IMC

[englishal]

I have a Garmin 496 and Garmin Aera 550. They are both great, with the Aera being better in my opinion. Certainly clever devices and of course covers the "western hemisphere" and so good for Europe too. I have the 550 due to the higher resolution TAWS but the 500 should be good too.

[mikehallam]

This has excellent reviews -various fora. For a basic £159 delivered & free NATS updates on 1/2 mill UK charts included. [1/4 mill also available].

AWARE - POWERED BY AIRBOX IN ASSOCIATION WITH NATS

mikehallam - about to recieve one

[flybymike]

I have used GPS since it first became available for aircraft and am a great believer in it. However I am a complete computer technophobe and ignoramus (ancient man) and have no idea what the content of this thread is about when it talks about Blue tooth, tablet computers, PDAs, Iphones, memory maps, etc etc.

I have been bought a netbook computer for my birthday. What exactly would I need to do to get CAA moving maps with if possible flight planning to run on it? I understand that one can get GPS dongles and buy software mapping but doesn't this have to be loaded by disc (my netbook [eepc] has no CD aperture) and would I need to use my home computer to set it up? what leads connections etc would I need? I know what a USB connector is but I read things about blue teeth ( mine are like that anyway) ethernet connections and goodness knows what all . I am quite happy indeed delighted with my present GPS ( garmin aera) but I thought a large scale moving map if cheap and easy to set up may be a worthwhile second option, (using a second GPS receiver just as a redundancy back up rather than my existing one) . Any help in simple childish terms much appreciated....!

[chris-h]

AWARE - POWERED BY AIRBOX IN ASSOCIATION WITH NATS

Seems quite cheap & it does most things the expensive ones do.
Can you buy a northern England 1:500.000 tho?

Does anybody out their allready own 1 of these?

[mikehallam]

Price includes the whole of GB charts.

Plenty of reviews out, try Google or the Flyer form, the LAA forum, even the BMAA: plus some specialist magazines on the web.

It's switch on and wait 1/2 minute & that's it - so the reviews say.

mikehallam

[p.s use the earlier above posted link to read what they offer if you're seriously searching for a device.]

[IO540]

I have used GPS since it first became available for aircraft and am a great believer in it. However I am a complete computer technophobe and ignoramus (ancient man) and have no idea what the content of this thread is about when it talks about Blue tooth, tablet computers, PDAs, Iphones, memory maps, etc etc.

I have been bought a netbook computer for my birthday. What exactly would I need to do to get CAA moving maps with if possible flight planning to run on it? I understand that one can get GPS dongles and buy software mapping but doesn't this have to be loaded by disc (my netbook [eepc] has no CD aperture) and would I need to use my home computer to set it up? what leads connections etc would I need? I know what a USB connector is but I read things about blue teeth ( mine are like that anyway) ethernet connections and goodness knows what all . I am quite happy indeed delighted with my present GPS ( garmin aera) but I thought a large scale moving map if cheap and easy to set up may be a worthwhile second option, (using a second GPS receiver just as a redundancy back up rather than my existing one) .

There are two principal moving map applications under Windoze which will deliver a moving map over an electronic version of the real "printed" VFR chart:

Oziexplorer

This runs any map as a GPS moving map. You need to get it in one of the common graphical image formats e.g. TIFF, JPEG etc. You also need a separate .map file which contains georeferencing data - this enables the computer to position the map correctly, with your present location in the middle.

There is a huge range of maps available, especially ones distributed by underground networks, and these include current aviation charts for all of Europe and beyond. You get topo maps, city maps, road maps, the lot, and most of it is free. The old U.S. ONC charts (which can be bought online) run straight off under Ozi.

This program is the "standard" for GPS moving maps. The maps are "open", not copy protected etc.

Memory Map

This is a UK product which has made its name reselling Ordnance Survey 1:25k and 1:50k land maps, and later branched out into the UK CAA VFR maps. They do very little outside the UK. I have seen French IGN (non-aviation) maps from them.

MM uses a closed map format - QCT. However they are now moving to a "digital rights managed" format - QC3 - which locks each map to the computer it is on and it cannot be moved elsewhere. I hope everybody boycotts MM from now on. Unfortunately, those who want an electronic version of the latest southern UK chart may not have an option...

When running the UK CAA VFR charts, MM provides a moving map product which is very similar to Ozi.


