How would YOU teach PPL nav?
The Original Whirly
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How would YOU teach PPL nav?
OK, a new subject...something to think about on a miserable, drizzly day (it is here anyway 
)
There have been various comments/criticisms over the last few months/years about the way navigation is taught on the PPL course (Hi IO540
) Criticisms of the whizzwheel, why no GPS etc etc etc. OK, if you could change the nav syllabus, how would you teach it? What would you include/take out/put in? Bear in mind you'll have to include emergency procedures for when electrics, batteries etc fail. And what to do when you have no PC access on a small airfield in France, for instance. And you can't just say something is rubbish; you have to come up with a better way.
I'm not getting at anyone; I'm genuinely interested.
Over to....everyone.
)There have been various comments/criticisms over the last few months/years about the way navigation is taught on the PPL course (Hi IO540
) Criticisms of the whizzwheel, why no GPS etc etc etc. OK, if you could change the nav syllabus, how would you teach it? What would you include/take out/put in? Bear in mind you'll have to include emergency procedures for when electrics, batteries etc fail. And what to do when you have no PC access on a small airfield in France, for instance. And you can't just say something is rubbish; you have to come up with a better way.I'm not getting at anyone; I'm genuinely interested.
Over to....everyone.
For simple light aeroplane navigation:
1. Assume IAS is roughly the same as TAS below 5000 ft PA.
2. Allow use of electronic nav computers in CAA exams.
3. Insist on lines on charts.
4. Allow waypoints to be backed up in GPS.
5. Reduce level of RT work to the absolute minimum.
6. Teach Standard Closing Angle correction.
7. In flight, insist on flying acuracy and proper activity organisation.
8. pre-HAAT and post-HAAT at turning points.
9. For VFR, throw away the useless 'PLOG' - just put leg headings and times on the chart and note down amended waypoint ETAs on a notepad!
10. Insist that students keep their eyes out of the cockpit most of the time.
11. Discourage excessive map reading.
....a few for a start!
1. Assume IAS is roughly the same as TAS below 5000 ft PA.
2. Allow use of electronic nav computers in CAA exams.
3. Insist on lines on charts.
4. Allow waypoints to be backed up in GPS.
5. Reduce level of RT work to the absolute minimum.
6. Teach Standard Closing Angle correction.
7. In flight, insist on flying acuracy and proper activity organisation.
8. pre-HAAT and post-HAAT at turning points.
9. For VFR, throw away the useless 'PLOG' - just put leg headings and times on the chart and note down amended waypoint ETAs on a notepad!
10. Insist that students keep their eyes out of the cockpit most of the time.
11. Discourage excessive map reading.
....a few for a start!
Pompey till I die
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Guildford
Age: 51
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Funny
11. Discourage excessive map reading.
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
Agree 100% with BEagle (and PompeyPaul), as a starting point.
Ded reckoning, the art of flying a heading and time, is the basis of all navigation. It does need to backed up by something else, though, and pilotage (map reading, cross-checking the map against the ground) is the most basic way of doing this - combined with some technique for fixing any track errors (and there are many of these, all equally good - standard closing angle is one of my favourites, very easy to use).
Once the student has got the idea of how the technique is used, it can be expanded by including techniques for dog-legging (e.g. around weather or small bits of airspace), techniques for avoiding controlled airspace to the side of track (having a stop-point which you know you must or must not be to the left of, or the right of), or techniques for stopping short of controlled airspace when you don't yet have a clearance (based on timing, possibly backed up with a good visual reference if there happens to be one).
However, once a student has mastered this most basic form of navigation, the syllabus ought to include the effective use of navaids: how to fix position with navaids, and use this as an alternative to pilotage to back up ded reckoning. And then, finally, GPS, which again is nothing more than a way of backing up ded reckoning. Initially, moving map features should not be used. Only once a student is fully conversant with all the other normal modes of use should the student be allowed to see the moving map for additional situational awareness of aircraft position along track and the relative position of controlled airspace.
The reason I have suggested this route is because it starts off by building good, solid foundations which can be used throughout the rest of the training (the building block principal). It then moves on to more practical, realistic techniques which can be used every day.
Unfortunately, it takes far too long to teach people everything they need to know on a PPL course. When I taught PPL, I started an initiative to train PPLs to a more advanced level in whatever areas of flight they felt they most needed it. This included several different modules on the subject of navigation.
Now, on the CPL course I teach students ded reckoning and pilotage (or, very often, un-teach them the bad habits they've taught themselves), and then teach them the use of conventional navaids to back up these techniques. On the IR, I go on the teach them how to use GPS - without moving map to start with, and then with moving map after that. Even on these two courses I don't have time to teach students everything I'd like to.
