Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Flight Following' started by CharlieD3, Apr 11, 2021.
Back in the day I did a lot of trips from Dallas to and from DCA and LGA. We had VLF/Omega but always backed it up with VOR's. I still remember most of the VOR frequency's on that route and back in the day knew the center frequency's. To this day I will have a VOR with DME turned up.
Our FMS (like most) auto tune the closest VOR’s. I always keep a needle up for awareness, although mostly the display does not define the route.
Probably appropriate, since @MBDiagMan made his own autocorrect/typo...
The “we’re”in lieu of “were” is not where the confusion came from. The confusion came from 18 HOURS when I responded which was shortly thereafter corrected to 18 YEARS.
So the t-shirt isn’t appropriate?
Even on a big tablet or large computer screen, I can't get anything even close to size/resolution of spreading out a paper chart on the table at home for flight planning. In the cockpit, agreed, since you're going to have the chart folded anyway it's not much different.
I don’t see the limitation you’re implying, I find electronic flight planning resources far superior to a WAC or SAC, but if a chart works for you, great!
Trying to think of the last time I did that. Once you’re in bifocals spreading stuff across a table is fairly useless. Pinch zoom a fixed distance from your face works a whoooooole lot better.
Skyvector does not magnify beyond a certain point (at least on my computer). Garmin Pilot zooms as far as you can go.
The other thing I really like about planning on a tablet is that in FF I can switch to imagery and see what a particular landmark or airport actually looks like from the air. Pretty tough to do that with paper.
Well, I guess that's true. On my ipad skyvector zooms to the same scale as a sectional. On my pc I can zoom in a bit more, although I don't see what that utility provides? Here's a picture of a SAC (expired 22 OCT 2009) held up to my monitor...
I'm in progressives, not bifocals, but isn't the whole point of either to let us see things close up or further away, just by changing our head angle slightly?
The limitation is not being able to see details along your whole route at once. On a tablet or computer screen, you can see your whole route at once with most detail removed or shrunk beyond legibility, or you can see a tiny sliding window of your route with details, but not both. Not that I spread out a paper chart every time I plan a flight (in fact, I'm voluntarily not flying at all right now during Ontario's stay-at-home order), but when I want to engage with where I'm flying, I find that the experience of having it all spread out over a bigger surface is quite different.
Or, in other words, just think of it this way -- you can flight plan perfectly well on your phone, but isn't it still nice having the bigger tablet screen? Well, a paper chart on a table is an even-bigger display. It's a lot easier to see the terrain and water bodies that will influence weather along your route, the alternative airports, the emergency-landing spots, the powerlines/roads/rivers that you could follow in a navigational emergency, etc. etc.
LOL I wish. I have two different pairs of progressives. One outdoor one inside.
You mean K&E don’t you?
Good advice. Many people allow their head to be behind the airplane. Learn to fly (again) with a constant DR position always going forward in your head, where you are in relation to the next waypoint, your position on a chart, estimating your drift by visual observation, know where you're going (terrain), progress to WP ETAs, etc. It helps in getting your mind ahead of the aircraft so when automation goes down, you don't also.