As regards connecting a GPS to a laptop/netbook (netbook is just a name for a cheap laptop), you need a laptop with bluetooth. This is a low power radio link for connecting various devices to it. If your laptop doesn't have BT then forget it. If it has BT then any BT GPS should work e.g. this one.

However, connecting a BT device to a laptop does require a bit of computer knowledge so getting help from a friend may be a good idea. The BT connection is easy to set up (normally) but then you need to go into Control Panel and find out which COM port number the GPS appears under, and configure that COM port number in the moving map application (Ozi/MM etc).


As regards flight planning software, there are two reasonably tested applications which cover Europe: Navbox and PocketFMS. I have used Navbox Pro around Europe and it is pretty good.

Both of these needs to be used in conjunction with the printed VFR charts (terrain clearance, etc).

Both will also provide a moving map function (with a BT GPS) but you don't get the "proper" VFR chart.

There is also Jeppesen Flitestar VFR but I can't recommend this to a technophobe. It is full of features but is a clunky bit of software. I use it for IFR/airways and for that it is the only game in town, but it has so many quirks...


There are other more esoteric options for a GPS moving map e.g. a Flitestar sister product called Flitemap. It is identical to Flitestar but has a moving map function. The moving map can be the basic Jeppesen map (no good for flying with) or it can be an electronic version of their "1:500k VFR/GPS" charts; this is sold as their Raster Charts product for about £200 for most of Europe. IMHO, for the UK, the CAA charts are clearer than the Jepp Raster Charts, but if MM tighten up their "digital rights management" UK pilots won't have an option there. I have flown as far as Crete, VFR, running Flitemap. Jepp have discontinued Flitemap but one can still get hold of it.


The "holy grail" which is a decent flight planning program that uses proper "printed" VFR charts, and support a GPS moving map over the same charts, exists only as Jeppesen Flitemap (which no longer officially exists). This is thanks to VFR maps being profit centres Safety doesn't come into any of this of course. Someone like Navbox could do it but instead of costing under £100 it would cost about £300 - due to the cost of licensing the Jepp raster charts.

[BackPacker]

IO, your post is not complete. If you mention PocketFMS, you should also mention SkyDemon (SkyDemon Plan, flight planning software for desktop PCs) which has more or less the same capabilities but is a far more recent product.

What would be very nice if either PocketFMS or SkyDemon would allow you to import your own maps & calibrate them, OziExplorer style, and then use this as the basemap on which all airspace features are drawn. (Or not, at your option.)

That way you would be able to get hold of said "Underground" maps and import them into PocketFMS or SkyDemon, to get your route overlaid on a map with familiar color coding etc., but you also get the intelligence of a program that understands airspace, can warn for imminent CAS busts, knows how to handle TAFs, METARs, NOTAMs, fuel flow, alternates and so forth.

[IO540]

I did not mention Skydemon because it doesn't have European coverage; only bits. I also think it needs some more market exposure, to iron out various things (according to reports). When they are done, and if they are committed to a constant update schedule, it will be a far better product than Navbox.

What would be very nice if either PocketFMS or SkyDemon would allow you to import your own maps & calibrate them, OziExplorer style, and then use this as the basemap on which all airspace features are drawn

I couldn't agree more

[mmgreve]

IMC - worth it ?

Do you mind if we get back to the original question for a while....

Having a PPL and realising that you can't go anywhere because of weather - or at least that you will be nervously flying below lowering clouds to stay VMC, some form of IR quickly come into mind

In my book, there is always gonig to be a trade-off, and I am not sure where to put my money and time down.

IMC: "Easy" to get, cost efficient and probably(?) learnes you 95% of what you will ever need in real life as a PPL. But you still can't go anywhere because it is UK only and I can't imaging myself going fo a leasure flight round the flagpole in IMC - I am like to need the IR when going cross country, and that is likely to be across the channel

FAA IR: Probably the next best in my book. Appears to be more targeted towards the PPL pilot than the JAA version. I will however need to (ideally) get a full stand alone FAA PPL, spend time in the states flying and get an N-reg plane (again, I need to be able to cross the channel). It seems counter-intuitive for me to be going for an FAA IR when I am likely to do 99% of my IR flying in Europe and as such need to know how things work here. I have also heard some talk about limiting the ability to operate foreign reg aircrafts permanently in Europe (I believe Denmark has imposed such a rule - probably mostly because they didn't want people to pay their fees to the FAA)

JAA IR: It will be interesting to see what they come up with to make it more FAA-like (not sure why they don't just copy). At the moment it seems to me a bit OTT in terms of what you need to go through to fly a small SEP through a cloud. Part of me feels however that the curriculum might be perceived to be worse than it is. I know piltos with JAA IR who I wouldn't consider to be overly strong academically.


