Navigation Woes...
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Similarly, on the odd occasion the GPS does throw a wobbly we use it in flight. More commonly we use a wheel to plan subsequent flights on return legs. Yes there is a GPS sat there, but to be quite honest it is often less hassel to use the wheel and not substantially slower.
Don't write off the wheel. It is an incredibly powerful tool and alot easier to use than is made out - practice makes perfect! There are even things it can do that our GPS cannot, like work out intercepts for moving way points (ok I agree that is not terribly useful).
Gadgets are great, but it doesn't mean the old stuff doesn't work. We still often fly IFR with no HSI, no Autopilot and no second GPS and we still get home on time
All the above proves is that a whole as yet undiscovered world can exist in some corner of aviation.
For a start, how often does a GPS "throw a wobbly"? What sort of a GPS are you using??? Was it made in the 1980s?
IFR with no HSI (presumably meaning no slaved DI) in a helicopter??? What kind of masochistic exercise is this?
The biggest problem is that anybody who can fly a helicopter while holding a heading to an accuracy where the slide rule would deliver a more accurate solution than the simplest rule of thumb (e.g. max drift is half the crosswind, etc) is a robot.
This is simply unreal. Could be an RAF or ex RAF crew perhaps, which was never exposed to the outside world?
Perhaps the most serious comment I can make is that some things can be practiced by very high hour highly trained pilots which would be completely stupid and inapplicable to all the rest.
Why not just fly partial panel, single pilot IFR, no autopilot, at night? Then you don't need much avionics, so even less to go wrong.
Don't write off the wheel. It is an incredibly powerful tool and alot easier to use than is made out - practice makes perfect! There are even things it can do that our GPS cannot, like work out intercepts for moving way points (ok I agree that is not terribly useful).
Gadgets are great, but it doesn't mean the old stuff doesn't work. We still often fly IFR with no HSI, no Autopilot and no second GPS and we still get home on time
All the above proves is that a whole as yet undiscovered world can exist in some corner of aviation.
For a start, how often does a GPS "throw a wobbly"? What sort of a GPS are you using??? Was it made in the 1980s?
IFR with no HSI (presumably meaning no slaved DI) in a helicopter??? What kind of masochistic exercise is this?
The biggest problem is that anybody who can fly a helicopter while holding a heading to an accuracy where the slide rule would deliver a more accurate solution than the simplest rule of thumb (e.g. max drift is half the crosswind, etc) is a robot.
This is simply unreal. Could be an RAF or ex RAF crew perhaps, which was never exposed to the outside world?
Perhaps the most serious comment I can make is that some things can be practiced by very high hour highly trained pilots which would be completely stupid and inapplicable to all the rest.
Why not just fly partial panel, single pilot IFR, no autopilot, at night? Then you don't need much avionics, so even less to go wrong.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All the above proves is that a whole as yet undiscovered world can exist in some corner of aviation.
Indeed.
For a start, how often does a GPS "throw a wobbly"? What sort of a GPS are you using??? Was it made in the 1980s?
It probably was. The make is Trimble, I forget which model, something like a 1201.
IFR with no HSI (presumably meaning no slaved DI) in a helicopter??? What kind of masochistic exercise is this?
Most aircraft have a nice HSI, some have a slaved DI, RMI, OBS. We don't get to choose!
The biggest problem is that anybody who can fly a helicopter while holding a heading to an accuracy where the slide rule would deliver a more accurate solution than the simplest rule of thumb (e.g. max drift is half the crosswind, etc) is a robot.
It is perfectly feasible to fly our helicopters to a degree of heading. Wheel is more accurate than rules of thumbs, but we still use our thumbs as well.
This is simply unreal. Could be an RAF or ex RAF crew perhaps, which was never exposed to the outside world?
Wash your mouth out!
Never flown military. Ex GA.
Perhaps the most serious comment I can make is that some things can be practiced by very high hour highly trained pilots which would be completely stupid and inapplicable to all the rest.
There are many ways of skinning the aviation cat. None are wrong, some might be seen as inappropriate but at the end of the day everything from rules of thumbs, whiz wheels, GNS 430s to full FMS are valid. To critisise any one of them is folly.
Why not just fly partial panel, single pilot IFR, no autopilot, at night? Then you don't need much avionics, so even less to go wrong.
Its not about masochism (although it maybe sadistic tendencies among management) or machoism. It is about being able to keep the show running regardless of the level of kit fitted to the machine. There is a huge dumming down of aviation in professional levels due to more advanced hardware. I prefer to fly rather than push buttons.
Indeed.
