Cross country question? How is it done today?

About a month ago while flying a borrowed glider, my Streak batteries died and I had no GPS to tell me if I could glide back to the home base. I was mortified. Contemplated pulling the dive brakes and landing at the airport I was over, because 30+ miles with no glide computer and a 3k AGL day must be impossible. I am kidding. The reality is that when I have lost GPS, like this flight, I just fly a bit more conservatively because long distances are hard to judge, so I use closer points that are maybe 10-15:1 away to gauge progress.

As you have already discovered, you don't need a GPS or a Chart or a wiz-wheel. You need a sensible head and to pay attention to your surroundings and what the landmarks are doing as you fly towards them.

I can't eyeball a 40:1 glide and know I'm going to make it to that obscured place on the horizon, but I can sure tell that the field 10:1 away is sliding under the nose. I came sailplanes from hang gliders, where you rarely even consider using a chart or relying on a glide computer for glide calculation so concern with the glide computer started out very low for me. I actually fly with two in my glider. An L-Nav and a Dell Streak. They are set up differently and rarely agree perfectly on glide. That's useful since the Streak is my pessimist and the L-Nav is my optimist

Definitely get yourself a GPS. If nothing else, being able to review your logs in See You is an amazing tool for learning from your own decisions. You'll also gain an appreciation for the performance or lack thereof of your glider as you can see in real-time how you are doing towards a fixed point..

I do find that the GPS enables me to think farther ahead. If I'm 2000 above a conservative glide to an airport, I'm not spending as much time looking at closer alternatives. This is probably more of a high-performance glider issue than a 1-26 issue, but freeing processor cycles for more important activities is a good thing. If you think you can reach Airport X, and you have 5 landable fields in between you and Airport X, you'll be more comfortably focusing on the clouds or looking for birds or other indicators of lift. You get to focus on the soaring more as you've got an easily monitored data point to gauge your progress.

Sounds like you are doing it right though. Head out of the cockpit, field to field. Fun stuff. Don't be afraid to augment that judgement with tools that we have available.






On Wednesday, September 11, 2013 7:22:16 AM UTC-7, flgliderpilot wrote:
I am fairly green had my PGL for about 3 years now.



Been venturing into cross country, have done my first flight out to another airport, and last weekend, an out to that airport and return, about 30 miles round trip (in a 1-26, no ridges, it's all flat Florida). No it's not very far, but at least I am not just circling the airport for hours, and my enjoyment of soaring has been taken to a new level.



However, I was told recently by an older experienced pilot that using a GPS is "not the correct way to do it". Instead I should be thinking "can I get there... now can I get there... can I get there...". I understand this ideology, but I am pretty sure nearly everyone is using GPS these days.



So, does this mean I should not use modern navigation technology? I know how to plot a cross country flight on paper of course, and required altitudes to the next safe landing area.



Does this mean I should I actually be drawing circles on charts, carrying a slide ruler to calculate arrival height at various distances, and mechanically doing everything my GPS is doing for me? This means I am not looking for traffic, or thermalling but instead flipping through charts and playing with a slide ruler or E6B, and my eyes are not outside the canopy.



Anyway, please enlighten a new pilot, I am listening intently. if I should not be using a GPS at this point I'll go without.



Thanks

Tom

Years ago I learned that, for a 40ish to 1 ship, you could hold out two
fingers at arm's length such that the top of the fingers rests on the under
side of the horizon. Anything visible below the second finger is reachable
at your present altitude. Give it a try! I suppose 3 fingers would work
just fine for a 1-26.


"Morgan" wrote in message
...
About a month ago while flying a borrowed glider, my Streak batteries died
and I had no GPS to tell me if I could glide back to the home base. I was
mortified. Contemplated pulling the dive brakes and landing at the airport
I was over, because 30+ miles with no glide computer and a 3k AGL day must
be impossible. I am kidding. The reality is that when I have lost GPS,
like this flight, I just fly a bit more conservatively because long
distances are hard to judge, so I use closer points that are maybe 10-15:1
away to gauge progress.

As you have already discovered, you don't need a GPS or a Chart or a
wiz-wheel. You need a sensible head and to pay attention to your
surroundings and what the landmarks are doing as you fly towards them.

I can't eyeball a 40:1 glide and know I'm going to make it to that obscured
place on the horizon, but I can sure tell that the field 10:1 away is
sliding under the nose. I came sailplanes from hang gliders, where you
rarely even consider using a chart or relying on a glide computer for glide
calculation so concern with the glide computer started out very low for me.
I actually fly with two in my glider. An L-Nav and a Dell Streak. They are
set up differently and rarely agree perfectly on glide. That's useful since
the Streak is my pessimist and the L-Nav is my optimist

Definitely get yourself a GPS. If nothing else, being able to review your
logs in See You is an amazing tool for learning from your own decisions.
You'll also gain an appreciation for the performance or lack thereof of your
glider as you can see in real-time how you are doing towards a fixed point.

