RNAV for PPL
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
RNAV for PPL
I observer that the skills test, which I have to pass to get my PPL back, has one thing in it which I never did the first time round, viz some basic RNAV.
From the test syllabus document it looks like it's just there because "it's silly to have all those avionics in the plane and not know how to use them"; chatting with my instructor this morning we both seemed to think that if a low hours PPL is really lost and in trouble, due to failure of visual navigation, the most useful radio navigation aid is the VHF radio with a controller in front of a radar screen on the other end.
However, seeing as I've got to learn this to pass the test, what are the current recommendations for RNAV books, given that I'm unlikely to want to do the IMC rating? And is there any value (either positive or negative) in practising RNAV with a PC flight simulator?
From the test syllabus document it looks like it's just there because "it's silly to have all those avionics in the plane and not know how to use them"; chatting with my instructor this morning we both seemed to think that if a low hours PPL is really lost and in trouble, due to failure of visual navigation, the most useful radio navigation aid is the VHF radio with a controller in front of a radar screen on the other end.
However, seeing as I've got to learn this to pass the test, what are the current recommendations for RNAV books, given that I'm unlikely to want to do the IMC rating? And is there any value (either positive or negative) in practising RNAV with a PC flight simulator?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats the problem with relying on visual nav....you never know when it may fail. Luckily I always carry a GPS as a backup 
Maybe its just me, but I think someone would have to be pretty stupid to take to the air, then rely on someone else to get them out of trouble, when they have all the nescessary kit with them ....There is no harm asking for help, but I would try to sort the problem out myself first....
EA
Maybe its just me, but I think someone would have to be pretty stupid to take to the air, then rely on someone else to get them out of trouble, when they have all the nescessary kit with them ....There is no harm asking for help, but I would try to sort the problem out myself first....
EA
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Moe's Tavern, Springfield
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If my memory serves me right the RNAV extras came in as part of the JAR syllabus. I used a book which is called "JAR Supplement" to the Jeremy M Pratt series of books. I think it is now listed as Exercise 18C and encompasses VDF, ADF, VOR and DME.
I am just flicking through the chapter and it seems to have all the relevant info, I would say is a good place to start Gertrude
I am just flicking through the chapter and it seems to have all the relevant info, I would say is a good place to start Gertrude
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
englishal - I might well carry my handheld GPS with me but that doesn't seem to be what's required to pass the test.
Barney_Gumble - that one appears to be OOP.
Barney_Gumble - that one appears to be OOP.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GTW,
My first line was a joke Its refreshing to think of visual navigation failure, usually people have a 'thing' about GPS failure
The Trevor Thom books [nav one I think] contains the required info, or alternatively do an internet search, I once found an excellent site which goes into detail of VOR / NDB tracking [can't remember where though]. Also your instructor would be a vital source of info. There is not much to it at PPL level, I think the only requirement for the GFT is to be able to make a 180° turn on instruments. The rest [VOR / NDB tracking] is carried out during training only I think.
Rgds
EA
My first line was a joke
Its refreshing to think of visual navigation failure, usually people have a 'thing' about GPS failure The Trevor Thom books [nav one I think] contains the required info, or alternatively do an internet search, I once found an excellent site which goes into detail of VOR / NDB tracking [can't remember where though]. Also your instructor would be a vital source of info. There is not much to it at PPL level, I think the only requirement for the GFT is to be able to make a 180° turn on instruments. The rest [VOR / NDB tracking] is carried out during training only I think.
Rgds
EA
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London, UK
Posts: 778
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Section 3 of the JAR flight skills test includes "Use of radio navigation aids, position fix and tracking".
As I recall, I was asked to demonstrate performing a position fix using two VORs and also (simple) tracking of an NDB.
As I recall, I was asked to demonstrate performing a position fix using two VORs and also (simple) tracking of an NDB.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chichester, UK
Posts: 1,650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
drauk is quite right. I had to position fix (VOR/DME is fine if the aeroplane has it and is very easy) and then track to a nearby VOR for a few minutes. I wasn't asked to intercept a particular radial, just find what I was on at that moment and track in on that. I did it at the same time as the 180-degree turn on instruments (not exactly the same time, of course....)
