Dependency on GPS

[frfly172]

Paper charts now seem to be backup for gps . When navigating i use a panel mounted garmin and back it up with foreflight on the I Pad. Charts take up a lot of space and weight in my little airplane.

 

[Mafoo]

And that's why my trainees learn how to flight plan with a pencil, a flight log, and an E-6B, and to navigate with basic flight instruments and a sectional chart before they get to use computer flight planning and a GPS.

I like that idea.

What I don't like, is the idea that the GPS stuff is not something a CFI should train on after they have learned everything else.

If there are times that using one can save your life, it should be yet another tool that students utilize. More situational awareness is better. Why not teach someone how to use the currently best tool available for providing it?

 

[poadeleted20]

Same thing I do when planning a flight. I have a bunch of "That's About Right" numbers in my head so when Foreflight or the 430 or whatever device I use spits out a plan, I can check it for reasonableness. If I didn't have those TAR numbers, I would do it the old fashion way until I do. Same thing happens in flight so I know what to use and when to go to the backup.

That explains why you've attained "geezer" status. I hope Mafoo can learn to understand these concepts so someday he, too, can join the Airport Geezer Club.

 

[poadeleted20]

I like that idea.

Good -- there's hope for you yet.

What I don't like, is the idea that the GPS stuff is not something a CFI should train on after they have learned everything else.

If you have a CFI who doesn't teach you to use everything in the plane before sending you for the ride, find another instructor who will. It may be the difference in passing/failing the practical test, not to mention saving your butt some day.

If there are times that using one can save your life, it should be yet another tool that students utilize. More situational awareness is better. Why not teach someone how to use the currently best tool available for providing it?

No argument there, as long as they learn the fundamentals first. Crawl -> Walk -> Run.

 

[Gary]

You remind me of an article I read in an engineering journal some years ago, written by the VP of at construction engineering firm. ..... snip....And that's why my trainees learn how to flight plan with a pencil, a flight log, and an E-6B, and to navigate with basic flight instruments and a sectional chart before they get to use computer flight planning and a GPS.

Good story. Funy how that works. We hand out a lot of big contracts. We always have an informal get together, no calculators, no programs, just a piece of paper and ballpark what we think things will cost. It is amazing how close that comes to the final detailed design costs.

Gary

 

[poadeleted20]

Good story. Funy how that works. We hand out a lot of big contracts. We always have an informal get together, no calculators, no programs, just a piece of paper and ballpark what we think things will cost. It is amazing how close that comes to the final detailed design costs.

I remember one time at the University when I was teaching an Airline Economics course, we neede to do some division to get an answer. I went over to the corner where the big E-6B for pilot ground school was located, and spun the numbers. When I turned around, there were 20 gaping mouths and 40 wide eyes. One of them finally dug out his calculator, and after some button pushing said, "Hey -- he's right! How'd he do that?" "It's just a big circular slide rule," I said. "A slide rule?" responded another student, "My grandpa has one of those."

 

[rottydaddy]

What do eggs have to do with this topic?

Something to do with putting them all in one basket?

I have to agree that a firm grasp of just the most basic pilotage and DR skills puts any pilot at an advantage, regardless of what other tools they might have.

I enjoy pilotage and dead reckoning; compass clock and chart, but I know it's just my proclivity. Before radio beacons and area radar coverage, it was a big deal, but now it's pretty rare to actually need that skill set. More so every day, the ability to double or triple up on navaids is within reach of the average Joe, so it becomes harder still to harp on "but if it fails..." Hell, if I got sucked into a cloud in the glider I could actually use my damn mobile phone to not only plot position, but get crude GPS-based virtual gyro instruments at my fingertips (InFlight; free Android app). I would still scrupulously avoid getting sucked into a cloud, because I just won't bet my life on those tools being adequate... but my point is that for us pilots, it's a whole new world... radically different than when I started training in the mid-90s. I still haven't commanded a flight with a moving-map display, and I've never felt at a loss because of that. And I've always liked using VORs and ADFs not to follow a line, but to plot position. But I've seen the new toys in action, and they are awesome. I know some pilots who use them with gusto, but don't lean on them like a crutch. I've let GPS receivers lead me astray while driving, but that's another story...


