This magenta line business...

cowman

cowman

Final Approach
Joined
Aug 12, 2012
Messages
5,284
Location
Danger Zone
Display Name
Display name:
Cowman
I felt this should go in a new thread as not to get entangled in the other discussion...

I always see people grumbling about "following the magenta line" or "magenta line syndrome" and so on. I am curious as to what defines a "magenta line" pilot. Is it strictly someone who relies on GPS for navigation? Is it someone who only looks at the map page on their GPS and follows the line?

What separates this frowned apon "magenta line" navigation from a good pilot taking advantage of the best available navigation tool he has?

To me, it only makes sense to use the GPS. If Pilotage was good enough, they wouldn't have started putting NDBs around the country. If that was good enough, they wouldn't have built VORs and LORAN and probably other stuff I'm not thinking of. GPS is even more precise and reliable than that stuff was.

I navigate with my garmin 430, I use an iPad/stratus with foreflight for my charts and to verify my position and to get inflight weather if I feel the need to check. I use the page on the 430 that shows ground track and desired and try to match the numbers, I refer to the iPad for a map and current position. Along the route I try to identify what towns/airports/etc I can see out the window. I also do tune in VORs or NDBs along the route if I'm not busy with anything, just to make sure they're still working or as something to immediately fall back on should some unlikely event kill my 430, ipad, and iPhone leaving me without any GPS. I'm confident I could find my way to an airport by VOR or NDB.... I demonstrated as much on my checkride. Could I do it by pilotage? Probably... but I wouldn't want to rely on it. Seems like it would be so easy to make a mistake... heck sometimes using GPS even having reviewed the terrain on google earth the night before I have trouble spotting a field. Sometimes I see it from 20+ miles out, usually at least within 5 miles but I don't like the idea of getting where I need to go being based on "usually". This is why I consider pilotage a last resort method.
 
I primarily use a handheld GPS. have a panel mount for a backup and another handheld for a backup backup. And I follow my course on a paper chart. I don't get lost...
 
I would define it as navigating using a moving map device like a video game display and manipulating the controls to keep the little airplane on the course line -- and being unable to navigate successfully any other way.

That said, I use my onboard GPS nav systems most of the time, but if you turned them all off and killed the GPS in my iPad, I'd still be able to navigate without difficulty from Point A to Point B using visual, pilotage, and DR. Further, I consdier that skill to be essential to being a competent pilot.
 
Last edited:
I'm a newbie but, like you, I try to know how to use all the resources at my disposal. 430? Yep, but I try to understand a lot of aspects of the device rather then just "Direct To". Paper charts? Yep. Even my Droid phone has some apps to identify airports, get weather, etc.

My guess is the "Magenta Line" issue you speak of is directed at those who use the "Direct To" button on the GPS as their only nav tool and, if that goes belly-up for some reason, they might be at a loss for quick alternatives if not prepared otherwise.

Just my .02
 
I don't think anybody is questioning the use of GPS for nav, the issue is not being able to navigate by other means including pilotage.
 
The direct to button ,is there to use. On pre flight the route and airports should be reviewed. Then push the direct to button. If all your GPS signals go out ,call ATC .
 
I love flying dead reckoning. It's a challenge to me, but really southern WI isn't hard to get lost in. You keep flying east and your going to see/fly over Lake Michigan. But all my flights so far have been less than 150 miles one way, and I have had Garmin Pilot running on almost all my flights for the past year. Haven't gotten lost yet. I also have a current chart and checklist on the dash. I've never planned a flight with the app and followed the magenta line.
 
As others have said it is not the use of GPS it is the inability to fly without it.
 
For me, the journey is the adventure. Yeah, I normally dial in the GPS, but pilotage is fun - why give it up just to steer s-turns about a magenta line?
 
cowman said:
I always see people grumbling about "following the magenta line" or "magenta line syndrome" and so on. I am curious as to what defines a "magenta line" pilot. Is it strictly someone who relies on GPS for navigation? Is it someone who only looks at the map page on their GPS and follows the line?
Click to expand...

Only the grumbler's know what they are on about. There is a video "Children of the Magenta Line" that attempts to make a case about over-reliance on cockpit automation that the grumbler's believe applies to the average spam-can driver, where the closest thing to automation is the trim wheel and the throttle lock.
 
Ron Levy said:
I would define it as navigating using a moving map device like a video game display and manipulating the controls to keep the little airplane on the course line -- and being unable to navigate successfully any other way.
Click to expand...

and, I would have one more thing: not being smart enough to know you need to be able to navigate otherwise...or being so arrogant (ignorant?) that you don't think you need to be able to.
 
