Looking out of the window while VFR?
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VOD80 like Olderndirt I also learned to fly when the Radio Range was the Nav aid for airways.
As the years passed I morphed with the aids as they became available, up to and including the magic glass cockpit fly by wire airplanes.
After over half a century flying for a living I am now semi retired and find these debates to be interesting.
As to relying on pencil, map, magnetic compass and a watch in today's complex airspace I feel it is poor airmanship...period.
By the way for what ever it is worth I am into my 55th year as a pilot and never had to fill out an accident report.
As the years passed I morphed with the aids as they became available, up to and including the magic glass cockpit fly by wire airplanes.
After over half a century flying for a living I am now semi retired and find these debates to be interesting.
As to relying on pencil, map, magnetic compass and a watch in today's complex airspace I feel it is poor airmanship...period.
By the way for what ever it is worth I am into my 55th year as a pilot and never had to fill out an accident report.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Toulouse
Age: 63
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sacré bleu or even merde alors!
OK, I surrender!
I've the feeling that I've fallen into some parallel universe.
To navigate with only a map and a compass and to have this called "poor airmanship"!
I think everything gets mixed up. The airlines need GPS because they have constraints that can't be satisfied without this. But, it isn't just something from Transair. It's a fully monitored redundant system, integrated into the aircraft and into the airlines' operations. I've not been involved directly in the nav systems (I was doing the warning systems) but I worked in the same department. It was not a trivial subject.
To think that, even two, independent GPS installed with zero integrity monitoring and uncontrolled databases coupled to ad-hoc processes is a sign of good airmanship or that it can, just like that, approach the level of performance achieved in the "professional world" is, to my mind, a questionable proposition!
There's no denying that it can "paper over the cracks" of someone's abilities such that their probability of encountering a sticky situation is reduced. But the corollary is likely to be that the probability of a stickier outcome once the sticky situation is encountered is increased - IMHO!
And, I've just spent a little time reading the "What to do if you're lost" thread as well. It seems like a very passionate subject.
I've the feeling that I've fallen into some parallel universe.
To navigate with only a map and a compass and to have this called "poor airmanship"!
I think everything gets mixed up. The airlines need GPS because they have constraints that can't be satisfied without this. But, it isn't just something from Transair. It's a fully monitored redundant system, integrated into the aircraft and into the airlines' operations. I've not been involved directly in the nav systems (I was doing the warning systems) but I worked in the same department. It was not a trivial subject.
To think that, even two, independent GPS installed with zero integrity monitoring and uncontrolled databases coupled to ad-hoc processes is a sign of good airmanship or that it can, just like that, approach the level of performance achieved in the "professional world" is, to my mind, a questionable proposition!
There's no denying that it can "paper over the cracks" of someone's abilities such that their probability of encountering a sticky situation is reduced. But the corollary is likely to be that the probability of a stickier outcome once the sticky situation is encountered is increased - IMHO!
And, I've just spent a little time reading the "What to do if you're lost" thread as well. It seems like a very passionate subject.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Toulouse
Age: 63
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sciolistes:
Sorry! Some people are just dead unreliable!
I had a friend in my Auster days who got a job as an airline pilot after being in the air force and he had great fun doing VFR stuff in an A320 - apparently lots of non-precision approaches in the eastern Mediterranean!
I agree with your position - quoted below with the additional bolded text from me:
Cheers!
You're not alone, where were you when I was embroiled in this debate? Huh?
I had a friend in my Auster days who got a job as an airline pilot after being in the air force and he had great fun doing VFR stuff in an A320 - apparently lots of non-precision approaches in the eastern Mediterranean!
I agree with your position - quoted below with the additional bolded text from me:
GPS is great. But for people to suggest that one would be mad not to use it is way off the mark. There is no reason why one can't maintain a traffic watch and situation awareness regardless of which properly implemented nav technique you use
Guest
Posts: n/a
I've the feeling that I've fallen into some parallel universe.
To navigate with only a map and a compass and to have this called "poor airmanship"!
To navigate with only a map and a compass and to have this called "poor airmanship"!
In the past, he has shared his knowledge freely on this forum and some of us listen to him and reflect on what he says, for he has forgotten more about flying than many of us here have yet learned.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Toulouse
Age: 63
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
?
The guy who said word to this effect (in today's complex airspace) has over 25,000 flying hours, including crossing the Atlantic in piston engined flying boats.
With all of the threads on GPS seemingly degenerating into this kind of mess, with two very polarised points of view, it is probably not worth continuing.