My biggest worry about GPS, just like the navaids before it, is not so much that "lazy" pilots will get lost or run into terrain or airspaces because they lack situational awareness, but that they will run into me because they are not looking outside enough. :wink2:

Sure, that extends to "CDI slaves" S-turning along airways and even chart and whiz-wheel users who are also not good at dividing their attention.
It's not just about traffic, though... we fly in the real world, so we should first and foremost deal with the real world when navigating. Even airspaces can be related to points in the real world. I have done very well skirting airspaces by pilotage in some pretty tight spaces... not because I am above average, but because I was first taught to navigate that way. Above my home drome in a glider, I could show you a series of landmarks that define the edge of the 3000-foot Class B shelf to the northeast... it's just more practical in that scenario to know this than to look at anything, even a chart, to show me. A chart is required to suss it out beforehand, but the same can be done prior to a flight into unknown territory. Every moment spent looking inside in daytime VFR should be used very wisely, and as little as possible.

In short, I put a lot of stock in the old saw about how to spot a good navigator: If you take him up blindfolded, fly him around for a while, then let him see a chart (or CDI or GPs screen) and ask "where are we?", if he looks outside first, he's worthy. When there's not enough to see outside, you may surrender your responsibility to navaids or radar vectors, but if there's anything at all to see, IMHO that should be what you look at first.

 

[Jaybird180]

In short, I put a lot of stock in the old saw about how to spot a good navigator: If you take him up blindfolded, fly him around for a while, then let him see a chart (or CDI or GPs screen) and ask "where are we?", if he looks outside first, he's worthy. When there's not enough to see outside, you may surrender your responsibility to navaids or radar vectors, but if there's anything at all to see, IMHO that should be what you look at first.

A jewel

 

[bbchien]

A jewel

I was taught to look out the dome first....."Gary if you don't get that third sighting real soon, and you cut another one, you're coming down here, and I'm taking the third fix.." (you know where the rear end of the person, sighting with the 'labe was, relative to the PIC).....

However my Stratus ADS-B receiver, iPad, iPhone, Garmin GPS, and my wife's iPhone (the 90% of the time she is with me) have to all fail before I turn to the Nav radio.

That works until you lose signal and panel electrical power just on the edge of a hot MOA in Nevada......if you can't derive you position in 30 seconds you can be in a world of hurt.... they turn on the jammer just before they go hot. EVERYONE you listed is GPS dependent. You, are dependent.

BTDT, arse saved by having two VORs tuned. All I had to do was twist, turn left about 10 degrees, and climb to above FL 18. Good thing the O2 was turned on, too.

 

[spiderweb]

The other day I was on a flight and we had backups galore.Need a backup pilot? Four pilots aboard. Need a backup IFR GPS? Three of those aboard. And if they all went TU? We had 8 VFR GPSs with us, at least four of which had moving maps on sectionals.

You mean you limited yourself to only 8 backup GPSs? You guys really fly with a devil-may-care attitude!

 

[spiderweb]

And that's why my trainees learn how to flight plan with a pencil, a flight log, and an E-6B, and to navigate with basic flight instruments and a sectional chart before they get to use computer flight planning and a GPS.

I'm so glad I had a flight instructor who thinks exactly like you!

TAA and their panels are amazing--I'm loving the Perspective--but it is also good to know how to know not to buy what they're selling!

 

[gismo]

And that's why my trainees learn how to flight plan with a pencil, a flight log, and an E-6B, and to navigate with basic flight instruments and a sectional chart before they get to use computer flight planning and a GPS.

Rather than going the whole 1940's approach for flight planning why not just teach the students how to make estimates and perform TLAR checks on their computer generated flight plans? The FAA sure doesn't see things that way though, given their stupid written tests where three of the multichoices for a leg distance or heading are within .03% of each other.