Sac Arrow said:
I don't think anybody is questioning the use of GPS for nav, the issue is not being able to navigate by other means including pilotage.
Click to expand...

I would hope that is what is meant, but with this group I highly doubt it. Unless you can navigate by the stars most in this group think you are a moron. Nothing wrong at all with following the magenta line, NOTHING! If you drew a line on a paper chart and followed it that would be that same thing. I have never used charts, and never will. I use them for flight planning only....when I am boarded. I use the computers now to map the route and look for things along the way. I suspect most others do too, unless they have no idea how to use a chart website. ;)

For years after GPS came out many CFI's would not let anyone bring one with them as a student. It was mostly the old school diehards taught how to navigate by Wilber and carrier pigeon. Technology is always slow to catch up with old folks, except old folks like me! :lol:

Airways? Another waste of fuel and time. "Direct To" is the only way to fly small planes, VFR.
 
Last edited:
I get the magenta line dependency thing- Must Avoid that kind of dependent relationship...

I took a solo night flight last night in one of the non-GPS Cherokees at my FBO. I have to say, I used EVERYTHING- paper charts, VORs, Pilotage, ForeFlight (magenta line and zoomable charts)...It was actually really, really fun.

Take away my Foreflight- and maybe reading the paper would have been harder (dim lighting and older eyes) but not impossible. For me as a low time pilot, it is important not to become complacent and/ or lazy. Yeah, the FBO has a nicer GPS equipped Archer...But the other planes are cheaper to fly. More Flying= More Fun= Sharper skills for later.:goofy::goofy:
 
Geico266 said:
For years after GPS came out many CFI's would not let anyone bring one with them as a student. It was mostly the old school diehards taught how to navigate by Wilber. Technology is always slow to catch up with old folks, except old folks like me!
Click to expand...

Just met a pilot who went through his whole IFR training with a CFII that did everything strictly paper, VOR tracking and "old school" methodology if you will. DPE failed the student on the DEPARTURE PROCEDURE of his first takeoff because he didn't know how to fully understand, use and set up the 430 and his EFB in his plane!

He was looking for a new CFII in touch with reality of flying a well equipped plane in today's environment.

So yeah, you better know how to get there with paper but more critical is that you better FULLY be able to understand and implement the technology if you are gonna use it. That seems to get lost with many pilots here who just beat the drum of "don't fly the magenta line".

Understand the magenta line. That lack of understanding is what is dangerous and it is a shame that pilots are ridiculed here for trying to understand it.
 
Last edited:
I'd add one more slight subtly to this which is not just being able to use other means to navigate but also maintaining enough situational awareness that you know about where you are if you suddenly lost GPS.

The magenta line dependency also gets mingled with automation dependency and was made famous in the 90's by an AA safety pilot training video. http://vimeo.com/64502012. Very much worth watching.
 
Shawn said:
Just met a pilot who went through his whole IFR training with a CFII that did everything strictly paper, VOR tracking and "old school" methodology if you will. DPE failed the student on the DEPARTURE PROCEDURE of his first takeoff because he didn't know how to fully understand, use and set up the 430 and his EFB in his plane!

He was looking for a new CFII in touch with reality of flying a well equipped plane in today's environment.

So yeah, you better know how to get there with paper but more critical is that you better FULLY be able to understand and implement the technology if you are gonna use it. That seems to get lost with many pilots here who just beat the drum of "don't fly the magenta line".

Understand the magenta line. That lack of understanding is what is dangerous and it is a shame that pilots are ridiculed here for trying to understand it.
Click to expand...

Absolutely :yes:

We had an old CFI here that made a buddy put in a VOR in an RV-9 that didn't have one saying the examiner requires it. I tried to tell him that was not the case, that an examiner for a PPL is not going to have him use it. The examiner didn't even have him turn it on. A total waste of time, money and effort. My buddy ripped it out of the plane as soon as he landed from the exam. :lol:
 
Last edited:
cowman said:
What separates this frowned apon "magenta line" navigation from a good pilot taking advantage of the best available navigation tool he has?
Click to expand...

Absolutely nothing.

Now if they have no clue how to read a map or dial in a VOR, that a different story entirely.

It's aviation, haters gonna hate.
 