I do find that the GPS enables me to think farther ahead. If I'm 2000 above
a conservative glide to an airport, I'm not spending as much time looking at
closer alternatives. This is probably more of a high-performance glider
issue than a 1-26 issue, but freeing processor cycles for more important
activities is a good thing. If you think you can reach Airport X, and you
have 5 landable fields in between you and Airport X, you'll be more
comfortably focusing on the clouds or looking for birds or other indicators
of lift. You get to focus on the soaring more as you've got an easily
monitored data point to gauge your progress.

Sounds like you are doing it right though. Head out of the cockpit, field
to field. Fun stuff. Don't be afraid to augment that judgement with tools
that we have available.






On Wednesday, September 11, 2013 7:22:16 AM UTC-7, flgliderpilot wrote:
I am fairly green had my PGL for about 3 years now.



Been venturing into cross country, have done my first flight out to
another airport, and last weekend, an out to that airport and return,
about 30 miles round trip (in a 1-26, no ridges, it's all flat Florida).
No it's not very far, but at least I am not just circling the airport for
hours, and my enjoyment of soaring has been taken to a new level.



However, I was told recently by an older experienced pilot that using a
GPS is "not the correct way to do it". Instead I should be thinking "can
I get there... now can I get there... can I get there...". I understand
this ideology, but I am pretty sure nearly everyone is using GPS these
days.



So, does this mean I should not use modern navigation technology? I know
how to plot a cross country flight on paper of course, and required
altitudes to the next safe landing area.



Does this mean I should I actually be drawing circles on charts, carrying
a slide ruler to calculate arrival height at various distances, and
mechanically doing everything my GPS is doing for me? This means I am not
looking for traffic, or thermalling but instead flipping through charts
and playing with a slide ruler or E6B, and my eyes are not outside the
canopy.



Anyway, please enlighten a new pilot, I am listening intently. if I
should not be using a GPS at this point I'll go without.



Thanks

Tom

On Friday, September 13, 2013 1:03:59 PM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
Years ago I learned that, for a 40ish to 1 ship, you could hold out two

fingers at arm's length such that the top of the fingers rests on the under

side of the horizon. Anything visible below the second finger is reachable

at your present altitude. Give it a try! I suppose 3 fingers would work

just fine for a 1-26.





"Morgan" wrote in message

...

About a month ago while flying a borrowed glider, my Streak batteries died

and I had no GPS to tell me if I could glide back to the home base. I was

mortified. Contemplated pulling the dive brakes and landing at the airport

I was over, because 30+ miles with no glide computer and a 3k AGL day must

be impossible. I am kidding. The reality is that when I have lost GPS,

like this flight, I just fly a bit more conservatively because long

distances are hard to judge, so I use closer points that are maybe 10-15:1

away to gauge progress.



As you have already discovered, you don't need a GPS or a Chart or a

wiz-wheel. You need a sensible head and to pay attention to your

surroundings and what the landmarks are doing as you fly towards them.



I can't eyeball a 40:1 glide and know I'm going to make it to that obscured

place on the horizon, but I can sure tell that the field 10:1 away is

sliding under the nose. I came sailplanes from hang gliders, where you

rarely even consider using a chart or relying on a glide computer for glide

calculation so concern with the glide computer started out very low for me.

I actually fly with two in my glider. An L-Nav and a Dell Streak. They are

set up differently and rarely agree perfectly on glide. That's useful since

the Streak is my pessimist and the L-Nav is my optimist



Definitely get yourself a GPS. If nothing else, being able to review your

logs in See You is an amazing tool for learning from your own decisions.

You'll also gain an appreciation for the performance or lack thereof of your

glider as you can see in real-time how you are doing towards a fixed point.

On Friday, September 13, 2013 2:03:59 PM UTC-4, Dan Marotta wrote:
Years ago I learned that, for a 40ish to 1 ship, you could hold out two

fingers at arm's length such that the top of the fingers rests on the under

side of the horizon. Anything visible below the second finger is reachable

at your present altitude. Give it a try! I suppose 3 fingers would work

just fine for a 1-26.

Great tip, but it's probably 4 fingers for a 1-26, and another finger for a slight head wind.

I'll try it!

On Wednesday, September 11, 2013 10:22:16 AM UTC-4, flgliderpilot wrote:
I am fairly green had my PGL for about 3 years now.



Been venturing into cross country, have done my first flight out to another airport, and last weekend, an out to that airport and return, about 30 miles round trip (in a 1-26, no ridges, it's all flat Florida). No it's not very far, but at least I am not just circling the airport for hours, and my enjoyment of soaring has been taken to a new level.



However, I was told recently by an older experienced pilot that using a GPS is "not the correct way to do it". Instead I should be thinking "can I get there... now can I get there... can I get there...". I understand this ideology, but I am pretty sure nearly everyone is using GPS these days.



So, does this mean I should not use modern navigation technology? I know how to plot a cross country flight on paper of course, and required altitudes to the next safe landing area.