For a start, how often does a GPS "throw a wobbly"? What sort of a GPS are you using??? Was it made in the 1980s?
It probably was. The make is Trimble, I forget which model, something like a 1201.
IFR with no HSI (presumably meaning no slaved DI) in a helicopter??? What kind of masochistic exercise is this?
Most aircraft have a nice HSI, some have a slaved DI, RMI, OBS. We don't get to choose!
The biggest problem is that anybody who can fly a helicopter while holding a heading to an accuracy where the slide rule would deliver a more accurate solution than the simplest rule of thumb (e.g. max drift is half the crosswind, etc) is a robot.
It is perfectly feasible to fly our helicopters to a degree of heading. Wheel is more accurate than rules of thumbs, but we still use our thumbs as well.
This is simply unreal. Could be an RAF or ex RAF crew perhaps, which was never exposed to the outside world?
Wash your mouth out!
Never flown military. Ex GA.Perhaps the most serious comment I can make is that some things can be practiced by very high hour highly trained pilots which would be completely stupid and inapplicable to all the rest.
There are many ways of skinning the aviation cat. None are wrong, some might be seen as inappropriate but at the end of the day everything from rules of thumbs, whiz wheels, GNS 430s to full FMS are valid. To critisise any one of them is folly.
Why not just fly partial panel, single pilot IFR, no autopilot, at night? Then you don't need much avionics, so even less to go wrong.
Its not about masochism (although it maybe sadistic tendencies among management) or machoism. It is about being able to keep the show running regardless of the level of kit fitted to the machine. There is a huge dumming down of aviation in professional levels due to more advanced hardware. I prefer to fly rather than push buttons.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I am impressed that a commercial pilot is so keen to hang on to history.
You are not an airline pilot and my comments still stand, I personally do not know an airline pilot who uses a whizz wheel.
There is no doubt as you say the whizz wheel is a powerful tool, so was the slide rule and the log tables I used as a kid for math. However in this day and age electronics devices deliver much greater accuracy with less effort and far less room for error.
You are not an airline pilot and my comments still stand, I personally do not know an airline pilot who uses a whizz wheel.
There is no doubt as you say the whizz wheel is a powerful tool, so was the slide rule and the log tables I used as a kid for math. However in this day and age electronics devices deliver much greater accuracy with less effort and far less room for error.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This has been debated so many times before!
At the end of the day, once you have done your exams it is up to you if you use it or put it in the bin, but, until the powers that be decide otherwise, it has to be used for exams and so lets get on with help where it is needed and I would suggest that those who no longer use one leave the thread alone as they are not likely to be in practice and so not a lot of help.
At the end of the day, once you have done your exams it is up to you if you use it or put it in the bin, but, until the powers that be decide otherwise, it has to be used for exams and so lets get on with help where it is needed and I would suggest that those who no longer use one leave the thread alone as they are not likely to be in practice and so not a lot of help.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Between a Rock & A Hard Place
Age: 53
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By all accounts the reason we still have to use a piece of equipment that was used by WW2 bomber crews is the old power issue. The CAA think that the whizz wheel is more reliable as there are no batteries to run out. Fair point, but only to a point. There are that many nav aids available these days that if the battery packs up then look at using another aid. Carry a spare set of batteries. Use VOR/NDB, call ATC, the options are endless really, and the whizz wheel isn't that accurate really. It needs to be supported by mental arithmatic as well. Not too hard on the ground, but a complete pain if being banged about at 2000 feet!
However, as we know the powers that be aren't keen on change, so the whizz wheel will stay for the forseeable future I imagine.
However, as we know the powers that be aren't keen on change, so the whizz wheel will stay for the forseeable future I imagine.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bose,
It is not a matter of wanting to hang onto history, its a case of having to fly a piece of aviation history
Mind you I reckon I will still fly with a wheel in the pocket even if I did fly a new fangled machine.
CG,
How accurate do you need to be? The wheel is easily accurate enough given the quality of the forecast wind, fuel gauges etc. Yes our flight planning software works out our fuel requirements to the nearest lb, but that is less than 0.1% of our hourly burn. The wheel goes to the nearest 10lbs which is easily good enough.
It is not a matter of wanting to hang onto history, its a case of having to fly a piece of aviation history
Mind you I reckon I will still fly with a wheel in the pocket even if I did fly a new fangled machine.
CG,
How accurate do you need to be? The wheel is easily accurate enough given the quality of the forecast wind, fuel gauges etc. Yes our flight planning software works out our fuel requirements to the nearest lb, but that is less than 0.1% of our hourly burn. The wheel goes to the nearest 10lbs which is easily good enough.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Warboys
Age: 55
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think one of the main reasons that the RAF has 'Talking Baggage' in the back of it's large Helis is precisely that it is impossible to use a whizz wheel while flying a heli.
