Pilot knowledge

[sarangan]

I’m looking for some feedback on a trend I’ve been noticing lately. Increasingly, students seem to be relying on ForeFlight as their only source of navigational information, and many have very limited familiarity with the underlying FAA publications - sectional charts, the Chart Supplement, Aviation Weather Service products, and so on.

For example, during flight reviews I’ll ask a pilot for the CTAF at a particular airport. Most immediately go to ForeFlight’s info panel and look it up there. But when I point to the sectional and ask what the inverted “C” next to the airport symbol means, they often can’t tell me. The same goes for approach frequencies, phone numbers, and other operational details - many seem unaware that the Chart Supplement is the official source for this information. Even with weather, asking about the valid time of a coded TAF often leads to, “Well, ForeFlight explains it for me.” I’ll admit I’m not a ForeFlight user myself, so that may be coloring my perspective.

I’m bringing this up because I’m trying to understand whether this is simply a natural shift in how pilots interact with information, or whether we’re losing essential foundational knowledge. I don’t want to sound like an old-timer desperately clinging to an E6B - far from it. I’ve written my own aviation apps and I am much more comfortable with electronic information than most of these students in question. But I can’t shake the feeling that all pilots should still know how to read a METAR and interpret the airport info boxes on a sectional.

What say you?

 

[MauleSkinner]

Where does Foreflight get its information, and is it an equivalent “official source?” If Foreflight goes down, and they can’t read coded METARs and TAFs, will they fly anyway? Is there something they’re actually missing if they don’t have the underlying knowledge?

Where I see it is in the performance apps…the overwhelming majority of times it doesn’t make a difference whether or not they understand the ground rules of the AFM performance section, but the assumptions that many pilots make could get them killed if they stray from the center of the performance planning envelope.

Quite frankly, long before Foreflight and its equivalents, those are topics that many pilots only learned because they were forced to, and only learned as much as they were forced to. So I’m not entirely sure that we’re “losing” anything.

 

[strikes2k]

Student pilot here. Can't imagine most students could get along with only foreflight. Not even sure you could pass all the tests without knowing how to read a chart, chart supplement, or interpret a METAR/TAF without electronic aids. The instructors I've had have required me to have proficiency doing things the old school way, while also embracing electronic tools. So I can only speak for myself but I'd like to think I'm reasonably proficient doing things the "old" way in addition to the "new" way, except the old school manual E6B. Just couldn't get the hang of that thing in a reasonable period of time so I bought a Sporty's electronic E6B and saved myself a lot of frustration.

 

[Brad Z]

I’m looking for some feedback on a trend I’ve been noticing lately. Increasingly, students seem to be relying on ForeFlight as their only source of navigational information, and many have very limited familiarity with the underlying FAA publications - sectional charts, the Chart Supplement, Aviation Weather Service products, and so on.

For example, during flight reviews I’ll ask a pilot for the CTAF at a particular airport. Most immediately go to ForeFlight’s info panel and look it up there. But when I point to the sectional and ask what the inverted “C” next to the airport symbol means, they often can’t tell me. The same goes for approach frequencies, phone numbers, and other operational details - many seem unaware that the Chart Supplement is the official source for this information. Even with weather, asking about the valid time of a coded TAF often leads to, “Well, ForeFlight explains it for me.” I’ll admit I’m not a ForeFlight user myself, so that may be coloring my perspective.

I’m bringing this up because I’m trying to understand whether this is simply a natural shift in how pilots interact with information, or whether we’re losing essential foundational knowledge. I don’t want to sound like an old-timer desperately clinging to an E6B - far from it. I’ve written my own aviation apps and I am much more comfortable with electronic information than most of these students in question. But I can’t shake the feeling that all pilots should still know how to read a METAR and interpret the airport info boxes on a sectional.

What say you?

Once you solely use ForeFlight (or virtually any other EFB for that matter) for aeronautical information and charting, your charting symbology knowledge quickly degrades. If they can tell you the frequency to use for CTAF (especially at an airport with a closed tower) does it matter if they know what the inverted C means?

 

[cowman]

I don't really think it's terribly important how someone gets their information as long as they know where to find the correct information in a timely manner.

However, going back to the original example of looking up the CTAF- I use Foreflight and I don't think I ever open the info panel for an airport to look up a CTAF. Why the heck would I, it's right there on the chart? When you're hand flying an airplane bouncing around fumbling around with touch controls to open up that screen can be cumbersome and distracting so I really think someone ought to be able to read something that basic from the chart.

Also it's been a while since I took a PPL written but I did just finish a CPL written and there were questions about where to find information- and of course that only listed official FAA publications as options. Also when I took my PPL checkride I'm pretty sure the examiner pointed to different stuff on the chart and expected me to know what all the symbols/numbers/etc meant so it seems like everyone had to learn that at some point. Maybe they really do forget that easily? IDK, the last time I really used a paper chart(other than a sunshade) was for my PPL. I've been on ForeFlight ever since and I still use the basic info on the sectional.