Does this mean I should I actually be drawing circles on charts, carrying a slide ruler to calculate arrival height at various distances, and mechanically doing everything my GPS is doing for me? This means I am not looking for traffic, or thermalling but instead flipping through charts and playing with a slide ruler or E6B, and my eyes are not outside the canopy.



Anyway, please enlighten a new pilot, I am listening intently. if I should not be using a GPS at this point I'll go without.



Thanks

Tom

honest and humble opinion: if you want to fly with GPS that's fine.In fact as your confidence and skills improve, and as your flights lengthen in duration and distance, i'd recommend it.

however: there is something to be said for learning the basic "manual" navigation skills as building blocks. in any case you should have a map no matter what, and in the event that you're flying with GPS and everything goes "lights out", you should have the confidence to continue on or head home with just a map.

but there is no one right answer. some people like to fly with maps, some like GPS.

I have had to use my map a few times already when the GPS provided erroneous data, so I only trust it when it sounds like it's being honest with me.

So yes, I use a map also when I need to.

On Monday, September 16, 2013 2:30:01 PM UTC-4, flgliderpilot wrote:
I have had to use my map a few times already when the GPS provided erroneous data, so I only trust it when it sounds like it's being honest with me.

What kind of erroneous data did your GPS provide? Maybe you were being jammed by the Ruskies.

On Monday, September 16, 2013 6:20:58 PM UTC-4, son_of_flubber wrote:
On Monday, September 16, 2013 2:30:01 PM UTC-4, flgliderpilot wrote:

I have had to use my map a few times already when the GPS provided erroneous data, so I only trust it when it sounds like it's being honest with me.



What kind of erroneous data did your GPS provide? Maybe you were being jammed by the Ruskies.

Haha, well first for whatever reason it did not show the last airport in my list of turn points/landables even though it was programmed, so I had to pull out my map to find it.

Second time, it lost GPS signal and told me I would arrive 5000ft low to next turnpoint, which was impossible, I was only 6 miles away at 4000AGL. Eventually my GPS figured out where I already knew I was.

On Tuesday, September 17, 2013 10:20:07 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Monday, September 16, 2013 6:20:58 PM UTC-4, son_of_flubber wrote:

On Monday, September 16, 2013 2:30:01 PM UTC-4, flgliderpilot wrote:



I have had to use my map a few times already when the GPS provided erroneous data, so I only trust it when it sounds like it's being honest with me.







What kind of erroneous data did your GPS provide? Maybe you were being jammed by the Ruskies.



Haha, well first for whatever reason it did not show the last airport in my list of turn points/landables even though it was programmed, so I had to pull out my map to find it.

Second time, it lost GPS signal and told me I would arrive 5000ft low to next turnpoint, which was impossible, I was only 6 miles away at 4000AGL. Eventually my GPS figured out where I already knew I was.

Okay. I misunderstood. By GPS, you actually mean "Flight Computer" (or PNA) told you bogus info.

The only true GPS error that I am aware is a complete loss of signal and therefore loss of position data. Do GPS units ever give significant position errors?

On Wednesday, September 11, 2013 7:22:16 AM UTC-7, flgliderpilot wrote:
I am fairly green had my PGL for about 3 years now.



Been venturing into cross country, have done my first flight out to another airport, and last weekend, an out to that airport and return, about 30 miles round trip (in a 1-26, no ridges, it's all flat Florida). No it's not very far, but at least I am not just circling the airport for hours, and my enjoyment of soaring has been taken to a new level.



However, I was told recently by an older experienced pilot that using a GPS is "not the correct way to do it". Instead I should be thinking "can I get there... now can I get there... can I get there...". I understand this ideology, but I am pretty sure nearly everyone is using GPS these days.



So, does this mean I should not use modern navigation technology? I know how to plot a cross country flight on paper of course, and required altitudes to the next safe landing area.



Does this mean I should I actually be drawing circles on charts, carrying a slide ruler to calculate arrival height at various distances, and mechanically doing everything my GPS is doing for me? This means I am not looking for traffic, or thermalling but instead flipping through charts and playing with a slide ruler or E6B, and my eyes are not outside the canopy.



Anyway, please enlighten a new pilot, I am listening intently. if I should not be using a GPS at this point I'll go without.



Thanks

Tom

I believe that any new XC glider pilot should be skilled in the use of maps and basic glide calculation tools. Who can argue with that?

The issue becomes blurred when the performance of the glider increases along with the distances flown. And when you get into extreme gliding (1000k+ tasks and/or mountains) you throw all of these rules out the window! I have flown in places where your landout choice is down to one and the terrain in between makes mountain goats shudder. One best have a very high degree of confidence in one's glide!

By all means get a GPS (unless you are a Luddite) and get familiar with it. All of the concerns about batteries are from people who are unprepared. I loved the comment about if you can't make the landing field use the next closer one. This guy has NEVER flown in Nevada! As Eric wrote, measuring distances across a map flip in a glider is challenging, at best. The best argument for a GPS & glide computer is that they reduce pilot workload, allowing you to concentrate at the task at hand.