If we were doing too well on a navex, we used to get the 'overturned Landrover, x stretcher cases at grid Y, can you deal' thrown in, and I had the luxury of spreading out the map on the aircraft floor and doing all my tracks, drift calcs and Fuel/weight/range computations without being encumbered with sticks and levers.
On the negative, I had no forward view, so had to rely on a sideways view of the world and the pilot narrating what he could see, OK at 1500', but somewhat exciting at 50-100'/90 kts, going across a 1:25,000 at alarming speed shouting 'Wires' sporadically!
If we were doing too well on a navex, we used to get the 'overturned Landrover, x stretcher cases at grid Y, can you deal' thrown in, and I had the luxury of spreading out the map on the aircraft floor and doing all my tracks, drift calcs and Fuel/weight/range computations without being encumbered with sticks and levers.
On the negative, I had no forward view, so had to rely on a sideways view of the world and the pilot narrating what he could see, OK at 1500', but somewhat exciting at 50-100'/90 kts, going across a 1:25,000 at alarming speed shouting 'Wires' sporadically!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The power issue doesn't wash. Can anybody here remember the last time a calculator was unusable due to dead batteries? One can make that argument for a laptop or a PDA, most certainly, but one would not use either of those for a critical application on the ground and one would not use either of them for anything (when running on batteries, anyway) when airborne.
It's true airline pilots don't normally do their own planning. I have flown with quite a few and none of them (noting that very few of those who fly GA fly IFR GA) would be able to file an IFR flight plan that's Eurocontrol acceptable, and they haven't got a clue about IFR issues like oxygen, and where to get smart weather data via the internet. The place to look for real "on the hoof" flight planning ability is corporate and private bizjet pilots; most of them have to do everything alone. None of them use the slide rule.
I think the continued teaching of the slide rule is positively reducing safety. For a start, the large proportion of the PPL ground school (none of which is mandatory anyway) gets blown away on this subject, and could be better spent teaching more useful stuff, like how to work out a real long route across a bit of Europe.
Next, nobody is taught how it actually works. I used a straight slide rule at school since in the late 1960s (this was in Eastern Europe, not the UK) and understood how it works: adding/subtracting logs and doing the antilog gives you multiplication and division. But present day PPL students never get to understand this very simple principle. They never realise that the calculator side is just a general purpose multiplication/division function, which just happens to have marks in common places like litre/gallon conversion factors. They think it is some special purpose aviation device, which magically converts one thing to another. So when they get a duff answer because they line up the marks wrong (which is really easily done) they never realise it. I also think most of them never suss out that the wind side works out the trig for the wind triangle, and when and why iteration is required to get the right answer.
There is so much stuff which would be more usefully taught in the PPL, which would help turn out a PPL holder who can go somewhere interesting. Instead, they learn a whole load of rubbish.
Most intelligent people that walk into a flying school take one look at this quaint old nonsense, smile politely and walk straight out of the door.
Droopy - if you can fly a heli to 1 degree on say a 20nm leg, you are indeed a robot
It's true airline pilots don't normally do their own planning. I have flown with quite a few and none of them (noting that very few of those who fly GA fly IFR GA) would be able to file an IFR flight plan that's Eurocontrol acceptable, and they haven't got a clue about IFR issues like oxygen, and where to get smart weather data via the internet. The place to look for real "on the hoof" flight planning ability is corporate and private bizjet pilots; most of them have to do everything alone. None of them use the slide rule.
I think the continued teaching of the slide rule is positively reducing safety. For a start, the large proportion of the PPL ground school (none of which is mandatory anyway) gets blown away on this subject, and could be better spent teaching more useful stuff, like how to work out a real long route across a bit of Europe.
Next, nobody is taught how it actually works. I used a straight slide rule at school since in the late 1960s (this was in Eastern Europe, not the UK) and understood how it works: adding/subtracting logs and doing the antilog gives you multiplication and division. But present day PPL students never get to understand this very simple principle. They never realise that the calculator side is just a general purpose multiplication/division function, which just happens to have marks in common places like litre/gallon conversion factors. They think it is some special purpose aviation device, which magically converts one thing to another. So when they get a duff answer because they line up the marks wrong (which is really easily done) they never realise it. I also think most of them never suss out that the wind side works out the trig for the wind triangle, and when and why iteration is required to get the right answer.
There is so much stuff which would be more usefully taught in the PPL, which would help turn out a PPL holder who can go somewhere interesting. Instead, they learn a whole load of rubbish.
