GPS, VOR, Pilotage, Dead Reckoning?

Everskyward said:
Then what you've got counts as "all".

In some cases using a VOR can be easier than using a GPS. A specific example is when you a cleared to intercept a radial off a VOR. To me it's much easier and less time consuming to use the actual VOR receiver for that rather than trying to program it into a GPS.
Click to expand...


Absolutely!

I guess the 'Direct Enter Enter' guys have much nicer IFR check-ride instructors then I do. I just finished my annual tune up with the instructor; no GPS, no moving map. Hours of flying holds, backcourse ILS, and DME arcs sans the pretty moving map. Quite to work out but after a while the 'mental moving map' reforms in your head and the CDI works quite well.
 
Baron2PG said:
Absolutely!
Click to expand...
Ditto what mari say too.

Baron2PG said:
I guess the 'Direct Enter Enter' guys have much nicer IFR check-ride instructors then I do. I just finished my annual tune up with the instructor; no GPS, no moving map. Hours of flying holds, backcourse ILS, and DME arcs sans the pretty moving map. Quite to work out but after a while the 'mental moving map' reforms in your head and the CDI works quite well.
Click to expand...
I just flew an IPC this past weekend and did not use the GPS for any of the nav. It was also nice to fly a missed to an intersection hold without GPS, just the two VORs. It had been a while since I practiced that. I did glance at the GPS after I was established and it was neat to see how close I really was to the race track on the display.
 
You always use al resources available... But sometimes that can make you complacent...

Local guy flunked his IFR check ride in his 430 equipped Mooney... The DE flunked him because when he made the inbound turn on the hold he failed to rotate the VOR head - even though he was dead-on on the race track on the 430 and using it for reference it was a bust...

I always use everything available...
denny-o
 
Baron2PG said:
You're now talking about a two-point failure; which has a very low probability. 1st the GPS would have to be down then Murphy bites you with a VOR on your route being fubar; extremely unlikely.
Click to expand...

Actually, I wasn't discussing a two-point failure, just the failure of a VOR while enroute. The scenario as described had you in a "No GPS, /A airplane". GPS could be working, but you don't have one in your airplane. ;-)
 
I *ALWAYS* have the GPS handheld on the glareshield in the cherokee. Living in Colorado and spending lots of time in WY, NM and AZ I have to deal with MOA, Restricted, Fire NOTAMS and such that can change daily. Almost everywhere I go, I'm negotiating some sort of military space.

I also have the maps right next to me and used each to cross-check the other. I'm not interested in having a close, personal relationship with a C150, F16, UH, or being a bombing target from the Army.
 
Not having a GPS is a bit on the dumb side according to me. The things can be had for very reasonable money, and give unparalleled situational awareness. Like some others have said, there's a big difference between being dependent on something and having it available in a pinch.
 
I now fly with a 396, and it has a good battery, so that's an improvement, anyway.
Click to expand...

I have a handheld GPS also that operates on 4 AA batteries. I like the redundancy of having a nav source that doesn't depend on ships power. I always carry spare batteries.
 
Dr. O said:
You always use al resources available... But sometimes that can make you complacent...

Local guy flunked his IFR check ride in his 430 equipped Mooney... The DE flunked him because when he made the inbound turn on the hold he failed to rotate the VOR head - even though he was dead-on on the race track on the 430 and using it for reference it was a bust...

I always use everything available...
denny-o
Click to expand...

As I have been led to believe the "race track picture" is not for navigation (though it is pretty accurate). Thus, if you didn't Turn-Twist-Time the official navigation source, even if that is your heading bug and a stop watch for a procedure turn, you are busted!
 
Baron2PG said:
As I have been led to believe the "race track picture" is not for navigation (though it is pretty accurate). Thus, if you didn't Turn-Twist-Time the official navigation source, even if that is your heading bug and a stop watch for a procedure turn, you are busted!
Click to expand...

nothing on the 430 screen is for navigation. The CDI is what you are supposed to follow.
 
Personally I think the IPC should involve some usage of the GPS. It's what you're most likely going to be flying with in the soup. Not a bad idea to use it during the IPC to make sure you actually know how. There is always something more to learn about it as well.

Not to say that it shouldn't be failed for a portion of the IPC.
 