I confess, when I asked the question, I thought that there would be some light hearted chat - I never thought for a moment that it could become so serious!
I've read some of Chuck's posts and enjoyed them - but struggle to see how anyone's previous experience allows them to become an authority on minimum requirements to get VFR RNP.
I'm here to learn and will listen to everyone. My experience is 250 odd hours of day VFR SEP, almost all of them cross country in the UK, France, Germany, the Netherlands and so on, half in my Auster (wouldn't fly "hands off") the rest in various Robins and Pipers. This was also in all sorts of weather, some of which was worse than forecast and which needed flights replanned "on the fly". All without any nav aids (none of us used them in those days) and none with any problems.
I'm surprised, not having flown for ten years, that there can be such a strong belief that it is difficult to maintain situational awareness without GPS.
Is GPS nice to have? For sure! Is it pretty? Yes. Is it easier? Of course! Is it the only way to fly? That is the question that I sort of asked (light heartedly, imprecisely - mea culpa!) and I really don't feel that this is the case.
Perhaps I'll find differently when I'm finally reprocessed...
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VOD80
Times have changed. Don't give up your kneeboard, I won't give up mine either.
But just as you needed to get a tool to help you hear better and I had to get specs so that I could see properly, the tools required in the increasingly crowded and controlled airspace are not absolutely essential but they sure can help a lot and make your flying less stressful, more accurate and enjoyable. Having one more dial or little screen added to your scan isn't really a big deal. Kind of fun doing the prep on a GPS as well as on paper.
By the by, you can get your charts laminated and use a pen on them that can be erased easily. Map will last for the period that it's current instead of falling apart at the creases. 3M make a great spray adhesive that you can use on the back of the expired charts... great insulation for the shed wall....
Times have changed. Don't give up your kneeboard, I won't give up mine either.
But just as you needed to get a tool to help you hear better and I had to get specs so that I could see properly, the tools required in the increasingly crowded and controlled airspace are not absolutely essential but they sure can help a lot and make your flying less stressful, more accurate and enjoyable. Having one more dial or little screen added to your scan isn't really a big deal. Kind of fun doing the prep on a GPS as well as on paper.
By the by, you can get your charts laminated and use a pen on them that can be erased easily. Map will last for the period that it's current instead of falling apart at the creases. 3M make a great spray adhesive that you can use on the back of the expired charts... great insulation for the shed wall....
Guest
Posts: n/a
with two very polarised points of view
Some of us are saying that GPS forms a part of the toolkit and should be considered for use in an integrated nav solution, not really a polarised view, more of a common sense view, I would have thought. Anyone using only GPS is also demonstrating poor airmanship in my opinion and that would be a polarised position.
Some others are saying they prefer traditional methods.
The irony is that I bet all the posters talking integrated solution are pretty hot on the concepts and practices of traditional methods.
Anyone who cannot maintain situational awareness without a GPS should probably not be in command of an aircraft, but having such a useful too can reduce the workload and stress considerably and if used properly, make more time for looking out, which is pretty important OCAS.
Codger says it nicely in his post.
As to 'What does that mean?', it means that Chuck Ellsworth has spent a lot of time learning about flying and is worth listening to. Nothing more or less.
Your attempt to start off light humour on this subject was sadly doomed before it started, due to historical threads, not your fault and please don;t take it personally.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VOD80 the opinion that I offered regarding flying safely is based on common sense.
In today's very complex airspace with many aircraft flying in said complex airspace it is very important that you know where you are and where you are heading at all times.
To compound the difficulty of flying in these busy airspace's one can encounter low visibilities due to air polution among other factors.
Depending on situational awareness with only a map and compass and time and distance is not good airmanship when for a very small money investment you can have a portable GPS which is more accurate position wise than you can relate to by looking at the ground even on a severe clear day.
It is not my intention to demean your ideas about navigating nor do I want to down play your map reading ability or flight planning ability. I am only trying to point out that not using a GPS is taking an unneccesary risk when there is no valid reason to take said risk.
In today's very complex airspace with many aircraft flying in said complex airspace it is very important that you know where you are and where you are heading at all times.
To compound the difficulty of flying in these busy airspace's one can encounter low visibilities due to air polution among other factors.
Depending on situational awareness with only a map and compass and time and distance is not good airmanship when for a very small money investment you can have a portable GPS which is more accurate position wise than you can relate to by looking at the ground even on a severe clear day.