 

[midlifeflyer]

AFAIK, DPEs still play the “what’s this” game with Sectional and IFR enroute charts. Beyond that, I tend to agree with

Quite frankly, long before Foreflight and its equivalents, those are topics that many pilots only learned because they were forced to, and only learned as much as they were forced to. So I’m not entirely sure that we’re “losing” anything.

I’m also fairly media neutral, so don’t worry too much about the form the information comes in. Whether someone looks at an EFB Airport page, a paper or plastic sectional chart, tapping/pressing on an aeronautical map, or their panel GPS’s information pages, doesn’t make a lot of difference to me, so long as they can also deal with common failure modes.

 

[robin ardoin]

I’ll play devil’s advocate…..how many of you keep a copy of a ‘phone book’ with the ‘yellow pages’ to look up phone number?

 

[Tarheelpilot]

Im a professional pilot at the age where I see the end is closer than the beginning for my career. (And life, most likely)

So part of me wants to tell these kids today to get off my lawn and learn how to use a paper chart. Then again… I don’t remember the last time I used one. Some of the new FO’s I’m flying with have never used any paper charts. Ever. Weird

What I see actually bothering me is how many of the never paper generation just sit there in cruise with no idea what’s around us. If they ever have an en-route divert ****s going to be hectic and unnecessarily stressful. But then I remember way back in the day that one time I was glued to the window at FL410 crossing the Rockies and my captain asked where I would go if we needed to divert, I had no clue. All I could do was point at the pretty mountains.

Everything has changed yet it’s all the same.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I’ll play devil’s advocate…..how many of you keep a copy of a ‘phone book’ with the ‘yellow pages’ to look up phone number?

LOL!

But this is a bit different in one respect. Flying with an EFB, we do have the original “Yellow Pages” - charts, plates, Chart Supplement, etc.

@sarangan, are you bemoaning lack of paper or inability to use what we do have. Those are two different questions.

 

[Warlock]

I was an Army military Aviator for 10 years before I ever understood civilian airspace or filed an FAA flight plan…accumulated almost 2000hrs of flight time as well…Even some IFR…I guess my point is you naturally don’t care if it’s not necessary, but will figure it out if it becomes so…different from being ignorant or not capable. The children of the magenta line as I call them, are in my experience much more aware and capable than my peer group as young pilots.

 

[Fearless Tower]

Once you solely use ForeFlight (or virtually any other EFB for that matter) for aeronautical information and charting, your charting symbology knowledge quickly degrades. If they can tell you the frequency to use for CTAF (especially at an airport with a closed tower) does it matter if they know what the inverted C means?

In the context of the OPs observation, I think it depends on how one uses FF or other electronic charting app.

Like many here, I learned on paper well before there were iPads or smartphones. I think due to that, I use FF like I would use a sectional, AFD and other sources.

I haven't flown with a sectional in almost 10 years, but if I was flying cross country and needed to look up a freq, field elevation, right or left hand traffic...etc, I'm not going to the airport database and search for that info there. I'm using my finger and thumb to scroll over and zoom in on the sectional view and lift that info right off the chart. It's quicker and I can spend less time head down in the device and more time eyes out. I only go to the airport database if I'm needing something that isn't on the sectional itself (ground or FBO freq, latest METAR...etc) and then I do that sparingly.

I suspect there are a lot of younger folks who because they never really learned how to use some of the older sources, don't realize the advantages of some of the older methods.

 

[Baked Potato]

I’ll play devil’s advocate…..how many of you keep a copy of a ‘phone book’ with the ‘yellow pages’ to look up phone number?

Similar, but I do keep a paper road map of my state, and each of the surrounding states, in the glove box of my car.

One day I'll have my kid use it to give me directions and watch him fluster the two requisite skills:
-wayfinding on a paper map
-folding the paper map for stowage

 

[sarangan]

LOL!

But this is a bit different in one respect. Flying with an EFB, we do have the original “Yellow Pages” - charts, plates, Chart Supplement, etc.

@sarangan, are you bemoaning lack of paper or inability to use what we do have. Those are two different questions.

Good point, and thanks for bringing that up.

I was referring to the abbreviated information that is on the VFR sectional chart - not whether it is printed on paper or displayed on a screen. Same with Chart Supplement - the data format is the same whether it is on in those green books, or on a screen.

My point was not about paper vs electronic. It is about "FAA format" vs "Foreflight format".

Same with METAR/TAF. I was referring to the coded format. Not whether it comes out of a teletype printer or a screen.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Good point, and thanks for bringing that up.