Most intelligent people that walk into a flying school take one look at this quaint old nonsense, smile politely and walk straight out of the door.
Droopy - if you can fly a heli to 1 degree on say a 20nm leg, you are indeed a robot
Blah Blah Blah
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Malmesbury VRP
Age: 48
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by IO540
Next, nobody is taught how it actually works. I used a straight slide rule at school since in the late 1960s (this was in Eastern Europe, not the UK) and understood how it works: adding/subtracting logs and doing the antilog gives you multiplication and division. But present day PPL students never get to understand this very simple principle. They never realise that the calculator side is just a general purpose multiplication/division function, which just happens to have marks in common places like litre/gallon conversion factors. They think it is some special purpose aviation device, which magically converts one thing to another. So when they get a duff answer because they line up the marks wrong (which is really easily done) they never realise it. I also think most of them never suss out that the wind side works out the trig for the wind triangle, and when and why iteration is required to get the right answer.
The whizz will i got came with a little manual. It explained how it works and went into all the above you mentioned. It even had a little test at the end.
I would imagine hardly anyone reads that little book and waits for NAV lessons, and as you say comes to the conclusion that it is an aeronautical masterpiece.
Originally Posted by IO540
Most intelligent people that walk into a flying school take one look at this quaint old nonsense, smile politely and walk straight out of the door.
Picture it, pilot has no ideas how to use a GPS and battles with the whizz wheel. Suddenly he looses instrumentation including the GPS is spamcan is equiped with. Pilot plots diversion whizz's it up and makes a safe landing.
Pilot has no ideas how to use a whizz wheel as he intelligently decided to walk away from the quaint old nonsene, but he did smile nicely. His spamcan looses all instrumentation including the GPS which he has a Phd in the operation of. He proceeds to fly of course get lost and crash due to no more fuel and the inability to read a map and use a whiz wheel.
Out of the two scenarios who is the less intelligent?
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most intelligent people that walk into a flying school take one look at this quaint old nonsense, smile politely and walk straight out of the door.
(n.b. for the record I also think it should be phased out, but until the CAA do that I will continue to each it)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by bose-x
I personally do not know an airline pilot who uses a whizz wheel.
True. But you might also struggle to find an airline pilot who does his own planning...
Originally Posted by bose-x
I personally do not know an airline pilot who uses a whizz wheel.
True. But you might also struggle to find an airline pilot who does his own planning...
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Yateley, Hants
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Intersting to read so many points of view from a large number of apparently experienced pilots here. As a very green PPL who has less than 20 hours under my belt since gaining my license I still use the whizz wheel to help me plan my nav. Touching wood here - it has never let me down and honestly I really enjoy this form of navigation.
During my training I often flew a GPS equipped aircraft but it was never allowed more than passing reference. Maybe I should have been more insistent and I wouldn't be sitting here now thinking how naive I seem to be and how little I know. I appear to have a mental block as regards getting started with a GPS. How did others who only have the "luxury" of club hire get to learn how to use one? Car based GPS easy - are a/c based system really as easy?
I am only now gaining in confidence in the use of VOR, presumably it's a case of familiarity and practice makes perfect.
I would really welcome a balanced view point on this. Am I really the only one who is having a crisis of confidence on the subject of "technology" in the cockpit?
During my training I often flew a GPS equipped aircraft but it was never allowed more than passing reference. Maybe I should have been more insistent and I wouldn't be sitting here now thinking how naive I seem to be and how little I know. I appear to have a mental block as regards getting started with a GPS. How did others who only have the "luxury" of club hire get to learn how to use one? Car based GPS easy - are a/c based system really as easy?
I am only now gaining in confidence in the use of VOR, presumably it's a case of familiarity and practice makes perfect.
I would really welcome a balanced view point on this. Am I really the only one who is having a crisis of confidence on the subject of "technology" in the cockpit?
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rude Not 2
I am sorry for hi jacking the post, but I hope you can see that at least a small minority of professional pilots still use the wheel and believe it is worthwhile to get to grips with.
Flyingsteve55,
As I have said before there are many ways of doing navigation and it is up to you what you decide to use. It will largely depend what sort of flying you want to do. For some, traditional navigation is a reason in its own right to fly, others want the most user friendly, low input means to get from A to B. Neither is wrong. What ever you use and whatever you choose not to use, it is well worth having some understanding of the pluses and minus's of all of them.