 

[poadeleted20]

Rather than going the whole 1940's approach for flight planning why not just teach the students how to make estimates and perform TLAR checks on their computer generated flight plans?

That's exactly what I do. But how are they going to learn how to make those estimates without those basic tools? One of the beauties of the E-6B is the wind side, which displays the solution graphically so it's easier to understand and visualize.

The FAA sure doesn't see things that way though, given their stupid written tests where three of the multichoices for a leg distance or heading are within .03% of each other.

Kinda dumb, isn't it? Especially since they're measuring with a micrometer something which will be cut with a broadaxe -- while moving.

 

[BillTIZ]

I was taught to look out the dome first....."Gary if you don't get that third sighting real soon, and you cut another one, you're coming down here, and I'm taking the third fix.." .

reminds me of a few celestial Nav legs in the B-52!

BTDT

 

[Mafoo]

That works until you lose signal and panel electrical power just on the edge of a hot MOA in Nevada......if you can't derive you position in 30 seconds you can be in a world of hurt....

So if I am on a heading, have my route mapped on GPS, using my overlaid chart so I know where the MOA is relative to me at all times, you're saying if it all goes away I only have 30 seconds to react to something?

Because I had GPS right up until it failed, I should have avoided putting myself in a situation where I have 30 seconds to use the next best navigational aid available to me (whatever that might be).

Dependent means when I run out of GPS's, I have no other options because I don't know how to navigate any other way. However recognizing a working one is better then the next option, it would be irresponsible of me to skip that tool in my progression of navigational aids (unless for some reason, my jugement tells me none of them are going to work).

If I have 2 guns and a knife, and something extremely dangerous charges me, if the first gun jams, should I go for the second gun, the knife, or just hand to hand combat?

Provided I have ample time to use the rest of the available personal protection options afforded me, I know which one I am going to reach for next.

 

[midlifeflyer]

That works until you lose signal and panel electrical power just on the edge of a hot MOA in Nevada......if you can't derive you position in 30 seconds you can be in a world of hurt.... they turn on the jammer just before they go hot. EVERYONE you listed is GPS dependent. You, are dependent.

BTDT, arse saved by having two VORs tuned. All I had to do was twist, turn left about 10 degrees, and climb to above FL 18.

Hmmm. ..

Ever notice that in a lot of antii-GPS posts, the GPS is the only thing in the cockpit capable of failing?

I don't disagree at all with the comments about needing toe be able to use all cockpit equipment, including the Mark 20/20s. Just commenting on a phenomenon I've noticed since the early days of GOS - probably because I haven't been flying long enough to recall the early days of NDB and VOR when similar comments were probably made.

 

[Jaybird180]

 

[MassPilot]

I like that idea.

What I don't like, is the idea that the GPS stuff is not something a CFI should train on after they have learned everything else.

If there are times that using one can save your life, it should be yet another tool that students utilize. More situational awareness is better. Why not teach someone how to use the currently best tool available for providing it?

I think a lot of CFI's don't focus on GPS navigation because it's just so easy, at least for VFR flight. It would be waste of time to focus on it during instruction. Read the pilot's guide. Play with a simulator if there is one. Can you figure out how to use a computer or smartphone? I bet you can figure out the GPS in the panel too. Then you just intercept the the CDI/magenta line and keep it centered, a skill that should carry over from VOR navigation.

VOR, pilotage, and dead reckoning all require learning skills and concepts that need to be practiced. GPS requires figuring out a gadget. My CFI didn't bother teaching me the GPS because it would have been a waste of Hobbs time. Instead we practiced the more difficult methods of navigating. I read the PG for the GPS and have had no issues using it. He did discuss with me the limitations of GPS navigation.

 

[denverpilot]

Ever notice that in a lot of antii-GPS posts, the GPS is the only thing in the cockpit capable of failing?

Heh. Everything can fail. Just ask my DME and transponder. (At least the transponder is working again.)

We are tossing around the idea of putting the Garmin GPS-400W in our panel.

We have enough room to keep the (far better in my opinion) King KX155 but the CDI has to be swapped for one with annunciators and a switching mechanism has to be put in for GPS/ILS if we want the ILS up on CDI #1.