I was referring to the abbreviated information that is on the VFR sectional chart - not whether it is printed on paper or displayed on a screen. Same with Chart Supplement - the data format is the same whether it is on in those green books, or on a screen.

My point was not about paper vs electronic. It is about "FAA format" vs "Foreflight format".

Same with METAR/TAF. I was referring to the coded format. Not whether it comes out of a teletype printer or a screen.

So why is the difference in format relevant?

 

[robin ardoin]

LOL!

Flying with an EFB, we do have the original “Yellow Pages” - charts, plates, Chart Supplement, etc.

Exactly, I don't carry paper charts but have all of my enroute info 'packed' on two devices and I know where to access the info if Foreflight does not 'stick it in my face' for me. Same rational behind not having a 'phone book' for a decade or longer.

 

[midlifeflyer]

My point was not about paper vs electronic. It is about "FAA format" vs "Foreflight format".

My gut thinks you have a point in saying that we should be able to glean necessary information from the "FAA official" publication, the way it's presented in an EFB, he way it's presented in our avionics, and the way it's presented in some other tool we use.

But there is also a part of me that says the "FAA-official'" doesn't really matter unless we are still using FAA paper as either primary or backup. Remove he question from paper vs plastic for a moment. Say we are still in a 100% paper world. You have spent your entire career with Jepp charts. Terminal Procedures, airport data in the 10-8, Jepp enroutes, etc. You are very proficient with them. Is your knowledge base lacking because you would have trouble with the different way the FAA presents the information on its charts and wouldn't know where to look up takeoff minimums or what the heck to do with a Chart Supplement?

 

[bonefishpete]

Boomer Thread

Back in the days got my PPL in a C150 single navcom hand mic that’s it. Sectional was plenty important.

 

[Bob Noel]

I’ll play devil’s advocate…..how many of you keep a copy of a ‘phone book’ with the ‘yellow pages’ to look up phone number?

raises hand

(but I should say I use appropriate available sources)

 

[robin ardoin]

raises hand

(but I should say I use appropriate available sources)

Hmm...you probably had the hots for Barbara Billingsley as a child, as well.

 

[Tools]

I think the biggest issue is the single point of failure. Can they find it with a different app? Or method?

Do they carry SEVERAL devices in case one fails? Are they all charged and updated? Or usable at all…

If I see you using a highly marked up and customized paper chart I may take it from you… see if you can adapt. Same concept.

 

[Half Fast]

Hmm...you probably had the hots for Barbara Billingsley as a child, as well.

Who didn't?

 

[Larry in TN]

I’ll play devil’s advocate…..how many of you keep a copy of a ‘phone book’ with the ‘yellow pages’ to look up phone number?

I miss the yellow pages. I never feel like my web searches are getting everything like the yellow pages did.

Back in the days got my PPL in a C150 single navcom hand mic that’s it. Sectional was plenty important.

I taught many pilots to fly long before there was an iPad.

I kept a number of sectionals, from different parts of the country, to use in my lessons. I'd have one which showed Glass G to 14,500', one with a tower without a Class D area, etc. My approach was that if they'd seen it before, they might not remember it but they'd remember that they'd seen it and know where to go to find it again.

I didn't want to create pilots who needed their EFB to fly. I wanted to create pilots who could fall back to the underlying techonology and still operate safely.

I do still have a CR-5 mechanical flight computer in my flight bag in the 737. It doesn't come out often, but it is useful when we're given holding as I can do more accurate endurance calculations, faster. (I'm just wondering why the font on the CR-5 has gotten so much smaller over the years)

 

[MauleSkinner]

If I see you using a highly marked up and customized paper chart I may take it from you… see if you can adapt. Same concept.

Or vector you so that you have to re-fold your sectional chart 3 times in 20 minutes in an open-cockpit airplane.

if it hadn’t been for where the sectional ended, I’d have found the airport where I landed on the chart without help.

 

[Half Fast]

But I can’t shake the feeling that all pilots should still know how to read a METAR...

I'm sorta curious. Where do you find a METAR or TAF these days other than using some online electronic tool? All the electronic tools I've seen will translate the code.

Keep in mind that the METAR codes were once themselves state-of-the-art modern technology. Why is it important to cling to outdated technology? Do we insist that pilots learn Morse code as an alternate to voice radio?

 

[Half Fast]

I wanted to create pilots who could fall back to the underlying techonology and still operate safely.

Carry that far enough and we'll insist students learn wing warping in a Wright Flyer.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Hmm...you probably had the hots for Barbara Billingsley as a child, as well.

what's your point?

 

[midlifeflyer]

I think the biggest issue is the single point of failure. Can they find it with a different app? Or method?

Do they carry SEVERAL devices in case one fails? Are they all charged and updated? Or usable at all…

If I see you using a highly marked up and customized paper chart I may take it from you… see if you can adapt. Same concept.

