Stupid Newbie Pattern Question

What Jay said.

But I know the locals will know where the VOR is.

Problem is, the locals will also report their position relative to "the
tanks" or "the bridge", or "5 corners" or other such nonsense for
transients. Even ATC does it at some 'ports.

Try to play to both audiences?

Jay Honeck wrote:

It goes well beyond that. VFR pilots fly GPS direct, which totally
eliminates the use of VORs for navigation. (I turn my VORs on, once in a
while, just to see if they still work.)

In flight planning, I really couldn't care less where the VORs are, any more
than I would want to know where the NDBs, A/N radio ranges, or light beacons
used to be. They have *all* been supplanted by GPS in the VFR world, and
the IFR world is slowly (glacially?) catching up to the technology.

"Maule Driver" wrote in message
. com...
What Jay said.

What Jay said is just a demonstration of how inappropriate use of GPS
navigation is creating pilots who don't have a clue of where they actually
are relative to the world.

The fact that you are using a GPS to get from Point A to Point B is no
justification for not knowing what is between Point A and Point B, or in the
general vicinity of Point A and Point B.

If there is a VOR close enough to an airport to be usable as a reference for
traffic reports, then any pilot operating at or near that airport has an
obligation to be aware of the VOR and its position, whether or not they are
using the VOR for navigation.

rant on
I realize that it's human nature, and perhaps even a bit fashionable, to be
clueless with respect to your surroundings. Not just in aviation, but in
all aspects of life, people seem to want to forget that they are a part of a
living, breathing world. They want to abstract their existence as much as
possible, and forget about reality. But every time they do so, they
sacrifice true awareness and an ability to interact with reality, because
they are ignoring reality. Unfortunately for those people, reality doesn't
care about abstractions; it exists, regardless of whether you pay attention
to it or not. If you fail to pay attention to it, you will pay the price.
/rant

Pete

What Jay said.

What Jay said is just a demonstration of how inappropriate use of GPS
navigation is creating pilots who don't have a clue of where they actually
are relative to the world.

I swear, the more I read your posts, the more I doubt that you have
actually piloted an aircraft in the last 10 years.

GPS has changed *everything* about flying -- and clinging to the old
VOR system is just another example of calcified thinking.

I have no doubt that 50 years ago some felt the same way about those
pilots who didn't "have a clue" where the A/N radio ranges were, and
nowadays (every now and then) I hear old timers grumbling about the
loss of our NDB approach into Iowa City. Time doesn't stand still, and
many people long for the familiarity of what they know best -- but
pilots are supposed to be lighter on their feet than the average Joe on
the street.

Change can be difficult to accept, and the elderly often find it easier
to just sit back and feign superiority...but I didn't think you were
*that* old, Pete.

If there is a VOR close enough to an airport to be usable as a reference for
traffic reports, then any pilot operating at or near that airport has an
obligation to be aware of the VOR and its position, whether or not they are
using the VOR for navigation.

Have you done a cross country flight lately, Pete? I don't mean to
Spokane -- I mean CROSS COUNTRY. If so, you would know how ludicrous
your statement truly is.

If not, you really aren't qualified to comment.

We are about to embark on a cross-continent cross-country flight. If
at any point in the next three days I turn on my VORs, it will be
because I am bored, and we will have listened to all our music CDs.

Stupidly, I might attempt to use my 1950s-tech dual VORs to
"cross-check" my dual GPS-verified position, even though I know that
they are exponentially less accurate instruments.

THAT is the reality of VORs to the modern pilot, Pete. Welcome to the
real world. You should have taken the Blue Pill.

rant on
I realize that it's human nature, and perhaps even a bit fashionable, to be
clueless with respect to your surroundings. Not just in aviation, but in
all aspects of life, people seem to want to forget that they are a part of a
living, breathing world. They want to abstract their existence as much as
possible, and forget about reality. But every time they do so, they
sacrifice true awareness and an ability to interact with reality, because
they are ignoring reality. Unfortunately for those people, reality doesn't
care about abstractions; it exists, regardless of whether you pay attention
to it or not. If you fail to pay attention to it, you will pay the price.
/rant

Wow. That's deep.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Hi -

Peter does seem to overreach a bit. A GPS that has any sort of
navigational screen such as a moving map or "nearest fix", then one
can easily determine one's position relative to a VOR or airport, in
order to yak with ATC on common terms. There are not many GPS units
that don't have that information within a button or two away. These
enhance situational awareness (as compared with VOR), not reduce it.

I hope Jay's GPS-philia doesn't also mean a strong habit for
"direct-to" rather than airway routing. Even flying VFR, I like
sticking to airways because they are generally routed away from
parachuting / training areas, MOAs, dinky little airports,
non-physical obstructions like blasting areas. They require a little
less in-depth map-reading to stay safe.


- FChE

Jay Honeck wrote:

GPS has changed *everything* about flying -- and clinging to the old
VOR system is just another example of calcified thinking.

There's a difference between "clinging" to it, and "using" it, and
"knowing that it's there". I have a Garmin 195 AND a VOR AND an open
sectional (or now that I'm instrument rated, a low level airways chart)
in my plane at all times.

Have you done a cross country flight lately, Pete? I don't mean to
Spokane -- I mean CROSS COUNTRY. If so, you would know how ludicrous
your statement truly is.