FFF
--------------
Ded reckoning, the art of flying a heading and time, is the basis of all navigation. It does need to backed up by something else, though, and pilotage (map reading, cross-checking the map against the ground) is the most basic way of doing this - combined with some technique for fixing any track errors (and there are many of these, all equally good - standard closing angle is one of my favourites, very easy to use).
Once the student has got the idea of how the technique is used, it can be expanded by including techniques for dog-legging (e.g. around weather or small bits of airspace), techniques for avoiding controlled airspace to the side of track (having a stop-point which you know you must or must not be to the left of, or the right of), or techniques for stopping short of controlled airspace when you don't yet have a clearance (based on timing, possibly backed up with a good visual reference if there happens to be one).
However, once a student has mastered this most basic form of navigation, the syllabus ought to include the effective use of navaids: how to fix position with navaids, and use this as an alternative to pilotage to back up ded reckoning. And then, finally, GPS, which again is nothing more than a way of backing up ded reckoning. Initially, moving map features should not be used. Only once a student is fully conversant with all the other normal modes of use should the student be allowed to see the moving map for additional situational awareness of aircraft position along track and the relative position of controlled airspace.
The reason I have suggested this route is because it starts off by building good, solid foundations which can be used throughout the rest of the training (the building block principal). It then moves on to more practical, realistic techniques which can be used every day.
Unfortunately, it takes far too long to teach people everything they need to know on a PPL course. When I taught PPL, I started an initiative to train PPLs to a more advanced level in whatever areas of flight they felt they most needed it. This included several different modules on the subject of navigation.
Now, on the CPL course I teach students ded reckoning and pilotage (or, very often, un-teach them the bad habits they've taught themselves), and then teach them the use of conventional navaids to back up these techniques. On the IR, I go on the teach them how to use GPS - without moving map to start with, and then with moving map after that. Even on these two courses I don't have time to teach students everything I'd like to.
FFF
--------------
I agree 100% with BEagle. By the way, Is it possible to buy any notes or books that teach the RAF techniques for various subjects, mainly VFR nav? I lke the idea of dispensing with the Plog and instead putting down all the info on the chart instead.
Fly Conventional Gear
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Winchester
Posts: 1,600
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm in two minds about the plog, I was always taught not to mess up the map by putting stuff all over it- so the plog means that one runs less risk of writing over landmarks that you might need. Having said that I can see the logic behind having all the info on the map and one is more likely to spot mistakes in heading and the like if they are on the map.
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: U.K.
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Think positional awareness from day one. When I was instructing (Not yesterday) on a trial lesson I would brief that we would fly west for five minutes and do some handling over a certain landmark. After 15mins or so, I would say "Take us back to the airfield" Panic. I don't know where we are! When they did remember how we got there with a bit of prompting, it would suddenly dawn that if we flew east for 5min, we would be about there. Also, given a wind and a 1/2 million, I would ask students to plan a route with no instruments at all, then when finished, get them to do it with a whizz-wheel protracter, and rule, and with a little bit of practice, they were amazed how accurate they could become. This ,of course, was all on top of the formal training.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You people remind me of a brilliant engineer who develops a really clever product. It is something totally out of this world and "therefore" everybody will want to buy it.
Sounds familiar? It should be to anybody who has done anything in business.
What you need to do first is define the market.
Nowadays, almost nobody is interested in flying for the sake of the kind of anorak techniques that are taught in the PPL. They remain there because they are for the most part the core skills (well, not the circular slide rule which is a total complete load of crap and a waste of many hours of ground school which could be put to better use) and nobody in the flight training business wants a "PPL" to appear on their price list with an even higher price tag, so people in the business always find a thousand reasons for not doing anything about it.
Think about it - if you were training your own child for example, would you teach him what the PPL currently covers and then let him/her go off on their own on a trip which goes anywhere near the limits of their current legal privileges?
The syllabus needs modernising - the question is what can be taken out to make room for stuff that's really needed e.g. GPS, engine management, knowing how to go places so people can get some enjoyment out of flying. I don't think anything much can be taken out, which leads to a bit of an intractable situation.
One could also diverge to a separate stream to do aerobatics, without doing the full current PPL.
Sounds familiar? It should be to anybody who has done anything in business.
What you need to do first is define the market.