It was a complete coincidence. The pilot's iPad overheated during an IPC and he had left his phone in the back. Ended up being a great scenario on single-pilot resource management as we completed the IPC without it.

 

[robin ardoin]

what's your point?

Humor...obviously a dull point... Those of us old enough to remember the necessity of phone books would obviously remember 'the Beaver and Wally's mom'.

 

[Half Fast]

Humor...obviously a dull point... Those of us old enough to remember the necessity of phone books would obviously remember 'the Beaver and Wally's mom'.

And some of us know Barbara was a cheesecake model long before she met Ward Cleaver.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Humor...obviously a dull point... Those of us old enough to remember the necessity of phone books would obviously remember 'the Beaver and Wally's mom'.

LOL! I guess my own attempted at humor was a bit blunted. We were all in love with June Cleaver for some reason.

 

[midlifeflyer]

And some of us know Barbara was a cheesecake model long before she met Ward Cleaver.

 

[Half Fast]

LOL! I guess my own attempted at humor was a bit blunted. We were all in love with June Cleaver for some reason.

Let's not forget Miss Landers.

 

[Half Fast]

View attachment 147286

Dup. Post #21.

 

[Bob Noel]

Hmm...you probably had the hots for Barbara Billingsley as a child, as well.

Jeannie

 

[TCABM]

I'm sorta curious. Where do you find a METAR or TAF these days other than using some online electronic tool?

For a METAR, in planning, I get it from the brief in whatever approved tool I used; then I choose from available formats. I (rarely, now) call 1800WXBRIEF, but will call into the awos recording on the drive to the airport.

Airborne? I get it from ATIS/AWOS/ASOS. How I get that freq is usually from what’s in the GPS’ waypoint database for the airport, load it into comm 2 and listen.

I’m also cross-checking the ASD-B wx info in my EFB against what I’m hearing.


As for the OPs question, format is less an issue for me than knowing what info is required to he gathered, how I’m getting it, and how do that source is valid.

If I had a CFI during a flight review play symbology/format trivial pursuit with me, I’d pretty quickly tire of the exercise without knowing the purpose.

If the purpose is to find out if I can decode some esoteric format, it’s time for me to disengage with that CFI.

 

[Hengelo]

This has the feel of a troll post, but I don't think it is.

So long as the pilot knows how to use the tool, does it really matter if it's repurposed hardwood with ink or aluminum with some glass and electricity?

The visually busy paper chart is a Frankenstienian abomination of information-mashups, necessitated by the absence of something better... like an iPad. I'm NOT saying the current EFB's are better - just that its an alternate way of doing the exact same thing.

Moses did not descend the mount with two stone tablets and a sectional...

 

[TCABM]

…. But I can’t shake the feeling that all pilots should still know how to read a METAR and interpret the airport info boxes on a sectional.

What say you?

What does the AC61-98 and the relevant ACS have to say on the topics?

 

[Larry in TN]

Carry that far enough and we'll insist students learn wing warping in a Wright Flyer.

Unwarranted extrapolation.

Lots of airplanes have design features that are relatively uncommon and that a transitioning pilot will have to learn. My argument is that all pilots will need information from flight publications and they should know more about obtaining that information than just the way their current app suggests it. They should learn how to fly without the app so that they have that to fall back on when their app is not available.

As far as reading METAR/TAF reports, my EFB has a function which decodes them, but I only use it when making a passenger announcement and want the temperature in Fahrenheit without doing the mental math (which I can do). I read the raw METAR/TAF because, when you know how, it is easier than reading the plain language version.

It's also good to know when copying weather information over the radio which, even in the 737 with FMS, ACARS, and CPDLC, I have to do with some regularity.

 

[Half Fast]

For a METAR, in planning, I get it from the brief in whatever approved tool I used; then I choose from available formats. I (rarely, now) call 1800WXBRIEF, but will call into the awos recording on the drive to the airport.

Airborne? I get it from ATIS/AWOS/ASOS. How I get that freq is usually from what’s in the GPS’ waypoint database for the airport, load it into comm 2 and listen.

I’m also cross-checking the ASD-B wx info in my EFB against what I’m hearing.


As for the OPs question, format is less an issue for me than knowing what info is required to he gathered, how I’m getting it, and how do that source is valid.

If I had a CFI during a flight review play symbology/format trivial pursuit with me, I’d pretty quickly tire of the exercise without knowing the purpose.

If the purpose is to find out if I can decode some esoteric format, it’s time for me to disengage with that CFI.

You made my point. Nobody is getting weather info by walking into an airport weather office and reading the printed hieroglyphics off a teletype machine, which is what the codes were developed for originally.

If we’re going to use modern technology to get the data, we might as well use that technology to put it into an easily read format.

 

[robin ardoin]

Jeannie

yea...you dream!