Any advice?

[Fuji Abound]

PocketFms

I think there is some confusion here which I would like to correct.

PocketFms is primarily NOT a flight planning product but is very much designed to run in the cockpit. The software can be installed on a very wide range of platforms including most touch screen car GPS, notepads and notebooks and other portable PCs. The maps cover the whole of Europe and in fact most of the world. The software works very very well in the cockpit, and the charts are as good as the printed versions.

Personally I think the holy grail is someone producing a platform on which software of this sort will operate which is comparable with the best panel displays. For a long time screens that could be viewed in bright light were few and far between. For this reason PocketFms was usually run on an iPaq. Cheap in car GPS have provided a good alternative. However, in the perfect world these screens are too small. The ideal screen size would IMO be around A5 size. Get the screen size right and then you need to provide a three hour plus run time on batteries, sunlight readability, touch screen and reasonable storage. All of that can be done except perhaps the run time aspect on batteries but tapping into the ships power is not the end of the world. The probelm is that by the time you have purchased PocketFms and a platform that meets my criteria to be fair you might just as well buy one of the very good units from Mr Garmin.

However PocketFms does work really well on in car type GPS which are a far less expensive solution.

[W2k]

JAA IR: It will be interesting to see what they come up with to make it more FAA-like (not sure why they don't just copy). At the moment it seems to me a bit OTT in terms of what you need to go through to fly a small SEP through a cloud. Part of me feels however that the curriculum might be perceived to be worse than it is. I know piltos with JAA IR who I wouldn't consider to be overly strong academically.

Being a low-hour PPL student this certainly matches my view of the IR so far. Being potentially grounded by a few rainclouds seems like it's going to be an awful inconvenience once I get my PPL and start using it to fly places. OTOH the IR seems to be an awfully big step over just PPL+NQ in terms of the time and money required to attain one and keep it current.

Having not really researched the subject in depth yet (a bit early for me to care about such things until I have my PPL!), I'm left wondering "what the hell have they put in there to make the course so darn long, just so I can fly through a few clouds?!"

There's a good answer to this I'm sure - perhaps "they" simply don't WANT too many low hour SEP guys flying around in IFR?

That said I'm still committed to getting an IR one day, perhaps a few years after the PPL if I find myself using it enough to warrant spending the time and money.

[IO540]

IMC: "Easy" to get, cost efficient and probably(?) learnes you 95% of what you will ever need in real life as a PPL. But you still can't go anywhere because it is UK only and I can't imaging myself going fo a leasure flight round the flagpole in IMC - I am like to need the IR when going cross country, and that is likely to be across the channel

The general idea in European touring on the IMCR (which I did for a few years) is that one departs the UK is less than great weather, climb to VMC on top before the airspace boundary, continues VMC to say La Rochelle and lands in VFR conditions. And the reverse going back. It tends to work quite well in the sense that it is a lot better than being legit VFR-only which is pretty limiting.

And the IMCR training, used together with 100% radio navigation (GPS/VOR/DME) enables one to cope with the, shall we say, occassional less than quite VFR conditions encountered enroute I don't think I have ever done a long VFR trip on which such "conditions" were never encountered But if you have no instrument capability, you can't do that else you kill yourself.

The full IR takes you into a different kind of flying. Sure enough you can still go drilling holes in clouds, and some do, but an IR gives you an implied whole-route IFR clearance which means controlled airspace falls away, so you climb to VMC, sit there the whole enroute bit, and then descend. The weather you are exposed to is different from that a PPL/IMCR is exposed to - it is high altitude weather, cloud tops, etc. You generally need a better machine than a Warrior, too, and many/most IR holders carry oxygen (I would never even depart on an IFR flight without sufficient oxygen). It's a great way to go places, but tough to do on the bottom end of the rental-wreckage scene. One still picks the weather; nobody wants to sit in muck for hours. On a nice day, one can fly IFR at FL100 for hundreds of miles, with a clearance all the way and nobody bothering you and dropping spanners in the works. In fact on any half decent day, if the European airspace owners operated their airspace according to ICAO (anything below Class A is fine for VFR) one would not need an IR half as much.