Practicing with a flight simulator is a good idea. Just make sure you can select and ident a VOR, track to and from it, and understand when you're using the OBI as a command instrument (say that you are on the 270 radial, the OBI has the 270 radial selected and the wind is from the south, so it's blowing you northwards off the radial. Do you understand the different behaviour of the CDI if you have a magnetic heading of 270, compared to a magnetic heading of 090). It's slightly over the top for the PPL, but it's worth making sure you understand the instrument - I know someone who got a partial because they tracked from a VOR when asked to track to it.
Practicing with a flight simulator is a good idea. Just make sure you can select and ident a VOR, track to and from it, and understand when you're using the OBI as a command instrument (say that you are on the 270 radial, the OBI has the 270 radial selected and the wind is from the south, so it's blowing you northwards off the radial. Do you understand the different behaviour of the CDI if you have a magnetic heading of 270, compared to a magnetic heading of 090). It's slightly over the top for the PPL, but it's worth making sure you understand the instrument - I know someone who got a partial because they tracked from a VOR when asked to track to it.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Belgium
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wombat,
Just a small point, but within the wider aviation world, RNAV stands for Area Navigation. If you search for, or buy books on, RNAV, you may not be getting what you think or need! I assume by RNAV, you really mean Radio Navigation using the VOR/ADF? I used T Thom and it tells you all you need to know.
BTW - RNAV requires a lot more equipment than found in a SEP - it is the ability to fly *any* track (not point to point) using whatever ground and satellite based equipment is available, to a defined level of accuracy (BRNAV- Basic RNAV 5nm, and PRNAV - precision RNAV 1nm).
If the skill test requires it, you have to do it, whether you think its a good idea or not - and be assured you *will* be tested on it - fail it and you fail the skill test!
Using a PC simulator is a very good idea to learn the concept - put it on autopilot and use the autopliot heading function to fly to/from VORs and ADFs - track inbound/outbound, intercept and follow radials etc. This will teach you how the radio navigation works (tuning, identification, OBS interpretation etc.) and how to orientate yourself. Put some wind in as well - try it with 5kts, 10kts, 20kts, and 40kts to see the effects.
When you get to practice it in a real aeroplane you will only have to worry about the piloting side, not what the instruments are telling you and where to go, as you will have found that out from the PC simulator.
Just a small point, but within the wider aviation world, RNAV stands for Area Navigation. If you search for, or buy books on, RNAV, you may not be getting what you think or need! I assume by RNAV, you really mean Radio Navigation using the VOR/ADF? I used T Thom and it tells you all you need to know.
BTW - RNAV requires a lot more equipment than found in a SEP - it is the ability to fly *any* track (not point to point) using whatever ground and satellite based equipment is available, to a defined level of accuracy (BRNAV- Basic RNAV 5nm, and PRNAV - precision RNAV 1nm).
If the skill test requires it, you have to do it, whether you think its a good idea or not - and be assured you *will* be tested on it - fail it and you fail the skill test!
Using a PC simulator is a very good idea to learn the concept - put it on autopilot and use the autopliot heading function to fly to/from VORs and ADFs - track inbound/outbound, intercept and follow radials etc. This will teach you how the radio navigation works (tuning, identification, OBS interpretation etc.) and how to orientate yourself. Put some wind in as well - try it with 5kts, 10kts, 20kts, and 40kts to see the effects.
When you get to practice it in a real aeroplane you will only have to worry about the piloting side, not what the instruments are telling you and where to go, as you will have found that out from the PC simulator.
'Gertrude the Wombat' - it would be very unusual for you to have to take the entire JAR-FCL PPL(A) Skill Test 'to get your PPL back' unless the CAA has directed you to on an individual basis.
If your SEP Rating has lapsed, you should normally only need to renew it by flying a 'SEP Class Rating Renewal Proficiency Check' with an Examiner. There is NO mandatory navigation content in this check.
