Student Diversion
Good on the student to use all the resources available to help himself. Too bad he did not have a GPS which would have instantaneously eliminated his positional uncertainty.......
I find it discouraging that the GPS vs traditional navigation always seems to be a binary argument. GPS can fail so never use it. Using GPS suddenly makes your brain mush and therefore you will be helpless if it ever fails
The fact is GPS systems provide the most accurate and most useful navigation information available. Not the least of which the nearest airport function can literally be a life saver.
The problem IMO is that instead of incorporating GPS in ab initio navigation along with traditional concepts we utterly ignore it. When I taught PPL's I included the use of GPS but with common sense strategies to both do a constant sanity check on what the box was saying and to keep track of your present position and what the heading required and TTE was.
So when my student is going to an airport North West of where he is now and the GPS says fly a heading of 260 he is going to say "hey that ain't right" . If the GPS fails then he is going to know that if he keeps flying the same heading he is going to be pretty close to his destination and since he was keeping track of his ETE he will know when he is getting close and since he always has the paper chart available and folded for his route of flight he can pick up landmarks to help maintain SA and his track.
I think is high time training moves into the 21 st century. Here is a news flash. PPL's are not stupid. After they graduate they will use the tools that work better, so why not teach them the best way to get the most out of their GPS, as well as prepare them for the pitfalls, as well as the advantages, of GPS as the primary means of getting from A to B
I find it discouraging that the GPS vs traditional navigation always seems to be a binary argument. GPS can fail so never use it. Using GPS suddenly makes your brain mush and therefore you will be helpless if it ever fails
The fact is GPS systems provide the most accurate and most useful navigation information available. Not the least of which the nearest airport function can literally be a life saver.
The problem IMO is that instead of incorporating GPS in ab initio navigation along with traditional concepts we utterly ignore it. When I taught PPL's I included the use of GPS but with common sense strategies to both do a constant sanity check on what the box was saying and to keep track of your present position and what the heading required and TTE was.
So when my student is going to an airport North West of where he is now and the GPS says fly a heading of 260 he is going to say "hey that ain't right" . If the GPS fails then he is going to know that if he keeps flying the same heading he is going to be pretty close to his destination and since he was keeping track of his ETE he will know when he is getting close and since he always has the paper chart available and folded for his route of flight he can pick up landmarks to help maintain SA and his track.
I think is high time training moves into the 21 st century. Here is a news flash. PPL's are not stupid. After they graduate they will use the tools that work better, so why not teach them the best way to get the most out of their GPS, as well as prepare them for the pitfalls, as well as the advantages, of GPS as the primary means of getting from A to B
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst I agree that PPLs should be taught to use GPS I still believe they should know how to work without it and that is what the PPL syllabus currently does, allowing the GPS on all the nav trips does not help when it packs in, first learn to manage without it, then learn how to bring it in.
Navigation is a skill, GPS may supliment that skill but is not a substitute for it. You could not learn to be a cabinet maker if you only use woodworking machines. Sadly, very few instructors teach students what to do with a GPS if it is fitted to the aircraft.
One of the things I think a lot of people don't think about is why the "traditional" navigation system was developed.
When it was perfected there was no way to know your exact position in real time. So traditional navigation was designed for the case where you only occasionally knew where you were and yet still had to figure out where you had to go.
GPS completely eliminates the central driving force that traditional navigation methods were developed to overcome. With GPS you know within meters exactly where you are and your track and speed all the time.
The problem is that GPS creates new and different chalenges to safe navigation. all of which we by design refuse to teach to new pilots. How stupid is that.
The problem is that GPS creates new and different chalenges to safe navigation.
I still do my flight planning the traditional way. What am I missing?
My first solo to the Cranfield training area in the 80's as a teenager with maybe 10 hours total time (glider conversion) I got temporarily uncertain of position, but we were trained to request a QDM so did so. Slight raised eyebrow from the CFI on landing as a few minutes over time, but no other consequence. If it happened today I would use my smart phone GPS first!
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Except training doesn't do the second part AT ALL. Instead we pretend that GPS doesn't exist and totally ignore it.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Scotland
Age: 84
Posts: 1,434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whopity
With GPS you know within meters exactly where you are and your track and speed all the time.
So why do we still use Waypoints?
With GPS you know within meters exactly where you are and your track and speed all the time.
So why do we still use Waypoints?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
It screams at me whenever I'm about to infringe airspace.
It screams at you if you're ten minutes away from busting airspace.
Which means that over southern England it's pretty well always screaming at you.
Which means I ignore it.
Useful, eh?
If you don't begin navigation training with chart, compass and clock, the student will be naturally reluctant to invest effort once he's hooked on GPS magic.