It is not my intention to demean your ideas about navigating nor do I want to down play your map reading ability or flight planning ability. I am only trying to point out that not using a GPS is taking an unneccesary risk when there is no valid reason to take said risk.
I can remember chugging across the swamp at a couple hundred feet between Nitchequon and Gagnon with a Beaver on floats and wishing I had something other than a map to navigate with. 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Near Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 1,096
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Hello!
Times have changed indeed and maybe it is time to give up the kneeboard. In the company where I fly commercially it is company policy not do do any paperwork below 10.000ft (above which there are no uncontrolled flights in Germany). This means, we put the kneeboards aside from receiving the T/O clearance until reaching FL100 and devote all spare capacity looking out for traffic. Even this way, I alone had three TCAS events during the last six months .
Greetings, Max
VOD80:
Really?
Times have changed. Don't give up your kneeboard, ...
Greetings, Max
VOD80:
I confess, when I asked the question, I thought that there would be some light hearted chat - I never thought for a moment that it could become so serious!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Toulouse
Age: 63
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello Max,
Yes, really!
I thought this was a "private flying" spot in PPRUNE. I give the position from the prespective of a Day VFR SEP pilot, outside of controlled airspace for the most part.
I really find it hard to believe that you think that maintaining situational awareness for people like me requires GPS.
For you, professional pilot, of course. You have considerations like BRNAV, PRNAV, RNPx as well as company motivations like productivity.
Me, pleasure pliot, I can be as inefficient as I like! And, I maintain that I'm sure I can maintain situational awareness without GPS.
This does not mean that GPS is no good, that nobody should use GPS or that I don't like GPS.
And about these TCAS events. Were these TAs or RAs? Were they VFR traffic infringing controlled airspace or traffic in the open FIR? And how would GPS have helped the situation?
Why so much emotion?
Yes, really!
I thought this was a "private flying" spot in PPRUNE. I give the position from the prespective of a Day VFR SEP pilot, outside of controlled airspace for the most part.
I really find it hard to believe that you think that maintaining situational awareness for people like me requires GPS.
For you, professional pilot, of course. You have considerations like BRNAV, PRNAV, RNPx as well as company motivations like productivity.
Me, pleasure pliot, I can be as inefficient as I like! And, I maintain that I'm sure I can maintain situational awareness without GPS.
This does not mean that GPS is no good, that nobody should use GPS or that I don't like GPS.
And about these TCAS events. Were these TAs or RAs? Were they VFR traffic infringing controlled airspace or traffic in the open FIR? And how would GPS have helped the situation?
Why so much emotion?
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Me, pleasure pliot, I can be as inefficient as I like!
Interesting line of thinking for a pilot.
And, I maintain that I'm sure I can maintain situational awareness without GPS.
No one has said you can't, as long as you fly in areas that are relatively easy to navigate in ...and of course in good visibility.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I can remember chugging across the swamp at a couple hundred feet between Nitchequon and Gagnon with a Beaver on floats and wishing I had something other than a map to navigate with.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Toulouse
Age: 63
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello again Chuck,
This is really a quick answer because I'm just off out for the evening. GPS is "effort reduction", not "risk reduction" - from the viewpoint of the ATS. Now, I'm not a specialist in this area and I'm applying my system engineering pronciples to this problem and I'll accept any deeper expalinations... The ultimate objective for the ATS would be something like making sure that us VFR pilots do not bring down an A380 loaded with passengers.
To that end the ATS is designed to keep us apart. There are risks that VFR pilots are going to get lost, so the "system" is designed to cope with this - Class A airspace, air traffic controllers, TCAS and so on.
There are a number of "consequences" (a component of "risk") from an infringement, and each has a probability associated. To illustrate the point, lets invent some numbers - Infringe airspace and the probability that you get called by ATC is going to be close to 1, that you get a letter from the CAA, probably 0.5, that you cause an aitrcraft to deviate 1 in 100 (0.01). That we bring down an A380, we need to have a "system" probability of something like 1*10E-9 per flight hour. This probability needs to cover everything that could conceivably happen, including the GPS equiped plane that does a DCT straight across an ILS.
GPS can reduce pilot work load. GPS can be more accurate - but does a VFR pilot necessarily need that accuracy? Are there no other acceptable means of compliance?
Maybe full of holes, but I hope you get the general thrust of the message!
Best regards,
T
I am only trying to point out that not using a GPS is taking an unneccesary risk when there is no valid reason to take said risk.