Fatal accident rates are at an all time low and have been declining for the past decade. Where do you think this has come from. I'm willing to bet it's the magenta line and other in cockpit resources.
 
trepine said:
Fatal accident rates are at an all time low and have been declining for the past decade. Where do you think this has come from. I'm willing to bet it's the magenta line and other in cockpit resources.
Click to expand...

How exactly does the magenta line keep you from running out of fuel or flying into crappy weather?
 
I would say that the phrase "children of the magenta line" is more synonymous with those who rely on any one instrument to help them navigate. Tune in one wrong digit and that magenta line that you follow may be in the opposite direction. However, someone who just unfailingly stays on that magenta line will fly for an hour and realize they're not where they were supposed to be. If they used a little pilotage/dead reckoning, VOR crosscheck, etc it would have alerted them fairly early on that they were going in the wrong direction.

Same could be said of someone exclusively following VOR's, the wrong frequency can lead you in the wrong direction. Although to be honest, it's likely a bit harder to dial in the wrong VOR than it is to grab the wrong airport identifier on the GPS box. I don't know why anyone would refuse to use all of the tools at their disposal. If I'm flying within an hour of the home airport I'm not even turning the GPS on, or likely even tracking a VOR. I've got an operable compass as well as decent reference points on the ground. No reason to make a simple flight into a complex flight.
 
JB1842 said:
How exactly does the magenta line keep you from running out of fuel or flying into crappy weather?
Click to expand...

Easy, hit "Nearest" and you have all of the nearest airports, fuel availability, weather info, flight services, etc. Most GPS's even have AOPA info so you know if the airport has a crew car, hotels, restaurants, PHONE NUMBERS!, and what the hours of operation are. Try that with a sectional. ;)

IMHO if you are not flying with a GPS you are flying blind and are more dangerous.
 
Last edited:
Geico266 said:
Easy, hit "Nearest" and you have all of the nearest airports, fuel availability, weather info, flight services, etc. Most GPS's even have AOPA info so you know if the airport has a crew car, hotels, restaurants, PHONE NUMBERS!, and what the hours of operation are. Try that with a sectional. ;)

IMHO if you are not flying with a GPS you are flying blind and are more dangerous.
Click to expand...

Sometimes "nearest" takes you right through cumulogranite. Or through 2000 foot TV towers.

A GPS is not enough by itself. It is not a substitute for real situational awareness.

GPS is not a problem in its own right. It's the assumption that it's infallible and authoritative that's the problem.
 
JB1842 said:
How exactly does the magenta line keep you from running out of fuel or flying into crappy weather?
Click to expand...

I'd argue by not letting you wander many miles off course, getting lost and having no clue where the nearest fuel might be. Shouldn't happen, but you know it's happened many times.
 
Geico266 said:
Absolutely :yes:

We had an old CFI here that made a buddy put in a VOR in an RV-9 that didn't have one saying the examiner requires it. I tried to tell him that was not the case, that an examiner for a PPL is not going to have him use it. The examiner didn't even have him turn it on. A total waste of time, money and effort. My buddy ripped it out of the plane as soon as he landed from the exam. :lol:
Click to expand...
I would point out that demonstration of the use of an electronic navigation system with some sort of course deviation indication is a required task for the PP-Airplane practical test. However, it need not be VOR (GPS or even ADF would be fine) and it need not even be installed (although you should coordinate in advance with the DPE for a hand-held device since it may be necessary to get the FSDO to remind the examiner that hand-held is OK for this task).
 
Last edited:
I took a private student on a 525 nm xc yesterday. We planned it "old school" AND on the iPad. We flew the first half all old school pilotage, only referencing the iPad occasionally to give some comparison perspective. Coming home at night, we did mainly VOR nav, but referenced a hand held GPS for a portion for comparison, and glanced at the iPad a few times for the same purpose, but remained off for 75% of the trip. Long term, she'll likely use the iPad much more, but I'm confident she won't HAVE to use it.

Oh, she did brief, file, activate and close her flight plan via ForeFlight on her iPhone!
 
trepine said:
Fatal accident rates are at an all time low and have been declining for the past decade. Where do you think this has come from. I'm willing to bet it's the magenta line and other in cockpit resources.
Click to expand...
And I'll take that bet. My thought is fewer flight hours, fewer active pilots, fewer aircraft results in fewer accidents.

Statistics is a slipperly slope - must have the same variables. Or in this case, accidents per 1000 flight hours or accidents per 1000 active pilots or accidents per 1000 aircraft, etc.
 