The FAA IR is nowadays not meaningful unless you are going to own your own plane, because it has to be N-reg.

A cut-down EASA IR is being promised but is at best 2-3 years away, and there have been so many false horizons on the IR front that I don't believe anything will happen.

The JAA IR syllabus is not intellectually hard. Most airline pilots are not intellectually that sharp. Anybody who could scrape an o-level pass in maths and science could easily pass all the exams. I know a bloke who can barely count and he has passed all 14 CPL/IR exams, on a very part-time basis (over years). It is just a huge memory exercise because so much of it is bullsh*t which doesn't relate to the real world. I have never done the JAA IR exams but have seen the material. There is a time/effort tradeoff in that you can spread them out if you are not too bothered about when you get there, but there is an overall time limit and if you don't complete the IR flight training itself in time (and that does cost serious money - it's currently 50hrs dual training, with no credit for anything previous short of another ICAO IR) then you have to either do it all again, or find a country which lets you do the flying while accepting your expired exam passes.

As I say, the way one has to play the "IR" game is backwards: can you afford a decent plane. If not, forget the IR. If so, then you can start throwing some options about... but I would not wait for an easier European IR.

[VMC-on-top]

IMC: "Easy" to get, cost efficient and probably(?) learnes you 95% of what you will ever need in real life as a PPL. But you still can't go anywhere because it is UK only and I can't imaging myself going fo a leasure flight round the flagpole in IMC - I am like to need the IR when going cross country, and that is likely to be across the channel

IO540 beat me to it!

The idea of getting the IMCr (as so many have said on here before) is not to go round in IMC all day. I did my IMCr last year and I've climbed / descended through clouds dozens of times. Do I have any intention of flying a relatively long route (300+ miles) in solid IMC? Not a chance, I can tell you.

As IO said, if you have the money, then do the IR and buy an N reg to sit in airways on AP drinking coffee all day. For me, I'm in a Warrior group and plan to do much more European touring, which technically I can do VFR on top (in sight of the ground) and that's plenty enough for me. I suspect the sort of flying you want to do is very similar to me and on that basis, I would say do the IMCr.

[mmgreve]

The general idea in European touring on the IMCR (which I did for a few years) is that one departs the UK is less than great weather, climb to VMC on top before the airspace boundary, continues VMC to say La Rochelle and lands in VFR conditions. And the reverse going back. It tends to work quite well in the sense that it is a lot better than being legit VFR-only which is pretty limiting

Shall I understand that so that you made use of the French rules allowing you to fly VMC on top (if I am not mistaking) and "hoped" for a hole in the clouds before destination?

My flying will be towards Northern Europe where the weather possibly is more rubbish than in the UK, so that would be quite a gamble for me. I can of course make an ILS approach based on what I will learn on the IMC course and hope that they are not checking....but I am not sure of the (legal) risks I would be running, and seems not to be something you would plan for (emergencies are different, of course)

The FAA IR is nowadays not meaningful unless you are going to own your own plane, because it has to be N-reg.

I am not so concerned about having to have an N-reg plane available, there seems to be plenty available for purchase and hire. I am more concerned about the EU ni their visdom deciding to ban N-regs to be permanently based in Europe or something, which could leave you with an FAA PPL and IR that are useless and an JAA PPL that has lapsed?

Thanks for gettnig back on subject

[flybymike]

IO540 and others many thanks for the technological pointers.

IO you have a reply to your email.

[IO540]

Shall I understand that so that you made use of the French rules allowing you to fly VMC on top (if I am not mistaking) and "hoped" for a hole in the clouds before destination?

It's not a "french rule".

Every PPL can fly VFR without sight of surface, worldwide.

Unless his license says he cannot (and UK issued ones do). No other European country AFAIK has such a limitation on its PPLs.

However if the UK PPL gets an IMCR or an IR, this restriction falls away and he can now fly VFR without sight of surface worldwide.

(The IMCR IFR privileges are a different thing; they are limited to UK only).

Correct about the hole in the cloud There are various ways to deal with this

My flying will be towards Northern Europe where the weather possibly is more rubbish than in the UK, so that would be quite a gamble for me. I can of course make an ILS approach based on what I will learn on the IMC course and hope that they are not checking....but I am not sure of the (legal) risks I would be running, and seems not to be something you would plan for (emergencies are different, of course)

I would never do that.