And finally I read the water tower. It says "Weenieburg".......just kidding it says "Podunkville" 'cause of my awesome navigational skillz.

~~~~~~~~~ I thought surely you were going to say :

It says "Purina" or "Seniors 95"
 
jesse said:
Personally I think the IPC should involve some usage of the GPS.
Click to expand...
Guess you and the FAA agree on something, because if you have an IFR approach GPS in the plane, one GPS approach is already required for an IPC by the PTS.
 
I sure hope GPS in cockpit never becomes mandatory. There is certain type flying that is enjoyable simply because there's no distraction from flight.

IFR? Gimme a GPS, and lacking a panel mount, and battery powered handheld for me has now become required equipment IMC.

Not long ago I lost all electric 10 minutes into low soup with CB ahead, no radio, no radio nav signals, and VFR many, many miles away.

I shot the LOC 5 approach with the handheld GPS on. In this case the 430W had enough residual juice to guide me until we broke out, but what if it died too?

Anyway, it's all about how much risk you're willing to take.

Flying VFR in severe clear over known terrain? I don need no steenkin GPS.

IFR with widespread IMC? Gimme the GPS.
 
Everskyward said:
Then what you've got counts as "all".

In some cases using a VOR can be easier than using a GPS. A specific example is when you a cleared to intercept a radial off a VOR. To me it's much easier and less time consuming to use the actual VOR receiver for that rather than trying to program it into a GPS.
Click to expand...
That may depend on the GPS. On mine I can simply punch -D-> More OBS and set the HSI course pointer just like you do for a VOR.
 
COFlyBoy said:
I fall in the "Use Everything You've Got" category. Why wouldn't you use it all.

I guess some folks are suggesting that not using the GPS will keep your skills sharper. I just use all the skills to cross check.

Example:
GPS says I'm over Podunkville heading Southwest..
Hmmm, I'm on the 148deg radial from Megopolis VOR, which goes right through Podunkville.
And, I'm on the 307deg bearing from Podunkville NDB, which also goes right through town.
So far so good.
Looking out the window, I can see a set of runways that matches the layout at Podunkville Muni. I can see the highway running through town from North to South. And finally I read the water tower. It says "Weenieburg".......just kidding it says "Podunkville" 'cause of my awesome navigational skillz.
A quick look at the DG and the compass verifies the heading as Southwest.

I know where I am and where I'm going. I used all the available resources. And I don't feel inferior to someone who says they don't use GPS for navigation, because I keep my dead reckoning, pilotage and radio nav skills sharp.
Click to expand...

Sharp like a butter knife maybe because the GPS already told you that you're at podunkville.

My navigation methods and cross check on cross country flights are almost exactly as you describe above (sans the water tower ID because I'm never flying that low) but I would never argue that this method does much of anything to sharpen my navigational skills. At the end of the day I 'm still just following the magenta line.

It's my opinion that there's a big difference between:

a) turning everything off and flying a 2...3...4 hour cross country using nothing but pilotage and ded reckoning

and

b) simply verifying what the GPS is already telling you.

But that's just me.
 
Last edited:
steingar said:
If you're reading road signs you're breaking the FARs. Colliding with things at 70mph hurts a lot.
Click to expand...
What, you think a road sign is a "structure" and you can't read them with 500 ft separation?:tongue:

Seriously though, while good old fashioned DR and pilotage are good skills, IMO they are fairly obsolete for cross country flight today in a fast airplane given the plethora of Class A/B/C/D, MOA, restricted and prohibited areas, not to mention the ubiquitous stadium and moving VIP TFRs.
 
dmccormack said:
Besides, fallibility is inherent in any system. Ever punch in the wrong waypoint?
Click to expand...
I've had the right waypoint give me the wrong coordinates. Like 20 miles wrong.
 
steingar said:
If you're reading road signs you're breaking the FARs. Colliding with things at 70mph hurts a lot.
Click to expand...

Nope -- not at all. I can tell I-79 from I-70 and I-68, can get close enough to tell which exit is below, and close enough to read most of the water towers -- all while maintaining required separation.

We all drive cars 70 MPH mere feet from other cars traveling opposite direction. We would it be so much harder while airborne?

Anyway, some people have good map sense -- a recent student was one. I never worried about his navigation because he could look out the window and figure out where he was.

I'm not advocating flying the Chief through the needle of P-40, and some folks live in very busy, very regulated airspace areas that need the precision of a GPS for every flight.