Could also just move the glideslope CDI down and have GPS top/ILS bottom.

Also requires the whole stack be shifted down so the GPS is on top. And probably an avionics fan.

 

[MassPilot]

In a plane I rent regularly, my CFI had a KLN94 spontaneously shutoff and refuse to turn back on while in the middle of a GPS approach. Fortunately it was VMC and it was just for practice.

I've had a KLN94 spontaneously switch to a different waypoint in the opposite direction while in direct-to mode. I hit direct-to and entered my intended waypoint, which went through. A few minutes later it did it again. I was close to home by this point so I just followed I495 the rest of the way.

Maybe it's my electrical engineering background, but I really don't trust technology anymore.

 

[gprellwitz]

In a plane I rent regularly, my CFI had a KLN94 spontaneously shutoff and refuse to turn back on while in the middle of a GPS approach. Fortunately it was VMC and it was just for practice.

I've had a KLN94 spontaneously switch to a different waypoint in the opposite direction while in direct-to mode. I hit direct-to and entered my intended waypoint, which went through. A few minutes later it did it again. I was close to home by this point so I just followed I495 the rest of the way.

Maybe it's my electrical engineering background, but I really don't trust technology anymore.

I've gotten a RAIM error on a KLN-89 in the past during a real approach. Went missed and requested vectors for the VOR-A. So even when it is working, it can fail to give guidance!

 

[NineThreeKilo]

Rather than going the whole 1940's approach for flight planning why not just teach the students how to make estimates and perform TLAR checks on their computer generated flight plans? The FAA sure doesn't see things that way though, given their stupid written tests where three of the multichoices for a leg distance or heading are within .03% of each other.

Normally I have my guys do it all on paper, its also nice to use a normal calculator so you can see the math behind it.

There have been a few times I've re-routed myself on a cafe table with a pen my chart, ruler and scrap paper.

Electronics make life easy but they do screw up (even TSOed units), during training I do not let my students use electronics UNTIL they have a excellent grasp of where they are, where they are going and how they are going to get there without help from electronics.

Saying "well I have this backup to that GPS" doesnt prove the case for me, it's like saying engines have dual mags, documented maintenance etc, why should we teach engine out procedures, the engine has backups for most of it's components.

Ive had a certified and very well maintained aircraft have a catastrophic engine failure on me and I put much more faith in my engine then my GPSs

One would be a fool if one were not planning the next move for WHEN that engine/electrical/trim/etc fails.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Maybe it's my electrical engineering background, but I really don't trust technology anymore.

As they say, trust but verify.

 

[Jaybird180]

In a plane I rent regularly, my CFI had a KLN94 spontaneously shutoff and refuse to turn back on while in the middle of a GPS approach. Fortunately it was VMC and it was just for practice.

I've had a KLN94 spontaneously switch to a different waypoint in the opposite direction while in direct-to mode. I hit direct-to and entered my intended waypoint, which went through. A few minutes later it did it again. I was close to home by this point so I just followed I495 the rest of the way.

Maybe it's my electrical engineering background, but I really don't trust technology anymore.

Did you ever find out the cause? I have a KLN-94 and it's been rock solid.

I've gotten a RAIM error on a KLN-89 in the past during a real approach. Went missed and requested vectors for the VOR-A. So even when it is working, it can fail to give guidance!

Not sure I'd call that a GPS failure. RAIM stands for Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring. If you get a failure, the normal procedure is to go missed or change approaches. Some approaches will downgrade depending upon the unit. Don't see anything wrong here.

 

[MBDiagMan]

Normally I have my guys do it all on paper, its also nice to use a normal calculator so you can see the math behind it.

There have been a few times I've re-routed myself on a cafe table with a pen my chart, ruler and scrap paper.

Electronics make life easy but they do screw up (even TSOed units), during training I do not let my students use electronics UNTIL they have a excellent grasp of where they are, where they are going and how they are going to get there without help from electronics.

