I know well so soon realised my mistake). However, in the past I've always just drawn a line on the chart and nav'd as I've gone. I've never busted and know several pilots who fly the same way and haven't either. The accusation that traditional navigators are more likely to bust than GPS users is IMHO rather offensive. None of us are infallible, but those who get lazy are more likely to bust than those who keep on top of the game. GPS use is potentially brilliant for accurate navigation, but in the hands of a lazy pilot it really is a licence to cock up!SS
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: London
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can't beat a pro/anti GPS debate!!
GPS CAN pack up... but as I've found out.. Doors can open and charts can end up in the Solent!! so don't rely just on maps and dead reckoning either lol
GPS CAN pack up... but as I've found out.. Doors can open and charts can end up in the Solent!! so don't rely just on maps and dead reckoning either lol
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It also shows IO540, that your usual statement that most CAS busts are most likely low houred non GPS pilots
The accusation that traditional navigators are more likely to bust than GPS users is IMHO rather offensive
Where?
The accusation that traditional navigators are more likely to bust than GPS users is IMHO rather offensive
Where?
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: In the shadows
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow, people, you have got to relax a little over this!
The most important aspect not really touched on must be safety – yours and every other poor f*@?** up there. As far as the originator of this thread, and every other low-houred GA pilot is concerned, good airmanship must always prevail. That means if you are still working towards your PPL then the priority must be on gaining a solid proficiency in time-tested navigational techniques – which means primarily visual navigation and lookout. Why do you think the military spend so long training in this way, despite all the Gucci kit you can shake a stick at. If you spend most of your time ‘heads in’ playing with kit then you’re just a liability up there.
Once you have a degree of proficiency and, most importantly, capacity, then is the time to start using your aircraft, and all the kit, as a tool to allow you to accomplish more – which is presumably why people want to fly anyway. Electronic navigation aids are amazing bits of kit that reduce pilot workload and can increase efficiency and accuracy. However, sometimes that comes at the price of distraction and reduced lookout (in a VFR context). They have a place, but all in good time. Master the basics first and you will always have a solid foundation to refer to.
GM
The most important aspect not really touched on must be safety – yours and every other poor f*@?** up there. As far as the originator of this thread, and every other low-houred GA pilot is concerned, good airmanship must always prevail. That means if you are still working towards your PPL then the priority must be on gaining a solid proficiency in time-tested navigational techniques – which means primarily visual navigation and lookout. Why do you think the military spend so long training in this way, despite all the Gucci kit you can shake a stick at. If you spend most of your time ‘heads in’ playing with kit then you’re just a liability up there.
Once you have a degree of proficiency and, most importantly, capacity, then is the time to start using your aircraft, and all the kit, as a tool to allow you to accomplish more – which is presumably why people want to fly anyway. Electronic navigation aids are amazing bits of kit that reduce pilot workload and can increase efficiency and accuracy. However, sometimes that comes at the price of distraction and reduced lookout (in a VFR context). They have a place, but all in good time. Master the basics first and you will always have a solid foundation to refer to.
GM
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Toronto, Ont, Canada
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the equipment "preset", it shouldn't require "heads in" playing, rather just glancing at the readouts to confirm them, just like you'd glance at a speedometer in a car.
Once you have a degree of proficiency and, most importantly, capacity, then is the time to start using your aircraft, and all the kit, as a tool to allow you to accomplish more – which is presumably why people want to fly anyway.
Electronic navigation aids are amazing bits of kit that reduce pilot workload and can increase efficiency and accuracy. However, sometimes that comes at the price of distraction and reduced lookout (in a VFR context). They have a place, but all in good time. Master the basics first and you will always have a solid foundation to refer to.
GM
Electronic navigation aids are amazing bits of kit that reduce pilot workload and can increase efficiency and accuracy. However, sometimes that comes at the price of distraction and reduced lookout (in a VFR context). They have a place, but all in good time. Master the basics first and you will always have a solid foundation to refer to.
GM
Why not cover up the ASI / ALT and all othe other instruments while we're at it, as they are just "distractions" and cause a pilot to be "heads in" ?
Mike
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: In the shadows
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mstram,
You are absolutely correct in what you say - for a pilot with an established degree of competence and, most importantly, capacity. No doubt about it that preparation will reduce ‘heads in’ time.
Please remember though that I was specifically referring to new guys starting out, trying to master the basics (the original point of the thread), not to more advanced and seasoned pilots. Naturally, being adept with your aircraft’s avionic fit will always help to increase your overall SA and should be encouraged – however, not at the expense of the basics for the new guys!
GM
You are absolutely correct in what you say - for a pilot with an established degree of competence and, most importantly, capacity. No doubt about it that preparation will reduce ‘heads in’ time.
Please remember though that I was specifically referring to new guys starting out, trying to master the basics (the original point of the thread), not to more advanced and seasoned pilots. Naturally, being adept with your aircraft’s avionic fit will always help to increase your overall SA and should be encouraged – however, not at the expense of the basics for the new guys!
GM
