GPS switched S for N!

with 1970's mechanical technology.

With proven technology.

Jose
--
My other car is up my nose.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jose" wrote in message
. ..
with 1970's mechanical technology.

With proven technology.

Yeah, proven to have dozens of moving parts that wear out and need to be
inspected annually, carbs that freeze, a pitot static system that clogs and
has to be checked every two years, probably some Narco comms that work every
third Sunday...

I have nothing against flying these planes - I fly one all the time. But I
don't kid myself that, after the pilot, the mechanical systems are the weak
link.


Michael

Yeah, proven to have dozens of moving parts that wear out and need to be
inspected annually, carbs that freeze, a pitot static system that clogs and
has to be checked every two years, probably some Narco comms that work every
third Sunday...

.... none of which have ever painted a purple line to Austrailia for me
to follow.

Jose
--
My other car is up my nose.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jose" wrote in message
...
When I got up to the mouth of the bay, I turned around and followed
the bug back south. [...] my destination was 5,900 miles distant, and
the time to
get there was 84 hours.

When I got home, I scanned out and out on the map, to find that my
waypoint was now located in the Andes on the Argentinian side of the
Chile-Argentina border.

What happened?

What happened was precisely why I am so vocal about paper charts and
against reliance on this newfangled gizmo thang. (and horrified at the
thought of central computer control of airplane systems)

As a cub driver you are probably with me on this. I've had my home
airport move to the other side of the country several times. Dunno why.

I use a KLN 94, but when I input coordinates and waypoints, I always
crosscheck the distances and bearing with a chart to see if everything makes
sense. Computerized systems do what we tell them to do, which is not
necessarily what we want them to do .

On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 18:56:32 -0400, "Guillermo"
wrote:

I use a KLN 94, but when I input coordinates and waypoints, I always
crosscheck the distances and bearing with a chart to see if everything makes
sense.

I had been using the waypoint in question for nearly a year, and had
used it most recently a week earlier.. It wasn't "input" incorrectly.
It actually changed from 42N to 42S in a 7-day period.

I didn't want to complicate the post, but another user-defined
waypoint also moved. In this case, it appears to have adopted the
coordinates of my home. This was Mountain View airport in Wolfeboro,
which I punched in a month ago in preparation for going to an open
house there. (In that case I didn't enter the coordinates, but put the
cursor on the map where I knew the airport to be, and punched it in.)
I did notice, when I was flying north to Lake Winnipesaukee on
Saturday, that the MtnView locator seemed to be in the middle of Great
Bay. But since I wasn't heading there, I ignored it.

For years I used a Garmin III+ (not aviation) and all my waypoints
were user-defined. I never had a problem with it.


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

"Jose" wrote in message
...
When I got up to the mouth of the bay, I turned around and followed
the bug back south. [...] my destination was 5,900 miles distant, and
the time to
get there was 84 hours.

When I got home, I scanned out and out on the map, to find that my
waypoint was now located in the Andes on the Argentinian side of the
Chile-Argentina border.

What happened?

What happened was precisely why I am so vocal about paper charts and
against reliance on this newfangled gizmo thang. (and horrified at the
thought of central computer control of airplane systems)

I find I make many more mistakes than than these newfangled gizmos that have
been around now for 15 years. What bothers me is pilots relying on old
technology when they could increase their situational awareness many times
over if they took advantage of current extremely reliable technology.

In article , Jose wrote:
I use 'em when I hafta, and they're cool when they work, but I've never
seen the blue screen of death on a sectional!

No blue screen of death, but I have had several total sectional failures
in flight.

See, I used to own an open-cockpit biplane, and if you weren't very
careful about folding/unfolding them, the wind could catch them and
they were gone. I once lost 3 copies of the same sectional on the
same flight.

Tina Marie
--
http://www.tripacerdriver.com "...One of the main causes
of the fall of the Roman Empire was that, lacking zero, they had no way
to indicate successful termination of their C programs." (Robert Firth)

...but I have had several total sectional failures
in flight.

See, I used to own an open-cockpit biplane...

Touche

Jose
--
You may not get what you pay for, but you sure as hell pay for what you get.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 10:09:05 -0500, Tina Marie
wrote:

No blue screen of death, but I have had several total sectional failures
in flight.

See, I used to own an open-cockpit biplane, and if you weren't very
careful about folding/unfolding them, the wind could catch them and
they were gone. I once lost 3 copies of the same sectional on the
same flight.

Yes, one time I thought it would be handy to put the airport
information on a Post-it note stuck to the sectional (which resides on
a kneeboard). I happened to be flying that day with the Cub's window
and door open. Fshooh! Gone in an eyeblink.


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com