To that end the ATS is designed to keep us apart. There are risks that VFR pilots are going to get lost, so the "system" is designed to cope with this - Class A airspace, air traffic controllers, TCAS and so on.
There are a number of "consequences" (a component of "risk") from an infringement, and each has a probability associated. To illustrate the point, lets invent some numbers - Infringe airspace and the probability that you get called by ATC is going to be close to 1, that you get a letter from the CAA, probably 0.5, that you cause an aitrcraft to deviate 1 in 100 (0.01). That we bring down an A380, we need to have a "system" probability of something like 1*10E-9 per flight hour. This probability needs to cover everything that could conceivably happen, including the GPS equiped plane that does a DCT straight across an ILS.
GPS can reduce pilot work load. GPS can be more accurate - but does a VFR pilot necessarily need that accuracy? Are there no other acceptable means of compliance?
Maybe full of holes, but I hope you get the general thrust of the message!
Best regards,
T
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Near Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 1,096
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Hello!
I can not see a major distinction between private and professional pilots. We all do the same "work", we share the same airspace, we have the same problems. There are days, when I am a private pilot too and there are days, when I teach people to become private pilots, that's why I read this part of the forum and a couple of flying magazines with great interest. It is like on the road: The same road is used by "private" and commercial drivers, and if I (private) collide with a taxi cab (professional) we both die, so we better should have talked to each other beforehand...
It certainly does not require GPS, but GPS takes most of the "burden" of navigation from the pilot and frees his attention/resources for other duties.
This is exactly what I can't believe. Based on my own experience. Only yesterday, I did a two-hour VFR training flight with a CPL student. Visual navigation only with ad-hoc tasks to be performed (like the typical transition from instrument flight to visual flight for landing on a VFR-only airfield: You cancel IFR at some point and have to find your way into the traffic pattern by reference to ground features, often in marginal weather). Based on the discussion here, I observed my student a little closer than I usually would have done: She never - not once in two hours of flying! - looked anywhere but either on her map or straight down to the ground trying to identify railway tracks, rivers and roads (at one point, we were off by over 10 NM and she could still match the ground to the map, but that's a different story). We could have flown straight into an airship and she only would have noticed the very moment everything around her got dark (if it is dark inside an airship?). And mind you, she's not a private pilot who flies once every couple of weeks, but is on an integrated ATPL course flying every day for the last half year.
I've had both TA (1) and RAs (2). Two of them happened in class F airspace (don't know if this exists anywhere else but in Germay - it allows instrument approaches and departures into airfields/airports that have no proper control zone - the lo-cost airlines like to use this kind of airfield because it saves them a lot of fees...). Especially in this kind of mixed VFR/IFR environment, the principle of "see and be seen" is very important and any unnecessary distraction from looking out is potentially dangerous.
Maybe, because my life is at stake? In another post, you calculate the risks/probabilites of colliding with other traffic. My calculation goes like this: The more hours you fly, the higher the risk to collide with someone. And because I fly more hours than most private pilots, the only way to reduce my risk is to make others aware of these risks and to show them ways to reduce them. For their benefit and for mine.
Greetings, Max
One more thing to think about: If GPS would have been around when Mr. Auster built his aeroplanes, and he would have fitted one in each of them (like he did with compass, ASI, altimeter and RPM indicator) - would anybody ever have questioned its usefulness?
I thought this was a "private flying" spot in PPRuNe. ... For you, professional pilot, of course.
I really find it hard to believe that you think that maintaining situational awareness for people like me requires GPS.
And, I maintain that I'm sure I can maintain situational awareness without GPS.
And about these TCAS events. Were these TAs or RAs? Were they VFR traffic infringing controlled airspace or traffic in the open FIR? And how would GPS have helped the situation?
Why so much emotion?
Greetings, Max
One more thing to think about: If GPS would have been around when Mr. Auster built his aeroplanes, and he would have fitted one in each of them (like he did with compass, ASI, altimeter and RPM indicator) - would anybody ever have questioned its usefulness?
Real Beaver pilots don't need maps, they know the route! -
Here ya go.
Moderator
And, I maintain that I'm sure I can maintain situational awareness without GPS.
No one has said you can't, as long as you fly in areas that are relatively easy to navigate in ...and of course in good visibility.
No one has said you can't, as long as you fly in areas that are relatively easy to navigate in ...and of course in good visibility.
Yeah, but....