To even get away with it practically, you would need the "IR lingo" which admittedly you could pick up by flying with a real IR pilot.

N of the UK (Sweden, Norway etc) is really tricky, VFR or IFR. Much of the time Norway is so covered in fronts you cannot see its outline on the pressure chart

It is the province of either waiting for good weather (for both out and back legs), or having seriously capable (de-iced, etc) hardware.

I keep half an eye on a trip to Trondheim (ENVA), which I can nonstop (900nm or so) from southern UK, and being able to go nonstop dramatically reduces the weather risk, but at least 90% of the time the flight is not flyable on any assesment of risk I am willing to do (icing conditions, cloud tops, etc).

I am not so concerned about having to have an N-reg plane available, there seems to be plenty available for purchase and hire.

Sure, but the hourly rate of the N-reg Cirrus SR22 groups is "interesting" And for real IFR you don't want some old dog. You need something in which everything works, and the owner has a policy of close to zero defects.

I am more concerned about the EU ni their visdom deciding to ban N-regs to be permanently based in Europe or something, which could leave you with an FAA PPL and IR that are useless and an JAA PPL that has lapsed?

There is no indication of a ban on N-reg airframes parking here long term. That was tried in 2005 or so and dropped. There would be various work-arounds, as well as a total lack of enforceability within the current aviation framework.

EASA's present tack is to ban European residents from flying in EU airspace on foreign licenses. The rather badly worded proposal is here (pages 159-161). IMHO, they won't be able to pull off something this aggressive.

The worst case, if EASA gets everything, gets the backing of the EC for this, and gets EC's backing to stick a finger up to the USA with total disregard for the wider political fallout, appears to be that you will need to do a JAA/EASA IR, but the conversion route from an FAA IR is not onerous - especially if done in some countries other than the UK It's a perfectly reasonable risk management option. Obviously, you would do it only if EASA's proposal does not melt down. I am keeping half an eye on this too, but have better things to do than the 7 PPL/IR exams.

IMHO, there will either be a total meltdown of all anti N-reg initiatives (and some press consensus seems to support this of late; I hope they are right), or there will be a compromise, with generous transition routes for FAA IR holders. There is simply too much sh*t which will hit the fan otherwise, with jet operators who are politically immensely powerful and were prob99 almost solely responsible for killing the 2005 DfT (and the 2004 French) proposal to kick out N-reg and other foreign airframes.

But if you can't get an N-reg plane of a suitable spec, forget the FAA route.

[VMC-on-top]

Every PPL can fly VFR without sight of surface, worldwide.

Unless his license says he cannot (and UK issued ones do). No other European country AFAIK has such a limitation on its PPLs.

However if the UK PPL gets an IMCR or an IR, this restriction falls away and he can now fly VFR without sight of surface worldwide.

My understanding is that the UK PPL holder can still fly VFR on top - if he / she "has sight of the ground" - and that could well be a mountain or hill, or hole in the cloud which is 100 miles away.

[IO540]

Yes.

All unenforceable, obviously.

[Islander2]

My understanding is that the UK PPL holder can still fly VFR on top - if he / she "has sight of the ground" - and that could well be a mountain or hill, or hole in the cloud which is 100 miles away.

I think a court could well beg to differ with your interpretation.

Given the ANO says with the surface in sight means with the flight crew being able to see sufficient surface features or surface illumination to enable the flight crew to maintain the aircraft in a desired attitude without reference to any flight instrument and when the surface is not in sight is to be construed accordingly ....

..... it seems unlikely that not fly out of sight of the surface would be interpreted differently.

Of course, as IO540 observes, this is largely unenforceable. Perhaps a case could be mounted if you've lost control of the aeroplane and crashed from the ensuing spiral dive ... but it's a little academic at that stage!

[VMC-on-top]

You're right, I'm sure we could argue for ever and a day on that. My point being that if you have sight of the surface, you have a fixed feature to navigate to, or with - and therefore to retain that desired attitude without reference to the instruments.

The inference that a subsequent spiral dives ensues is that i am in solid IMC with no IMCr / IR? I do have an IMCr and wouldn't go off into solid IMC with it anyway (not for long journeys anyway) and certainly, I wouldn't advocate going pure VFR on top with masses of cloud around with sight of a solitary ground feature many, many miles away. It was just a technicality really.