But not everyone does for every flight, and I'm glad there hasn't been such a mandate.
 
I believe one should make use of all the technology available. Navigation is no exception. There will always be some who prefer to stick with the old ways because supposedly the old ways are more reliable and superior. True, as technology get more sophisticated there's a higher tendency for things to break down. But the benefit they offer, including enhanced safety, far surpasses the potential risk of them breaking down.

Columbus didn't say "The sextant might break down, and I'm a pretty good sailor, so let's use the compass only." It's important to know how to the old methods work, AS A BACKUP. It should not be done at the expense of not utilizing all the resources available.

But if you're still unconvinced, I'd be to take the GPS off your hands :D
 
dmccormack said:
Nope -- not at all. I can tell I-79 from I-70 and I-68, can get close enough to tell which exit is below, and close enough to read most of the water towers -- all while maintaining required separation.

We all drive cars 70 MPH mere feet from other cars traveling opposite direction. We would it be so much harder while airborne?

Anyway, some people have good map sense -- a recent student was one. I never worried about his navigation because he could look out the window and figure out where he was.

I'm not advocating flying the Chief through the needle of P-40, and some folks live in very busy, very regulated airspace areas that need the precision of a GPS for every flight.

But not everyone does for every flight, and I'm glad there hasn't been such a mandate.
Click to expand...

I suppose if all you're doing is puttering around the patch, though I'd still have the backup. You can never tell what will happen, and lots of really good pilots have gotten lost. Some of us like to go places, though...
 
steingar said:
I suppose if all you're doing is puttering around the patch, though I'd still have the backup. You can never tell what will happen, and lots of really good pilots have gotten lost. Some of us like to go places, though...
Click to expand...
As a use-everything-you-have-available (at least most of the time) person I think it's interesting that some people want to stick to the old ways. But as someone who learned how to fly a long time ago in pretty congested airspace in airplanes with limited avionics I also think it's interesting how people aren't comfortable without all sorts of safety nets most of which were not invented yet back in the day. I've seen this in other parts of life, not just aviation.
 
steingar said:
I suppose if all you're doing is puttering around the patch, though I'd still have the backup. You can never tell what will happen, and lots of really good pilots have gotten lost. Some of us like to go places, though...
Click to expand...

I go places -- just takes longer. :D

I've flown SEL as far as Phoenix, and many times to NC, SC, NY, DE, VA, and GA. Most longer trips were IFR, but some were pure VFR. I've crossed PA I don't know how many times and don't need any navaids if I can see the ground.

Though, I'm planning to fly KWAY to KPTD without a GPS. I would also fly non-GPS to anyplace in WV, NY, or PA (except Philly or NYC region, of course, since I don't have a transponder either). I know those states well enough from the air.

I would not fly sans GPS anywhere east of Winchester, VA, though. Just too much airspace, traffic, etc.

I am a Map person, though. I have various maps (besides sectionals) and like to find different places or retrace routes, etc, etc. And part of the fun in terrain association is using that knowledge to get from point A to point B.

I've used a GPS, like the GPS, and don't think pilots who use them are somehow less aeronautical. I just think that for certain type of flying the big map out the window provides plenty of clues.
 
Last edited:
Lately, I've been doing more and more flights with just a sectional and my 2 eyes. It is kinda fun, in a "keep yourself busy" kind of way.
 
dmccormack said:
Gotta update those databases...

:rolleyes2:
Click to expand...
The database was out of date but the waypoint was actually an airport. The airport hadn't moved. Ever. The database was literally just wrong the day it shipped.
 
jesse said:
The database was out of date but the waypoint was actually an airport. The airport hadn't moved. Ever. The database was literally just wrong the day it shipped.
Click to expand...


It happens.

So far I haven't found an error in any Approach plate, but I did find an IF waypoint named differently on the plate than it was in the 430W (up to date) DB.

:dunno:
 
dmccormack said:
It happens.

So far I haven't found an error in any Approach plate, but I did find an IF waypoint named differently on the plate than it was in the 430W (up to date) DB.

:dunno:
Click to expand...