There are A LOT of places on earth, some within an hour's flying of where I live in Ontario, that you'd have to be very sharp with the chart to always know where you are. It becomes just about completely constant map reading, to the point that it nearly interferes with good airmanship, to always know your location without navaids. Fortunately, there's less traffic to watch for, and hardly any controlled airspace to manage. Prior to GPS I flew these areas in not so great VFR, and realized that if I lost my location, I would never get it back. All those lakes look the same!
I once tracked outbound for 93 miles south from NairobiKenya. After that, I lost the VOR signal, and with no topographical reference at all, I flew for 4 hours (Twin Otter). All I did was hold the last heading, there were no other navaids at all at our altitude, and nothing else to refer to on the ground, it all looked the same! I eventually came to Lake Malawi, and was 25 miles off coarse, but in 500 miles, that's not too bad! Had GPS existed, I would have been much closer.
But, skilled map reading ability aside, there's no good excuse for not availing one's self with reasonable navigational capability. I can hardly think that anyone who can afford and has the skill to fly, cannot make a GPS a part of their good pilotage. Sure, I fly around locally without using one (but I still have it), within 25 miles of here, I really do know where I am!
To me. it's sort of like getting into a Cessna 182RG, and saying well, I'll not bother retracting the wheels, 'cause I never did on the regular 182 I used to fly! Advances are made, we should make good use of them!
Pilot DAR
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Max,
There is a huge difference between the average commercial pilot and the average private pilot - about 30,000 feet, 300 kts, several thousand hours to name but a few. More over of course you student spent most her time struggling with the nav - she was only learning and the lookout is your job as the instructor.
The GPS is a great tool. I don't think anyone is disputing that providing it is used properly. I have seen how easy it is for two commercial pilots to get suckered into a black box in a cockpit. The private pilot will be equally or even more susceptable to that.
The problem with VFR nav is that a) it is poorly taught (instructors think the student will get a GPS when they qualify), b) it takes practice, c) it takes planning and d) people insist on those horrible half mil charts. It is not for the idle or the impatient.
Similarly GPS is a) not taught, b) takes practice to use c) takes planning on the ground and d) uses those horrible Jeppesen charts. Not the solution for the idle and impatient.
There are parts of the world where GPS is more or less essential - where there are few ground features. There are parts of the world, like all the UK and I guess much of Europe where there are sufficient visual references for VFR nav.
Should private flying stop if GPS is switched off? Should we stay on the ground when the military are playing at jamming? Was Chuck exercising bad airmanship by flying in the days before GPS? OF course not. GPS is not a prerequisite for flight. It is an excuse for not teaching for nav properly.
If you can VFR nav properly there is no need for a GPS. If the viz is poor, don't go - you are of course doing it for fun. Where is the fun in groping around in poor viz (with or without GPS) at £x00/hr?
There is a huge difference between the average commercial pilot and the average private pilot - about 30,000 feet, 300 kts, several thousand hours to name but a few. More over of course you student spent most her time struggling with the nav - she was only learning and the lookout is your job as the instructor.
The GPS is a great tool. I don't think anyone is disputing that providing it is used properly. I have seen how easy it is for two commercial pilots to get suckered into a black box in a cockpit. The private pilot will be equally or even more susceptable to that.
The problem with VFR nav is that a) it is poorly taught (instructors think the student will get a GPS when they qualify), b) it takes practice, c) it takes planning and d) people insist on those horrible half mil charts. It is not for the idle or the impatient.
Similarly GPS is a) not taught, b) takes practice to use c) takes planning on the ground and d) uses those horrible Jeppesen charts. Not the solution for the idle and impatient.
There are parts of the world where GPS is more or less essential - where there are few ground features. There are parts of the world, like all the UK and I guess much of Europe where there are sufficient visual references for VFR nav.
Should private flying stop if GPS is switched off? Should we stay on the ground when the military are playing at jamming? Was Chuck exercising bad airmanship by flying in the days before GPS? OF course not. GPS is not a prerequisite for flight. It is an excuse for not teaching for nav properly.
If you can VFR nav properly there is no need for a GPS. If the viz is poor, don't go - you are of course doing it for fun. Where is the fun in groping around in poor viz (with or without GPS) at £x00/hr?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: London
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To think that, even two, independent GPS installed with zero integrity monitoring and uncontrolled databases coupled to ad-hoc processes is a sign of good airmanship
or that it can, just like that, approach the level of performance achieved in the "professional world" is, to my mind, a questionable proposition!
Sorry VOD80, what ever your point about GPS is, trying to make out that GA IFR GPS is inadequate is not helping your cause.