If your SEP Rating has lapsed, you should normally only need to renew it by flying a 'SEP Class Rating Renewal Proficiency Check' with an Examiner. There is NO mandatory navigation content in this check.
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree with BEagle on this one.
After a lapse of 4 1/2 years from flying I renewed my SEP PPL last week.
After a few hours revision with an instructor, all I was then required to do was sit the Renewal Proficiency check with the examiner.
This lasted 1 hour and consisted of the following :
Pre flight checks
Start and taxy
Normal departure
Transit to and from local flying area (covers navigation I guess !!!)
Slow flight
Stalling and recovery
Forced landing without power
Rejoin and normal circuit (touch and go)
Flapless landing (touch and go)
Normal circuit with go around followed by fan stop
Normal circuit to land
Taxy and shut down
I guess other elements which might appear in the Examiners brief were observed along the way but I wasn't specifically asked to demonstrate them. For example using the RT, Danger Area penetration, airmanship, etc, were all part and parcel of this flight.
Nice to be back and was not a traumatic experience in any manner.
After a lapse of 4 1/2 years from flying I renewed my SEP PPL last week.
After a few hours revision with an instructor, all I was then required to do was sit the Renewal Proficiency check with the examiner.
This lasted 1 hour and consisted of the following :
Pre flight checks
Start and taxy
Normal departure
Transit to and from local flying area (covers navigation I guess !!!)
Slow flight
Stalling and recovery
Forced landing without power
Rejoin and normal circuit (touch and go)
Flapless landing (touch and go)
Normal circuit with go around followed by fan stop
Normal circuit to land
Taxy and shut down
I guess other elements which might appear in the Examiners brief were observed along the way but I wasn't specifically asked to demonstrate them. For example using the RT, Danger Area penetration, airmanship, etc, were all part and parcel of this flight.
Nice to be back and was not a traumatic experience in any manner.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Moe's Tavern, Springfield
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Gertrude,
I guess the JAR Supplement has been incorporated into the main books now. Send me a PM with your address and I'll post you my copy if you like, it is only a thin book. Might help and save a few pennies.
Regards
I guess the JAR Supplement has been incorporated into the main books now. Send me a PM with your address and I'll post you my copy if you like, it is only a thin book. Might help and save a few pennies.
Regards
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
PPRuNe Radar, BEagle:
Depends how long ago your last certificate of experience lapsed. 4.5 years is one set of rules; over five years is another set of rules; over ten years is "training as necessary to pass the skills test" and then pass the entire skills test. Since my licence was last valid in 1990 that's what I have to do according to the documentation (and I have checked with the CAA).
At least the "training as necessary" is up to the discretion of my flying school, there's no minimum hours of anything in particular.
Depends how long ago your last certificate of experience lapsed. 4.5 years is one set of rules; over five years is another set of rules; over ten years is "training as necessary to pass the skills test" and then pass the entire skills test. Since my licence was last valid in 1990 that's what I have to do according to the documentation (and I have checked with the CAA).
At least the "training as necessary" is up to the discretion of my flying school, there's no minimum hours of anything in particular.
No - you're wrong. So is whoever you claim to have 'advised you' at the CAA.
The 'Skill Test' which you must pass is the SEP Class Rating renewal Proficiency Check, NOT the PPL Skill Test.
The difference between 'less than 5 years' and 'more than 5 years' is that for SEP Ratings lapsed by more than 5 years, the form in your licence must be completed by the CAA, whereas for ratings lapsed by less than 5 years the form may be completed by the examiner. Unless, that is, you're applying for a NPPL with SEP aircraft rating based upon a lapsed PPL, rather than a UK or JAR-FCL PPL SEP Class Rating renewal.
The 'Skill Test' which you must pass is the SEP Class Rating renewal Proficiency Check, NOT the PPL Skill Test.