The coordinates were actually set to another airport, which was a class D about twenty miles away. Had I just been flying the GPS and not noticing that I was off-course I would have ended up having a very bad day.

It took me awhile to figure out what the hell was actually going on. The outside picture didn't match the inside picture. But the outside picture doesn't lie so I went with it instead.
 
Everskyward said:
...I also think it's interesting how people aren't comfortable without all sorts of safety nets most of which were not invented yet back in the day.
Click to expand...

I understand exactly what you are saying. I am comfortable flying from one side of the country to the other with sectionals and a watch. But I'm happier with a GPS.
When I got caught in a surprise lowering overcast, being able to find NRST in two seconds, glance at the GPS for heading and distance every 15 seconds, and stay eyes-out for obstructions was a very very good thing.
 
I have a handheld aviation GPS just because I like techy toys, but I'm with Dan. For the kind of airplanes we fly, you really don't need anything more than a sectional (or road atlas) and a watch. If I'm flying less than 100 miles from home I don't really need those, but they're always in the airplane, which the GPS is not. It's a lot more satisfying tracing your path on the map with your finger than following a magenta line on a little hard-to-read screen.
 
dmccormack said:
:thumbsup:

I don't think I'd be as comfortable doing the sectional thing out there in the land of endless rectangles, though!!
Click to expand...

Heck, that's what makes it easy. You can always figure out E/W-N/S. Just fly a section line until you cross a primary highway and then follow that to the nearest town.B) Besides....for the next 6 months the entire state is one giant airport for Aeroncas.
 
It's funny how it goes... at one time, pilots probably sat around arguing the same points about, say, gyros (especially DGs).

There's nothing inherently negative about using a wonderful tool like GPS, but the basic skills are logically the ultimate backup, and if following the line is inclined to cause you to neglect the basic skills, you are setting yourself up for trouble.
Sure, I know pilots who've told tales of "I don't need it to navigate, but if it weren't for the DIRECT function on my GPS that time I got caught in unfamiliar country scud-running... etc., etc.". You picture yourself in such a situation and think "well ,heck yes, that must have made all the difference!"

But way in the beginning of all of these stories is a brief mention of how they pressed on "to have a look" because "it didn't look so bad". A pretty common decision, often made by very savvy, experienced pilots... I'm not looking down on any pilot by pointing this out. But it's still a failure of the basic skills, which include making the right call at the right time (it's usually not a gamble, especially when you make the more conservative choice).

I don't see needing navaids for VFR flight, even an NDB, unless you've already screwed up. And every time I've opted to use a navaid because my plan had gone awry, I could have successfully carried out the same new plan the hard way, but opted for the easy way.

That's one less time I did not apply the basic skills, and that's not a good habit to get into, IMHO.

Bottom line: I say use whatever toys you can afford, but balance it with flexing those old-timey skills, including making decisions as if you did not have the toys. There's plenty of time on most XCs to practice this stuff without getting too distracted by it, even if it's been a while since you, say, plotted your position by dead reckoning alone. I find that navigating the "hard way" is a fun way to pass the time when you're holding the same course and altitude for long periods... and the more often you do it, the easier it is to do it if and when you need to.
 
For me personally, I would use my pilotage, dead reckoning skills always as a backup to the GPS. Anywhere I fly to, it's always better to backup what you have onboard.

It's true, nowadays, people do rely too heavily on the use of their GPS.
 
rolandjude said:
For me personally, I would use my pilotage, dead reckoning skills always as a backup to the GPS. Anywhere I fly to, it's always better to backup what you have onboard.

It's true, nowadays, people do rely too heavily on the use of their GPS.
Click to expand...


I've placed all my reliance on a GPS -- during an approach with loss of all radio nav.

Sometimes it's a Very Good Thing. :thumbsup:
 
rolandjude said:
For me personally, I would use my pilotage, dead reckoning skills always as a backup to the GPS. Anywhere I fly to, it's always better to backup what you have onboard.

It's true, nowadays, people do rely too heavily on the use of their GPS.
Click to expand...

Pilotage and to a slightly lesser extent ded reckoning, are fairly useless if you're in IMC, a condition that applies to a significant number of my cross country flights.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top