Saying "well I have this backup to that GPS" doesnt prove the case for me, it's like saying engines have dual mags, documented maintenance etc, why should we teach engine out procedures, the engine has backups for most of it's components.

Ive had a certified and very well maintained aircraft have a catastrophic engine failure on me and I put much more faith in my engine then my GPSs

One would be a fool if one were not planning the next move for WHEN that engine/electrical/trim/etc fails.

I don't know why I didn't post this extremely related story early in this thread, but the above post reminded me of it and it is VERY relative to the OP's question.

When I was finishing my private last year, my independent instructor had another student that he was finishing up a little ahead of me. The guy had bought a Cherokee Six and had never been in a GA airplane before hand. My instructor taught him from ground zero in the plane.

The instructor kept me up to date on the guys progress and told about things that he did. My instructor made the mistake (in my opinion) of letting the guy keep his IPad with Foreflight and other electronics in the cockpit all the time, I guess from the beginning. Evidently the instructor didn't do much to instruct or encourage Ded Reckoning or Pilotage, or if he did the guy insisted on depending on his electronics.

The instructor went with the pilot to a nearby airport for the checkride on a Saturday. The student ended up going back again on Sunday. I tried to find out why he had to go back and the instructor was a little vague saying that the student had gotten lost. I didn't press for details because it didn't seem right for me to do so.

A month or two later the instructor accompanied me to the same airport for my checkride with the same DPE. in the planned flight, there were two fingers of a lake that were very far apart. The second one to go over was an obviously good checkpoint. The other was WAY off course and far away from the one that most anyone would select as a checkpoint.

I chose the obvious one for one of my early checkpoints, and when I got there, the DPE diverted me. It was an airport I had been to on my long XC and a quick glance at the chart gave me an approximate heading and a good estimate of how far. I turned to the heading and went straight to the diversion airport with no trouble although it was kind of hard to see from the air, but I finally pointed it out, and he was happy. We did a bunch of other stuff from that point and back to the airport and within an hour or two I was a legal Private Pilot.

When my instructor and I started back home, I asked him where his other student had gotten lost. He told me that the other student headed for the other finger of the lake which was not even close to the correct heading. Evidently the DPE gave him enough rope to hang himself and let the student believe he was headed for the correct checkpoint. He then gave the student the same diversion airport, and he headed somewhere WAY in a different direction.

That student had OBVIOUSLY flown with that IPad and never bothered to learn or acknowledge the importance of DR or pilotage.

I never met the other student and wouldn't know him if he walked in my office right now. I was disappointed in the guy, and disappointed in my instructor for letting the guy go to a checkride without the slightest bit of fundamental navigational skill. The instructor is a nice guy, and a highly experienced and seasoned pilot. He was the ONLY choice I had for an instructor, so he's who I had to fly with. He was good and teaching stick & rudder skills.

Luckily I learned DR & pilotage pretty well in my first phase of lessons many years previously PLUS I put on my own rules forcing myself to fly with DR & pilotage to the point of the checkride.

As a student pilot, IMHO, you should NOT cheat yourself out of learning these important skills.

My $0.02,

 

[MassPilot]

Did you ever find out the cause? I have a KLN-94 and it's been rock solid.

The complete shutdown was a result of a circuit board failure according to the avionics shop.

I'm not sure what the cause was for the waypoint switching problem, but I left out some details. I had used flight plan mode for 1B9-MVY-KACK and it worked fine getting there. Hours later when departing KACK, the unit powered on and the previous flight plan was still active, saying I was 0.4 miles from KACK. I could not find a way to create a new flight plan or invert the current one, and I was wasting Hobbs time trying to figure it out.

I planned on following the same route home, so I selected MVY and hit the direct-to button. The direct-to symbol appeared and showed my destination as MVY. Once I was flying over MVY, I hit the direct-to button and entered 1B9. The direct-to symbol appeared and the destination was shown as 1B9. While about 20 miles from 1B9, it spontaneously switched to a direct-to for MVY. I hit direct-to and entered 1B9 and all was well. About 12 miles out it happened again. Afterwards I spent hours reading the PG, but could not make sense of it.