The difference between 'less than 5 years' and 'more than 5 years' is that for SEP Ratings lapsed by more than 5 years, the form in your licence must be completed by the CAA, whereas for ratings lapsed by less than 5 years the form may be completed by the examiner. Unless, that is, you're applying for a NPPL with SEP aircraft rating based upon a lapsed PPL, rather than a UK or JAR-FCL PPL SEP Class Rating renewal.
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
Well, regardless of what Gertrude has or doesn't have to do, I think the whole Radio Nav thing (which is different to RNAV, as GroundBound says) is a very interesting topic.
Personally, I disagree with Englishal when he says: "I think someone would have to be pretty stupid to take to the air, then rely on someone else to get them out of trouble, when they have all the nescessary kit with them" - but with certain provisos.
We need to distinguish between being a bit unsure of where you are, and being completely lost. Personally, I've been a bit unsure of where I am many times. On several occassions when I hadn't planned on using any nav-aids, I decided to use them to confirm my position. Usually it confirmed I was roughly where I thought I was, maybe a little way off track but not much. This, I think, is why Radio Nav is taught for PPL, and it seems entirely valid to me.
But Englishal talks about getting "out of trouble" - the implication being that you are completely and totally lost. I've never been in this situation, but I can imagine it must be pretty stressful. I'm a firm believer that in times of high stress such as this, you should use whatever method is least taxing on you. And if that happens to be talking to someone and squawking so they can locate you, then that's the thing to do.
I suspect that this is what Englishal actually means, and that it's the semantics I disagree with rather than the actual meaning. But I don't think people should be discouraged from calling a controller for help when they really are in trouble, just because they did an hour or two of tracking a VOR radial for their PPL.
FFF
----------
Personally, I disagree with Englishal when he says: "I think someone would have to be pretty stupid to take to the air, then rely on someone else to get them out of trouble, when they have all the nescessary kit with them" - but with certain provisos.
We need to distinguish between being a bit unsure of where you are, and being completely lost. Personally, I've been a bit unsure of where I am many times. On several occassions when I hadn't planned on using any nav-aids, I decided to use them to confirm my position. Usually it confirmed I was roughly where I thought I was, maybe a little way off track but not much. This, I think, is why Radio Nav is taught for PPL, and it seems entirely valid to me.
But Englishal talks about getting "out of trouble" - the implication being that you are completely and totally lost. I've never been in this situation, but I can imagine it must be pretty stressful. I'm a firm believer that in times of high stress such as this, you should use whatever method is least taxing on you. And if that happens to be talking to someone and squawking so they can locate you, then that's the thing to do.
I suspect that this is what Englishal actually means, and that it's the semantics I disagree with rather than the actual meaning. But I don't think people should be discouraged from calling a controller for help when they really are in trouble, just because they did an hour or two of tracking a VOR radial for their PPL.
FFF
----------
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Belgium
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A & C
you're right of course
, though, as you say, it is the latest kit - which not so many (older) aeroplanes have, typical of many aeroclubs. Also, I don't think you are allowed to use GPS, in the skills test.
I think Gertrude is really talking about the radio nav on traditional VOR/DME/ADF instruments and has perhaps inadvertantly used a similar but incorrect term, and I just wanted to gently draw attention to a potential misunderstanding.
you're right of course
, though, as you say, it is the latest kit - which not so many (older) aeroplanes have, typical of many aeroclubs. Also, I don't think you are allowed to use GPS, in the skills test.I think Gertrude is really talking about the radio nav on traditional VOR/DME/ADF instruments and has perhaps inadvertantly used a similar but incorrect term, and I just wanted to gently draw attention to a potential misunderstanding.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
BEagle:
I think you're saying I have to take the test described in "Standards Document 14" rather than the one in "Standards Document 19"? - if that's wrong I'd be grateful for the URL(s) of what you think I should be reading instead. On a quick read through they look very similar to me, the only thing I spotted at first glance was the apparent lack of an explicit requirement to do a glide approach.
Want I want to do, of course, is whichever test is more likely to spot something I've failed to relearn; I certainly don't want to do less than a newly qualified PPL, as you wouldn't, I'm sure, want to meet me flying around up there if my skill was not demonstrably as good as that of a new PPL.