My advice to you is to practice the wheel and get confident with it. After all you have to use it to get your PPL. Thereafter I would recommend that you get your instructor to give you at least an hours flying using the GPS post PPL as an extra lesson. GPS's are great, but there are a large number to choose from and not all of them are very easy to use. In fact some of them are very challenging and counter intuitive. But once you get the hang of them, they can be very useful.
PS IO540 I am not a robot and agree that I couldn't hold a heading to within a degree for an extended period, but the AFCS can - all I have to do is fly to that heading, which I can do to one degree. The Stab looks after the rest. (basically a yaw hold using the compass as a datum)
I am sorry for hi jacking the post, but I hope you can see that at least a small minority of professional pilots still use the wheel and believe it is worthwhile to get to grips with.
Flyingsteve55,
As I have said before there are many ways of doing navigation and it is up to you what you decide to use. It will largely depend what sort of flying you want to do. For some, traditional navigation is a reason in its own right to fly, others want the most user friendly, low input means to get from A to B. Neither is wrong. What ever you use and whatever you choose not to use, it is well worth having some understanding of the pluses and minus's of all of them.
My advice to you is to practice the wheel and get confident with it. After all you have to use it to get your PPL. Thereafter I would recommend that you get your instructor to give you at least an hours flying using the GPS post PPL as an extra lesson. GPS's are great, but there are a large number to choose from and not all of them are very easy to use. In fact some of them are very challenging and counter intuitive. But once you get the hang of them, they can be very useful.
PS IO540 I am not a robot and agree that I couldn't hold a heading to within a degree for an extended period, but the AFCS can - all I have to do is fly to that heading, which I can do to one degree. The Stab looks after the rest. (basically a yaw hold using the compass as a datum)
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Next, nobody is taught how it actually works.
Personally I use the wheel because I was taught it for the PPL and can't be arsed either to do the sums by hand with pencil and paper or to find and learn a piece of software that will do it for me. Simply because it's not worth the effort, the wheel takes seconds per flight to do the sums, and it'll take longer than that for the computer to start up!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Droopystop
Don't worry about the 7500
!! This is what the forums in general - not just this one - are about.
I will look back to the thread on Sunday night with whizzy in hand and also dig out the CRP cd that I have and go over things again. I must get my finger out and get the exam sat otherwise October will be on us and I will have to sit Airlaw and HPL again!!
Thanks for the info guys, both the relevant stuff and the banter.
Don't worry about the 7500
!! This is what the forums in general - not just this one - are about.I will look back to the thread on Sunday night with whizzy in hand and also dig out the CRP cd that I have and go over things again. I must get my finger out and get the exam sat otherwise October will be on us and I will have to sit Airlaw and HPL again!!
Thanks for the info guys, both the relevant stuff and the banter.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure why a discussion of the circular slide rule should automatically lead to a discussion of GPS.
The slide rule is for ground use. A GPS is used enroute. The two are not related.
I am convinced that the slide rule should be abolished and the time put to better use. Anybody who can afford to fly can afford to buy an electronic version for the wind calcs. The CRP devices are actually very expensive for what you get. The multiplication/division side of the slide rule is (in most hands) just a disaster looking for a place to happen and a 5 quid calculator does a much better job. The pilot then has to remember a few factors like 3.78 (USG to litres) but he has to remember those anyway to do a sanity check when using the slide rule.
The slide rule is for ground use. A GPS is used enroute. The two are not related.
I am convinced that the slide rule should be abolished and the time put to better use. Anybody who can afford to fly can afford to buy an electronic version for the wind calcs. The CRP devices are actually very expensive for what you get. The multiplication/division side of the slide rule is (in most hands) just a disaster looking for a place to happen and a 5 quid calculator does a much better job. The pilot then has to remember a few factors like 3.78 (USG to litres) but he has to remember those anyway to do a sanity check when using the slide rule.
Couldn't agree more. There should be no restriction on using an electronic calculator for PPL navigation training as far as I'm concerned. Although personally I find the circular slide rule useful for some applications.
Do any of the latest hand-held GPS systems include a flight planning calculator? Having entered route waypoints, it wouldn't be rocket science to enter planned IAS, ALT, W/V, OAT and fuel consumption to obtain GS, heading and leg time for each leg. Then send it to a printer for your paper back-up in case the system dumps in flight.
Ideally, of course, the W/V and OAT would be available on-line....
Do any of the latest hand-held GPS systems include a flight planning calculator? Having entered route waypoints, it wouldn't be rocket science to enter planned IAS, ALT, W/V, OAT and fuel consumption to obtain GS, heading and leg time for each leg. Then send it to a printer for your paper back-up in case the system dumps in flight.
Ideally, of course, the W/V and OAT would be available on-line....