Ron Levy said:
I would point out that demonstration of the use of an electronic navigation system with some sort of course deviation indication is a required task for the PP-Airplane practical test. However, it need not be VOR (GPS or even ADF would be fine) and it need not even be installed (although you should coordinate in advance with the DPE for a hand-held device since it may be necessary to get the FSDO to remind the examiner that hand-held is OK for this task).
Click to expand...

He set his GPS to a destination. The inspector said good. Nothing mentioned about VOR.

I would hope you would agree that the CFI should have known what the requirements are for a check ride. I called the inspector and the local FSDO to verify a VOR was NOT needed as part of a PPL. I don't recall telling them the plane had a GPS, but it does have a built in panel mounted Garmin 496 GPS.
 
Last edited:
Geico266 said:
Easy, hit "Nearest" and you have all of the nearest airports, fuel availability, weather info, flight services, etc. Most GPS's even have AOPA info so you know if the airport has a crew car, hotels, restaurants, PHONE NUMBERS!, and what the hours of operation are. Try that with a sectional. ;)

IMHO if you are not flying with a GPS you are flying blind and are more dangerous.
Click to expand...

Not only that but if you are using foreflight for pre-flight planning it downloads the winds and gives you your actual flight time with wind correction. It's been pretty accurate for me so far.
 
Geico266 said:
He set his GPS to a destination. The inspector said good. Nothing mentioned about VOR.

I would hope you would agree that the CFI should have known what the requirements are for a check ride. I called the inspector and the local FSDO to verify a VOR was NOT needed as part of a PPL. I don't recall telling them the plane had a GPS, but it does have a built in panel mounted Garmin 496 GPS.
Click to expand...

My examiner made me use everything I had installed. GPS, VOR, and ADF along with some very basic pilotage.
 
Is it still possible to pass a checkride in a J3 without an electrical system?
 
cowman said:
I felt this should go in a new thread as not to get entangled in the other discussion...

I always see people grumbling about "following the magenta line" or "magenta line syndrome" and so on. I am curious as to what defines a "magenta line" pilot. Is it strictly someone who relies on GPS for navigation? Is it someone who only looks at the map page on their GPS and follows the line?

What separates this frowned apon "magenta line" navigation from a good pilot taking advantage of the best available navigation tool he has?
Click to expand...

Watch the original "Automation Dependency" video, aka "children of the magneta" [NOT "the magneta line"]. The simplest differentiation is whether a pilot is blindly trusting and dependent on the equipment or if they can smoothly and calmly continue the flight normally *when* reality no longer matches the pretty pictures, the box starts throwing bad info, or GPS goes Tango Uniform.
 
and back in the day the discussion was about flying "the vor line or the adf line".technology is a tool and when appropiately employed makes a flight less risky.
 
My Mother-in-law, may she rest in peace was riding along with us to Salisbury for a wine festival. A short hop but it was better than driving. As we are flying along VFR I am trying to point out landmarks for her. It was CAVU, you could see down the Delaware Bay to the east and we pointed out the Chesapeake to the west. As we continued past Dover we pointed out the skyline of Ocean City MD, she said "get out of here", how do you know that is it and not another town.

I tried to explain it's like driving to the mall. You don't need street names you know to turn at a grocery store, gas station or bank....whatever. After flying the area so much you know the lay of the land. For the return trip I handed her my iPad which was in the flight bag. She could follow along and she tested me.

When she got out of the plane she said, "honey, I don't want to hurt your feelings but that was the most boring ride". After I stopped laughing I told her boring or uneventful is a good thing when you really consider we're in the air....she paused nodded her approval then gave me a hug.

Classic moment that I will always remember.

So long story short...who needs all that stuff! Just look out the window. :yesnod:

cape+may+013.jpg

My Bride and her Mom
 
Last edited:
Ron Levy said:
I would define it as navigating using a moving map device like a video game display and manipulating the controls to keep the little airplane on the course line -- and being unable to navigate successfully any other way.

That said, I use my onboard GPS nav systems most of the time, but if you turned them all off and killed the GPS in my iPad, I'd still be able to navigate without difficulty from Point A to Point B using visual, pilotage, and DR. Further, I consdier that skill to be essential to being a competent pilot.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Let's be honest. No one plans a flight with paper, pen and a whiz wheel. It's usually Foreflight and/or fltplan.com. I use the 430 in the plane. LET ME SAY, THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE ABOVE METHOD. Getting that out of the way, THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH TOTAL RELIANCE ON IT. Like Ron said, if his electronics decide to take a nap, he can still navigate via pilotage and DR. If a pilot can not do so, there is a problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top