I think you're saying I have to take the test described in "Standards Document 14" rather than the one in "Standards Document 19"? - if that's wrong I'd be grateful for the URL(s) of what you think I should be reading instead. On a quick read through they look very similar to me, the only thing I spotted at first glance was the apparent lack of an explicit requirement to do a glide approach.
Want I want to do, of course, is whichever test is more likely to spot something I've failed to relearn; I certainly don't want to do less than a newly qualified PPL, as you wouldn't, I'm sure, want to meet me flying around up there if my skill was not demonstrably as good as that of a new PPL.
Sort of. Standards Document 14 is actually a guide to Examiners, not applicants.
Look on the CAA website for Form SRG\1157. Although it's the Examiner's Record for the SPA, Skill Test and Proficiency Check, it spells out what you will have to do:
For SPA SEP Class Rating renewal, only Sections 1, 2, 4 and 5 are required:
Section 1 - Departure
Section 2 - Airwork (VFR)
Section 4 - Arrival and Landing
Section 5 - Abnormal and Emergency Procedures
Section 3A - Enroute Procedures (VFR) and Section 3B are not required for SEP Class Rating renewals or re-validations!
There is no actual need to study any radio navigation to reactivate your PPL; however, your intention to do so is very laudable and I wish more people would learn how to use the expensive avionic equipment in their aeroplanes. But I suggest that you sort out your PPL first, then go flying with an instructor at a later date to teach you properly. We have our GPS equipment set up to indicate present position; however, we do not teach pre-PPL pilots how to 'navigate' using GPS. Position fixing using VOR, VOR/DME, ADF is taught to PPL students as is tracking a radial. But that's the limit at PPL level.
Perhaps you should consider doing an IMC rating? That'll certainly teach you how to use the aircraft navigation aids.
Look on the CAA website for Form SRG\1157. Although it's the Examiner's Record for the SPA, Skill Test and Proficiency Check, it spells out what you will have to do:
For SPA SEP Class Rating renewal, only Sections 1, 2, 4 and 5 are required:
Section 1 - Departure
Section 2 - Airwork (VFR)
Section 4 - Arrival and Landing
Section 5 - Abnormal and Emergency Procedures
Section 3A - Enroute Procedures (VFR) and Section 3B are not required for SEP Class Rating renewals or re-validations!
There is no actual need to study any radio navigation to reactivate your PPL; however, your intention to do so is very laudable and I wish more people would learn how to use the expensive avionic equipment in their aeroplanes. But I suggest that you sort out your PPL first, then go flying with an instructor at a later date to teach you properly. We have our GPS equipment set up to indicate present position; however, we do not teach pre-PPL pilots how to 'navigate' using GPS. Position fixing using VOR, VOR/DME, ADF is taught to PPL students as is tracking a radial. But that's the limit at PPL level.
Perhaps you should consider doing an IMC rating? That'll certainly teach you how to use the aircraft navigation aids.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Gosh, finding one's way round that web site is a right b****r, isn't it.
Having found form 1157 I note that it says:
just as "training as necessary to pass the test" is effectively at the club's discretion.
So yes, in theory I could get away with no nav practice or testing at all, but that doesn't sound like a very good idea to me, and I'm sure it won't to the club, and I'm sure I wouldn't want to be flying with an outfit that thought I didn't need any nav revision after thirteen years of not flying.
(What a pity I'm not retraining with a cowboy outfit - I could save hundreds of pounds!! )
Having found form 1157 I note that it says:
Any of the ‘O’ items may be tested at the examiner’s discretion.
So yes, in theory I could get away with no nav practice or testing at all, but that doesn't sound like a very good idea to me, and I'm sure it won't to the club, and I'm sure I wouldn't want to be flying with an outfit that thought I didn't need any nav revision after thirteen years of not flying.
(What a pity I'm not retraining with a cowboy outfit - I could save hundreds of pounds!!
)