Handheld GPS adaptible to aviation

Clearly navigation requires some information. When walking
or drifting with the ocean currents, a map is not needed.
Lewis and Clark made maps as they walked westward.

But today, without a current chart, in the cockpit, you will
violate some type of airspace in short order. Yes, many
things can be left out, you don't NEED a compass if you can
see the sun or moon or the North Star. Maybe you "know" the
river and will follow it [MSP to STL, for example] but
navigation requires the navigator to have information.
Merely blundering around in the air can be done by anyone.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Peter Duniho" wrote in
message ...
| "Jim Macklin" wrote
in message
| news:Ve8Of.111157$QW2.108788@dukeread08...
| Well, you do have to have some means to know what you're
| seeing with the OUTSIDE WORLD INDICATOR.
|
| No, you don't. People managed to get from Point A to
Point B for tens of
| thousands of years before written language was invented,
never mind
| map-making.
|
| The most basic navigation simply involves a means of
locomotion, and the
| human ability to navigate without any external aids at
all. A chart is no
| less an "aid to navigation" than any other device that
might assist that
| human.
|
| Pete
|
|

Thomas Borchert wrote:
Stubby,

the standard instruments.


To which I say: and GPS certainly is a standard instrument in the year
2006. We don't fly by flapping our wings, either.

Huh???? What plane flies by flapping its wings? This is nonsense.

Paul Tomblin wrote:
In a previous article, said:
Aviation GPS's need periodic map updates. So what I'd ideally like is
rather low-end land/marine unit with a basic map (cities, highways,
shoreline, other topographic features) that has available software to
create my own waypoint database of airports and navaids to supplement
the base map.

Anyone using something like that?

Take a look at EasyGPS.com - it will tell you what GPSes will accept a
load of data from a GPX format file. Then you can generate GPX format
files from my web site, http://navaid.com/GPX/ - I update the data on that
site every 28 days from DAFIF data and every 56 days from FAA data.

Great site. Thanks, Paul.

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:xlhOf.113449$QW2.22374@dukeread08...
[...]
But today, without a current chart, in the cockpit, you will
violate some type of airspace in short order.

That is simply not true. You cannot claim that it's a foregone conclusion,
since the pilot may have other sources of information that allow him to
avoid "some type of airspace" (including, but not limited to and certainly
not requiring, prior reference to a chart). That assumes there is airspace
nearby to be avoided, which is not true in all cases anyway.

The fact that a chart makes things a lot easier in some cases doesn't mean
the chart is a necessary tool. If anything, it just illustrates the charts
role as "an aid to navigation".

Yes, many
things can be left out, you don't NEED a compass if you can
see the sun or moon or the North Star.

You don't NEED a compass if you can get from Point A to Point B by
referencing ground features or other means. I make many flights during
which I never need to know my compass heading at all, nor the location of
the sun, moon, or any star.

I will agree that charts are very useful. But to say that they are anything
other than "an aid to navigation" is overstating their importance. A human
being is perfectly capable of navigating with nothing more than their own
senses.

Pete

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message news:xlhOf.113449$QW2.22374@dukeread08...

see the sun or moon or the North Star. Maybe you "know" the
river and will follow it [MSP to STL, for example] but
navigation requires the navigator to have information.

Right, the point was you don't necessarily need a map or chart, to have that "information"...

Paul,

airports don't move that often or that far.


Airspace does, especially after 9/11.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

I hardly ever use GPS, simply because I don't have an aviation one available
to me on a regular basis (I don't have any particular bias against GPS), so
I'm not really one to ask. I have an opinion (as you'll see below), but
little first-hand experience using GPS units with which to back it up.
However, you posted your question in a public forum, and plenty of people
here DO have an opinion. No doubt, you'll hear at least some of them now.


Opinions? Here? Ha!

:-)

Personally, I use GPS on every flight. My wife and I (both pilots) fly
often (like, 2 - 3 times per week), and we do a lot of long
cross-country flights. Programming both moving map GPSs is just
another part of our pre-takeoff checklist, as is making sure that
they've both acquired their respective satellites. When I first
started flying, this would have been Buck Rogers stuff -- but after 9
years, it's become just as natural as doing a mag check before takeoff.


Does this make us rusty as far as pilotage goes? Sure. GPS inhibits
your ability to use ded reckoning in much the same way as using a
calculator inhibits your ability to do long division. Can you still do
it? Yep. Is it harder and slower? Yep.

Does that bother me? Not really. There are plenty of things I can't
do as well I used to, simply because technology has made that knowledge
redundant or obsolete. (My voluminous knowledge of Paradox database
design and MS-DOS come to mind.) CAN I still write a batch file?
Sure. Do I need to? Nope.

In my opinion, the safety and situational awareness that GPS gives us
is worth whatever minor downside that may present. To affordably and
easily know my position anywhere on earth to within 10 feet is simply
amazing.

Over-reliance on ANY single navigation tool is a mistake, whether it's GPS
or VOR or NDB or whatever. But for a pilot who isn't ever going to fly
using anything *except* a GPS, I don't see the point in keeping their VOR
skills fresh (except perhaps as an academic issue)

Using a VOR is simple enough to not really need practice, IMHO. We
turn ours on every few months (usually to listen to an oddball AWOS
that is on a VOR frequency), and spin the knob just to make sure the
needle still centers. If the GPS signal ever fails, we will always
have the VORs on board, if needed.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

In a previous article, said:
Paul,
airports don't move that often or that far.


Airspace does, especially after 9/11.

The GPS is just there to get you on your route - it's up to you to make
sure the route works. If you go on a flight without first marking your
route on a CURRENT sectional or l-chart and then comparing it with the
current TFRs, you deserve to be shot down.


--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
They thought that faxing one's butt was bad - just wait till they hear
about blurry, pixilated, mpeg artifacted live porn by phone!
-- Geoff Lane contemplates the 3G future

I do if I'm going to someplace that I have never been to
before and only know by name. The chart IS that
information.



"John Clonts" wrote in message
...
|
| "Jim Macklin" wrote
in message news:xlhOf.113449$QW2.22374@dukeread08...
|
| see the sun or moon or the North Star. Maybe you "know"
the
| river and will follow it [MSP to STL, for example] but
| navigation requires the navigator to have information.
|
| Right, the point was you don't necessarily need a map or
chart, to have that "information"...
|
|

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:B5rOf.115811$QW2.94652@dukeread08...
I do if I'm going to someplace that I have never been to
before and only know by name. The chart IS that
information.

The chart is a *means* to obtain that information. It is not that
information itself, nor is it the only means of obtaining that information,
nor was your original statement restricted only to navigating to unknown
destinations.

Try again?