Why The Hell... (random rant)

GPS finds true north. And, just incidentally, you can find true north by
looking at the sky. ANS will do that, and people can do it, too.

As an expert in Location based services and GPS, let me assure you
that depending solely on GPS for any form of navigation is a fools
errand that is going to get a lot of people killed one of these
days.

The system is a rube goldberg contraption with an instant-on kill
switch. Wait until someone launches a home-made GPS guided cruise
missile into Washington DC, watch them flick the switch, and see what
happens. Just hope it doesn't happen at night, and you're not in the
air at the time.

Documenting them doesn't really eliminate them.

It does make you aware of them, which is all you need.

GPS is better, and more accurate, to name just one.

It also requires constant, very expensive maintenance, a complex
receiver in good working order, and as I mentioned, can be turned off
at the push of a button. None of these are traits you want for you
primary navigation system.

You can find true north by looking at the sky, or with GPS, or with ANS
(automated looking at the sky), or with an INS. The latter usually has to be
on the ground, although some systems support align-in-motion with a longer
setup time.

The simplest, fastest and most dependable (in VMC) way of finding true
north (or any form of navigation) is simple spatial awareness and
pilotage. A good chart, and a good eye.

You need a precise clock to do just about any navigation. The need for the
rest is debatable, depending on how resourceful you are.

Not at all... about the only modern navigation that requires a precise
clock is night over uninhabited terrain or over water.

Unless the airplane is a glider, you have power.

GPS have batteries, power isn't the issue. The problem (in my
experience) with GPS is that they're _SO_ good that people very
quickly delegate all of their navigational requirements to them,
letting their pilotage, dead reaconing, and other navigational skills
atrophy (in my humble experience at least). This is fine, until the
tremendously complex system finally fails (either intentionally or
otherwise). Either way, its not something I want to bet my life on.

One third correct: it requires power, but engines provide power. It doesn't
have to be set up against anything else to find true north. It doesn't need
to be constantly updated; the whole idea is to be fairly autonomous.

The whole idea of navigation is to know where you are in space at any
given time. Autonomy is irrelevant.

EridanMan wrote:



GPS have batteries, power isn't the issue. The problem (in my
experience) with GPS is that they're _SO_ good that people very
quickly delegate all of their navigational requirements to them,
letting their pilotage, dead reaconing, and other navigational skills
atrophy (in my humble experience at least). This is fine, until the
tremendously complex system finally fails (either intentionally or
otherwise). Either way, its not something I want to bet my life on.

The exact, word for word, arguments against VOR, NDB, four course
ranges, colored lights, etc. It goes on and on.

On Apr 4, 8:01 pm, Newps wrote:
EridanMan wrote:

GPS have batteries, power isn't the issue. The problem (in my
experience) with GPS is that they're _SO_ good that people very
quickly delegate all of their navigational requirements to them,
letting their pilotage, dead reaconing, and other navigational skills
atrophy (in my humble experience at least). This is fine, until the
tremendously complex system finally fails (either intentionally or
otherwise). Either way, its not something I want to bet my life on.

The exact, word for word, arguments against VOR, NDB, four course
ranges, colored lights, etc. It goes on and on.

I think I have to give you that point, set and match.

In rec.aviation.piloting Newps wrote:


EridanMan wrote:



GPS have batteries, power isn't the issue. The problem (in my
experience) with GPS is that they're _SO_ good that people very
quickly delegate all of their navigational requirements to them,
letting their pilotage, dead reaconing, and other navigational skills
atrophy (in my humble experience at least). This is fine, until the
tremendously complex system finally fails (either intentionally or
otherwise). Either way, its not something I want to bet my life on.

The exact, word for word, arguments against VOR, NDB, four course
ranges, colored lights, etc. It goes on and on.

But, it is a good arguement for not doing away with all the other
backup systems since GPS can totally go away for a number of reasons.

I don't see much real use for NDB's these days (ignoring for a moment
not everywhere has a GPS approach, but that's just a paper work
problem) with VOR's and GPS available.

If some new, independant, system becomes available, then VOR's become
obsolete and can be turned off like the four course ranges were.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Newps writes:

The exact, word for word, arguments against VOR, NDB, four course
ranges, colored lights, etc. It goes on and on.

And correct each time.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

EridanMan writes:

The system is a rube goldberg contraption with an instant-on kill
switch.

There is no instant-on kill switch. It takes quite a bit of time to send
commands to all the satellites.

Wait until someone launches a home-made GPS guided cruise
missile into Washington DC, watch them flick the switch, and see what
happens. Just hope it doesn't happen at night, and you're not in the
air at the time.

They can't do that any more. It would be a worse disaster to turn it off than
it would be to just let it run, for both military and civilian use.

It also requires constant, very expensive maintenance, a complex
receiver in good working order, and as I mentioned, can be turned off
at the push of a button. None of these are traits you want for you
primary navigation system.

It cannot be turned off at the push of a button. I'm not aware of any
constant maintenance requirement. Databases have to be updated by a
monopolistic price-gouging private enterprise, but that's a separate issue.

The simplest, fastest and most dependable (in VMC) way of finding true
north (or any form of navigation) is simple spatial awareness and
pilotage. A good chart, and a good eye.

I wouldn't trust those.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic wrote:
EridanMan writes:

The system is a rube goldberg contraption with an instant-on kill
switch.

There is no instant-on kill switch. It takes quite a bit of time to send
commands to all the satellites.

Yeah, a few seconds once the decision is made.

Wait until someone launches a home-made GPS guided cruise
missile into Washington DC, watch them flick the switch, and see what
happens. Just hope it doesn't happen at night, and you're not in the
air at the time.

They can't do that any more. It would be a worse disaster to turn it off than
it would be to just let it run, for both military and civilian use.

If backup systems like VOR, NDB, LORAN didn't exist, that might be
true, but the backukp systems do exist.

It also requires constant, very expensive maintenance, a complex
receiver in good working order, and as I mentioned, can be turned off
at the push of a button. None of these are traits you want for you
primary navigation system.

It cannot be turned off at the push of a button. I'm not aware of any
constant maintenance requirement. Databases have to be updated by a
monopolistic price-gouging private enterprise, but that's a separate issue.

We'll just add that to the long and growing list of things you are
not aware of.

The simplest, fastest and most dependable (in VMC) way of finding true
north (or any form of navigation) is simple spatial awareness and
pilotage. A good chart, and a good eye.

I wouldn't trust those.

That's because you haven't a clue as to how to use them, especially
the awareness part.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

writes:

Yeah, a few seconds once the decision is made.

No, far longer than that. I seem to recall it being minutes or hours,
probably the latter.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Yeah, a few seconds once the decision is made.

No, far longer than that. I seem to recall it being minutes or hours,
probably the latter.

Maybe, just maybe, the satellites on the other side of the planet, but
for everything in view, seconds.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

writes:

Maybe, just maybe, the satellites on the other side of the planet, but
for everything in view, seconds.

The satellites take twelve hours to orbit the planet, and they don't pass over
the same spots on each orbit. As I recall, it takes several hours to have
them all execute a command, although that may be changing in future blocks.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.