Transits to and from the practice areas are a much neglected opportunity to plot a course on the chart and determine heading and ETA. By the time cross country comes up, the student would have it nailed
Transits to and from the practice areas are a much neglected opportunity to plot a course on the chart and determine heading and ETA. By the time cross country comes up, the student would have it nailed
To properly use the G 1000 system you need to be properly taught by some one who is not only technically smart but operationally smart too, so that the unit works for you, not the other way around.
Finally the G 1000 is an FMS optimized for IFR flight. It is not the best tool for VFR low level flying, one of the tablet apps is much better for this application.
Again this speaks to understanding the capabilities as well as the limitations of GPS navigators, something you could start to get in ab initio, but won't, thanks to institutional inertia and the over supply of Luddites in the training system.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So given the simple and highly intuitive GPS units and software programmes which are available these days, and the fact that they can still never the less significantly differ from one another in their method of planning input, set up and operation, what specific form of training is it suggested should be given for GPS use (specifically excluding anything which would in any event be covered in a conventional non GPS flight planning environment?)
So in broad strokes.
!) What are my flight planning considerations for todays flight. These include weather, wind, terrain, airspace, alternate landing field; considerations ?
2) After considering point 1, what route do I want to plan before I get into the airplane ?
3) How am I going to enter that route, ie how will I use the flight plan function of the GPS navigator ?
4) How am I going to preflight the navigator, ie how will I ensure the database is current, the flight plan I loaded is sensible, the unit is functional (eg battery life ) ?
5) For non panel mounted units, how am I going to place it so that it is convenient but not a distraction ?
6) What presentation am I going to use. North Up ? track up ? What navigational information is most important to me and how is it displayed ?
7) In flight what system am I going to use to backup the GPS. A periodic PLOG entry ?, a tick mark on a paper map ?, a geographic reference that is going in the right direction ?
So with a bit of training we could develop good habits that leverages the navigational accuracy of GPS for safer flying, or just have new PPL's buy their first magic box and hit, Direct to enter
, minds blissfully unencumbered, by conscious effort on the part of flight training providers with any useful instruction
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Big Pistons, dealing with the numbered items in your list in turn, I specifically asked what GPS training could be offered which would not be covered by conventional non GPS training.
1. These are normal flight planning considerations and not Specific to use of GPS.
2. So is this.
3. That will depend on each individual GPS unit. It is not realistic to train for the use of every conceivable type of unit.
4. Is it necessary to train for the blindingly obvious? (I.e don't take off with a flat battery in the GPS)
Not using out of date charts and data is part of normal flight planning as is ensuring a sensible flight plan.
5. Is it necessary to train someone where to place a portable unit in the cockpit? Different units and different cockpits will have different requirements which can only be assessed based on individual circumstances. Pilots must ultimately make their own minds up.
6. North up or track up is a personal choice and pilots and instructors will never agree on which is best. Which data to present on the screen is a good point but also often a matter of personal preference and the abilities of the individual unit itself. It is not possible to train for the use of all units.
7. This brings us back to normal non GPS flight planning again.
I don't decry navigation training in any way, but there is only so much specific training which can usefully be given for the use of GPS which would not have been covered in "normal" heading/distance/time/chart non GPS training. Pilots who have attentively taken on board normal navigation techniques should in most cases be perfectly capable of figuring out how to sensibly use a typical portable GPS unit using common sense and an instruction book. Complex built in aircraft specific systems like G1000 will obviously require specific software training whether by instruction manual. Face to face, video, simulator or whatever.
1. These are normal flight planning considerations and not Specific to use of GPS.
2. So is this.
3. That will depend on each individual GPS unit. It is not realistic to train for the use of every conceivable type of unit.
4. Is it necessary to train for the blindingly obvious? (I.e don't take off with a flat battery in the GPS)
Not using out of date charts and data is part of normal flight planning as is ensuring a sensible flight plan.
5. Is it necessary to train someone where to place a portable unit in the cockpit? Different units and different cockpits will have different requirements which can only be assessed based on individual circumstances. Pilots must ultimately make their own minds up.
6. North up or track up is a personal choice and pilots and instructors will never agree on which is best. Which data to present on the screen is a good point but also often a matter of personal preference and the abilities of the individual unit itself. It is not possible to train for the use of all units.
7. This brings us back to normal non GPS flight planning again.
I don't decry navigation training in any way, but there is only so much specific training which can usefully be given for the use of GPS which would not have been covered in "normal" heading/distance/time/chart non GPS training. Pilots who have attentively taken on board normal navigation techniques should in most cases be perfectly capable of figuring out how to sensibly use a typical portable GPS unit using common sense and an instruction book. Complex built in aircraft specific systems like G1000 will obviously require specific software training whether by instruction manual. Face to face, video, simulator or whatever.
I would very much agree with flybymike. Anybody who is bright enough to plan and navigate a flight by hand should be able to teach themselves to use a handheld GPS, and any fool can see the value in one. The converse isn't true.