 

[MassPilot]

On my first solo to the practice area I punched in a direct-to to my current airport while on the ground so I would know how far away I was at all times once I departed and could avoid busting the 25 NM radius I was limited too. I made the rookie mistake of entering K1B9 instead of 1B9. Somehow it accepted it as a valid waypoint, but 20 something NM away. I decided to without GPS. If I was somewhere besides 1B9 when I entered that code and blindly followed the GPS, I don't know where it would have lead me, but I very well could have busted the Providence class C or Boston class B that's nearby.

 

[gprellwitz]

I've gotten a RAIM error on a KLN-89 in the past during a real approach. Went missed and requested vectors for the VOR-A. So even when it is working, it can fail to give guidance!

Not sure I'd call that a GPS failure. RAIM stands for Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring. If you get a failure, the normal procedure is to go missed or change approaches. Some approaches will downgrade depending upon the unit. Don't see anything wrong here.

I agree that it wasn't a failure of the unit and that it functioned as designed. My point was that it failed to give guidance, so that an alternative/backup means of navigation was required! And with a KLN 89, there's really no other approach type for it to degrade to, since it's not a WAAS unit.

 

[Jaybird180]

I agree that it wasn't a failure of the unit and that it functioned as designed. My point was that it failed to give guidance, so that an alternative/backup means of navigation was required! And with a KLN 89, there's really no other approach type for it to degrade to, since it's not a WAAS unit.

Yes, some units when they RAIM fail will render a GPS approach NA

 

[Jaybird180]

The complete shutdown was a result of a circuit board failure according to the avionics shop.

I'm not sure what the cause was for the waypoint switching problem, but I left out some details. I had used flight plan mode for 1B9-MVY-KACK and it worked fine getting there. Hours later when departing KACK, the unit powered on and the previous flight plan was still active, saying I was 0.4 miles from KACK. I could not find a way to create a new flight plan or invert the current one, and I was wasting Hobbs time trying to figure it out.

I planned on following the same route home, so I selected MVY and hit the direct-to button. The direct-to symbol appeared and showed my destination as MVY. Once I was flying over MVY, I hit the direct-to button and entered 1B9. The direct-to symbol appeared and the destination was shown as 1B9. While about 20 miles from 1B9, it spontaneously switched to a direct-to for MVY. I hit direct-to and entered 1B9 and all was well. About 12 miles out it happened again. Afterwards I spent hours reading the PG, but could not make sense of it.

Did you check to see if the right outer knob had been pulled out? Were you diddling with the OBS and had the GPS in OBS mode?

 

[bbchien]

Hmmm. ..

Ever notice that in a lot of antii-GPS posts, the GPS is the only thing in the cockpit capable of failing?

Hmmmn. I don't consider that to be an anti-GPS post. I consider it to be "pro everything else".

Amazing how the GPS centrists view anything but singing exclusive praises to be "anti gps".

The reason I know about the example I gave, is that I departed KOAK without my alternators on. The MOAs east of Friant are where I got the first hint that my electrics were failing. I did get them on in time to self-excite, but I lost comm (<11.1 V), and did lose my 430W.

But, knowing the MOA was 4 miles to my right and ended at 180 was very very useful. Of course, with the alternators on line, the VORs got my position confirm well before the 430W had finished its reboot.

Oh yes, and the autopilot couples to the 430W.....

 

[MassPilot]

Did you check to see if the right outer knob had been pulled out? Were you diddling with the OBS and had the GPS in OBS mode?

The GPS was defintely in Leg mode. I don't think the outer knob was pulled out, and once I got it into direct-to mode (as verified by the direct-to symbol next to the waypoint code), I don't see why it would suddenly switch destinations.

 

[n20junkie]

At some point in time the words "4 course's, do they make pilots lazy" or "adf, do they make pilots lazy" were said............ Just saying.






I have flown through a GPS outage in NM, effected all aircraft on that sectors freq in the FL's. It was a none event because I am competent with VOR's, and I ensure my students are as well. A loss of GPS should be about as exciting as a loss of my XM music.