Nowadays, almost nobody is interested in flying for the sake of the kind of anorak techniques that are taught in the PPL. They remain there because they are for the most part the core skills (well, not the circular slide rule which is a total complete load of crap and a waste of many hours of ground school which could be put to better use) and nobody in the flight training business wants a "PPL" to appear on their price list with an even higher price tag, so people in the business always find a thousand reasons for not doing anything about it.
Think about it - if you were training your own child for example, would you teach him what the PPL currently covers and then let him/her go off on their own on a trip which goes anywhere near the limits of their current legal privileges?
The syllabus needs modernising - the question is what can be taken out to make room for stuff that's really needed e.g. GPS, engine management, knowing how to go places so people can get some enjoyment out of flying. I don't think anything much can be taken out, which leads to a bit of an intractable situation.
One could also diverge to a separate stream to do aerobatics, without doing the full current PPL.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Scotland
Age: 44
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps navigating the old fashioned PPL way isn't a skill required any longer (although I disagree with that, as it gives you better multitasking and cockpit management skills) , but then again what are the skills involved in pressing a few keys on a GPS unit ?
I'd teach the fundamental principles of navigation:
1) Calculate your desired track
2) Estimate the heading required to maintain the desired track and fly it
3) Evaluate your actual track compared to desired track
4) Correct your heading accordingly, first to close, then to maintain desired track
I'd then demonstrate that these fundamental principles apply whether you are using a map and eyeball, a moving map GPS, a VOR, an NDB, or a tuna sandwich. These are tools for evaluating deviation from desired track required in step 3, and the difference between them is only in their reliability and precision, both of which should be considered for each tool to be used.
1) Calculate your desired track
2) Estimate the heading required to maintain the desired track and fly it
3) Evaluate your actual track compared to desired track
4) Correct your heading accordingly, first to close, then to maintain desired track
I'd then demonstrate that these fundamental principles apply whether you are using a map and eyeball, a moving map GPS, a VOR, an NDB, or a tuna sandwich. These are tools for evaluating deviation from desired track required in step 3, and the difference between them is only in their reliability and precision, both of which should be considered for each tool to be used.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On a PPL Skill Test the average candidate sets out on the first leg with lots of impressive lines and marks on the chart, often including halfway marks, quarter way marks, distance to go marks etc. None of these have any use whatsoever as you can't see them on the ground; the candidate invariably does nothing with them, and hasn't got a clue why they are there, other than someone told them they must put them on their chart. More often than not they maintain height and heading well, but the track can be up to 15 degrees out and they don't either notice or know what to do about it. When you question what their ETA will be, their watch is seldom synchronised to within 3 minutes of real time!
So if we do nothing else teach them to Fly Heading and Time, and at 6 minute intervals check the track and time and how to correct it if its wrong. There is no substitute for DEAD REKONING, the principle is the same whether you are in a boat or an aeroplane.
So if we do nothing else teach them to Fly Heading and Time, and at 6 minute intervals check the track and time and how to correct it if its wrong. There is no substitute for DEAD REKONING, the principle is the same whether you are in a boat or an aeroplane.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Fareham
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok guys. I am going to be deliberately provocative. I think the original poster was after trying to get some new ideas so I’ll put some up and see how well they can be shot down. I’m not necessarily arguing that I am right, just trying to initiate some discussion.
I would start by letting my student simply watch the moving map GPS and get feeling for what a wonderfully accurate, easy to read and intuitive tool it is. Once they had a grasp of the basic principles I would start and add a single track-line between two waypoints. I would explain the importance of checking that the line did not pass through controlled airspace, prohibited areas etc. and that it was much better to do this on the ground before setting off than in the air.
I would then build on the idea of the difference between ‘heading’ shown by the GPS (which is really course-over-ground or track) and the compass. This provides a very simple and graphic illustration of drift.
Next I would look at the HSI function and explain the relative merits of this as compared to the moving map display.
Once these concepts were understood, I would build a more substantial knowledge of the features of the GPS unit including (but not limited to):
* How to check the integrity of the GPS signal (gross error check at start-up and satellite signal)
* How to check that the database was up to date, how to update it if it is not and how important this is
* How to enter routes
* How to use the ‘nearest’ function for diversion planning
* How to find out the details of airspace from the moving map
* How to get airfield information from the unit
* The importance of checking that routes generated on the fly (in the air) did not cross through controlled or prohibited airspace.
Finally I would switch the GPS off and get my student to call a Practice Pan on 121.5. I would explain to D&D what I was up to and have them give the student a steer either back to base or to a suitable airfield. Repeat several times for confidence.
Job done.