Well, I have - I've been from MA to FL a few times, to WI a few times,
and to CO once. I think that qualifies - all of that in the last two
years, along with numerous flights from MA to VA, or MA to NJ over a
route I know VERY well, and can fly blindfolded.

If not, you really aren't qualified to comment.

So given that criteria, I am qualified to comment.

Stupidly, I might attempt to use my 1950s-tech dual VORs to
"cross-check" my dual GPS-verified position, even though I know that
they are exponentially less accurate instruments.

You are correct - they are much less accurate, wander all over the
freaking place, and have no range. But, they're there, and if the GPS
gives up the ghost, the VOR's will be a decent cross check. I (not
stupidly) check the VOR's as I fly by them, just to verify what my GPS
and eyeballs/map are telling me - if I ever see a discrepancy, I'll have
to spend more than the 10 seconds that takes every ten minutes or so
figuring out why.

THAT is the reality of VORs to the modern pilot, Pete. Welcome to the
real world. You should have taken the Blue Pill.

There are many valid "real worlds". I've been flying since 1974. I
LOVE my GPS, and would hate to fly without it. But I ALWAYS have an
open map, cross check against the map using my eyeballs every couple of
minutes, and also cross check with the VOR on occasion. If I had an ADF
in the plane for some reason, I'd cross check with that, too.....

--
Marc J. Zeitlin
http://marc.zeitlin.home.comcast.net/
http://www.cozybuilders.org/
Copyright (c) 2005

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
ups.com...

rant on
I realize that it's human nature, and perhaps even a bit fashionable, to
be
clueless with respect to your surroundings. Not just in aviation, but
in
all aspects of life, people seem to want to forget that they are a part
of a
living, breathing world. They want to abstract their existence as much
as
possible, and forget about reality. But every time they do so, they
sacrifice true awareness and an ability to interact with reality,
because
they are ignoring reality. Unfortunately for those people, reality
doesn't
care about abstractions; it exists, regardless of whether you pay
attention
to it or not. If you fail to pay attention to it, you will pay the
price.
/rant

Wow. That's deep.

Deep ****!

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
ups.com...
I swear, the more I read your posts, the more I doubt that you have
actually piloted an aircraft in the last 10 years.

GPS has changed *everything* about flying -- and clinging to the old
VOR system is just another example of calcified thinking.

I swear, the more I read your posts, the more I doubt that you have actually
READ a post in the last 10 years.

Once again, you have demonstrated your amazing ability to both miss the
point and be insulting all at the same time.

Where in my post did I say anything about USING a VOR? My point is that
even those of you who use GPS as your primary navigation have a
responsibility to be aware of any VOR that is near enough to your route to
be relevant to your operation along that route.

The same thing is true of any landmark. The question of whether flying by
VORs is antiquated or not is irrelevant, as is the question of how you
personally are navigating. All that matters is that it's a major landmark
that can easily be expected to be referenced by any number of other pilots
operating in the same airspace as you.

It seems like people who are flying with GPSs assume that the rest of the
world just disappears, and all they need to care about is the waypoints they
enter in their GPS. That's just not true.

Pete

"A Lieberman" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 15:03:09 GMT, Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

Why wouldn't a transient pilot know where the VOR is? It's on the
charts.

Note, the following is my "observation", no statistical value....

I have noticed that VFR pilots do not use VOR's in their flight planning
BEYOND their destination.

If you would come in from the east side of the compass rose, and not "look
ahead" in your flight planning, you may not take notice that there is a
VOR
out there.

Most VFR pilots, again, my opinion look for land references that they fly
over, and not beyond their destination. If you look on the sectional, one
huge land mark that overpowers any VOR is the reservoir. The transient
pilot will be focused on the reservoir and the airport position in
relationship to the reservoir, not the VOR.

So, most likely, the TRANSIENT VFR pilot won't pay any attention to what
is
beyond his destination and won't realize there is a VOR NW of MBO.

May not be wise, but it is human nature. So, to report your position that
you are over the VOR MAY be useless to most transient VFR pilots (not all,
but most).

Unless I am about to run into a VOR I could care less where they are and if
I am close to an airport and need to be looking out the window I am not
about to look at the sectional to try to locate one.

Jay Honeck wrote:

I swear, the more I read your posts, the more I doubt that you have
actually piloted an aircraft in the last 10 years.

You are completely oblivious to everything he said. To put it bluntly, it
doesn't matter one whit if you don't even have a NAV unit in the plane. What
Peter said is that THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR NOT KNOWING WHERE THE VORS ARE.

Did that get across at all?

George Patterson
Why do men's hearts beat faster, knees get weak, throats become dry,
and they think irrationally when a woman wears leather clothing?
Because she smells like a new truck.

Stupidly, I might attempt to use my 1950s-tech dual VORs to
"cross-check" my dual GPS-verified position, even though I know that
they are exponentially less accurate instruments.

Umm... I think he's saying that you've got a responsibillity to know
where the VORs are, even if you don't use 'em. I remember reading that
there is a statistical spike in mid-airs over VORs (because lots of
people use them as intersections), and I imagine that driving across a
victor airway without know that it's a high traffic corridor is kinda
counterindicated. I always keep a vigillant scan, but... I'll use any
data I have to keep 'big sky theory' in check.