 

[midlifeflyer]

At some point in time the words "4 course's, do they make pilots lazy" or "adf, do they make pilots lazy" were said............

Absolutely!

And Bruce? My comment was referring to multiple posts by multiple people over multiple years on multiple forums.

 

[Jim_R]

Hmmm. ..

Ever notice that in a lot of antii-GPS posts, the GPS is the only thing in the cockpit capable of failing?

???

The "anti-GPS" crowd isn't an anti-GPS crowd. It's a pro-alternate-method-of-determining-your-position crowd.

The reason the topic of GPS failures arises in these discussions is because they're always started by the "I'm good because I have multiple GPS's in the cockpit" crowd.

 

[PPC1052]

I feel quite competent to track a VOR and use it to find any particular air field. I feel quite competent to use two VOR's to find a specific point or fix. If I lost GPS, I would pull out my sectional, and confidently find a VOR and track it to my destination, or a safe alternate. But I freely admit that I would be nervous without a GPS regarding knowing that I am clear of a particular air space. How am I supposed to know the landmarks for all of the boundaries of a class Charlie or Bravo? If I had DME, that would be one thing. How awful is this really? I ask as a lower time pilot, so I won't be offended if you're critical. It just tells me what I need to work on. I suppose this goes to how thorough one really needs to flight plan every trip. Do you really plan the crossing VOR radial to let you know where each section of airspace is?

 

[Mafoo]

???

The "anti-GPS" crowd isn't an anti-GPS crowd. It's a pro-alternate-method-of-determining-your-position crowd.

The reason the topic of GPS failures arises in these discussions is because they're always started by the "I'm good because I have multiple GPS's in the cockpit" crowd.

Well, I have been argued with a lot in this thread, and I have repeatedly stated that and alternate method of navigation outside of GPS is required.

What would you call all the people who have been arguing with me?

 

[Jim_R]

I have repeatedly stated that and alternate method of navigation outside of GPS is required.

What would you call all the people who have been arguing with me?

If you had started out by saying an alternative method of navigation outside GPS is required, I doubt there would have been much debate. I've already said the people arguing with you are the pro-alternate-method-of-determining-your-position folks.

A reminder of your first post in this thread:

I think the question at hand, is...if using GPS as the only reliable form of navigation is acceptable. (Let's say he had 3-4 GPS systems with him, like I would most of the time).

I think knowing how to use something else is always good, however I find no need for it. Technology moves on, and people adapt.
<snip>
If GPS as a service goes down, you have a lot bigger problems then knowing exactly where you are.

Translation: "I'm good because I have multiple GPS's in the cockpit."

 

[Mafoo]

Translation: "I'm good because I have multiple GPS's in the cockpit."

That was taken out of context. That line is there to state the question asked:

"I think the question at hand, is not if he has a backup in case it went out, but if using GPS as the only reliable form of navigation is acceptable. (Let's say he had 3-4 GPS systems with him, like I would most of the time)."

My point was people used to navigate with the stars. Most people don't anymore, because we have much more accurate forms that we consider reliable. Obviously GPS is not there yet (or we would not have this thread), but some day it will be (or something else better will come along), and we can start dropping off crude less accurate forms of navigation that are no longer needed.

Like we did with celestial navigation.

 

[midlifeflyer]

???

The "anti-GPS" crowd isn't an anti-GPS crowd. It's a pro-alternate-method-of-determining-your-position crowd.

The reason the topic of GPS failures arises in these discussions is because they're always started by the "I'm good because I have multiple GPS's in the cockpit" crowd.

I'm a pro-multiple-methods person myself. I've even had GPS failures (as well as VORs, NDBs and Comm failures).

But I've noticed a lot more "GPS will fail and nothing else will" posts through the years than "I'm good because I have 18 GPSes" posts.

I don't think it's as much anti-GPS as a distrust of the new and wistful reminiscences of the "good old days" when men were men and ADFs led you into thunderstorms.