On the basis of my personal experience, if well taught, learned and tested, knowledge of this syllabus would result in a vast reduction of CAS busts and a significant reduction if ‘temporarily uncertain of positions’.
For those who were lost, the learned response would be to call D&D early (hopefully immediately).
You can go on all you like about the possible frailty of GPS but my experience (and that of the vast majority of recreational pilots) is that it is a damn sight more reliable than compass and stopwatch navigation will ever be.
Hardhat firmly on…… incoming!
I would start by letting my student simply watch the moving map GPS and get feeling for what a wonderfully accurate, easy to read and intuitive tool it is. Once they had a grasp of the basic principles I would start and add a single track-line between two waypoints. I would explain the importance of checking that the line did not pass through controlled airspace, prohibited areas etc. and that it was much better to do this on the ground before setting off than in the air.
I would then build on the idea of the difference between ‘heading’ shown by the GPS (which is really course-over-ground or track) and the compass. This provides a very simple and graphic illustration of drift.
Next I would look at the HSI function and explain the relative merits of this as compared to the moving map display.
Once these concepts were understood, I would build a more substantial knowledge of the features of the GPS unit including (but not limited to):
* How to check the integrity of the GPS signal (gross error check at start-up and satellite signal)
* How to check that the database was up to date, how to update it if it is not and how important this is
* How to enter routes
* How to use the ‘nearest’ function for diversion planning
* How to find out the details of airspace from the moving map
* How to get airfield information from the unit
* The importance of checking that routes generated on the fly (in the air) did not cross through controlled or prohibited airspace.
Finally I would switch the GPS off and get my student to call a Practice Pan on 121.5. I would explain to D&D what I was up to and have them give the student a steer either back to base or to a suitable airfield. Repeat several times for confidence.
Job done.
On the basis of my personal experience, if well taught, learned and tested, knowledge of this syllabus would result in a vast reduction of CAS busts and a significant reduction if ‘temporarily uncertain of positions’.
For those who were lost, the learned response would be to call D&D early (hopefully immediately).
You can go on all you like about the possible frailty of GPS but my experience (and that of the vast majority of recreational pilots) is that it is a damn sight more reliable than compass and stopwatch navigation will ever be.
Hardhat firmly on…… incoming!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd spend 10 hours teaching them how to program the G1000 so they could use it to the full potential (or GPS equiv. in the crappy warriors we get in the UK)......seriously. DR is outdated, it was outdated in the 30's according to Ernest K Gann, which is why navaids were invented. GPS just happens to be the best navaid around, and I don't think I have ever seen it drop out for more than a few seconds since 1995 when I started using it for work.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by IansEager
I'm with Bookworm, apart from his tuna sandwich method, everyone knows that tuna mayo is the way to go.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Fareham
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just out of interest, why is GPS (which can and does go wrong very very very rarely) worse as a sole method of navigation than DR (which can and does go wrong quite often)?
Here's a scenario for the panel (especially the GPS fans):
You are teaching someone to drive.
Once you've covered the basics of car handling and 'roadcraft', you teach them how to navigate.
Would you hand them a TomTom, show them how to enter their destination (postcode etc) and tell them to follow the instructions. Or would you hand them a road map and teach them how to use road signs?
You are teaching someone to drive.
Once you've covered the basics of car handling and 'roadcraft', you teach them how to navigate.
Would you hand them a TomTom, show them how to enter their destination (postcode etc) and tell them to follow the instructions. Or would you hand them a road map and teach them how to use road signs?
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Canadian Shield
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This sounds bizarre but is GREAT!!!!!
Ever heard of 'OFF-COURSE NAVIGATION'????
It was used by helicopter pilots in the jungles of Vietnam - they had to find very precise LZs, but often when they arrived at their Ded Reckoning position, the LZ was nowhere in sight......... so which way to turn??????
What they started doing was flying their computed track @ the appropriate speed and ignore the WCA. Then when Ded Reckoning said they should be over the LZ, they only had to turn and head INTO the wind to find the LZ.
I didn't believe it either, so tried it and it WORKS!!!!
Not sure I would recommend it to students though..........
It was used by helicopter pilots in the jungles of Vietnam - they had to find very precise LZs, but often when they arrived at their Ded Reckoning position, the LZ was nowhere in sight......... so which way to turn??????
What they started doing was flying their computed track @ the appropriate speed and ignore the WCA. Then when Ded Reckoning said they should be over the LZ, they only had to turn and head INTO the wind to find the LZ.
I didn't believe it either, so tried it and it WORKS!!!!
Not sure I would recommend it to students though..........