If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
wrote in message ... He did not say that right. There is VOR/DME-RNAV as well as INS RNAV, IRS RNAV, GPS RNAV, and LORAN RNAV. IRS RNAV? Yes, a straight line is the fastest way to get away from the IRS. Matt |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
My apologies - I was overly critical.
"Richard Hertz" wrote in message et... You are filing /G and you don't know the answer to this? Where do people get their IFR 'training' these days? "PaulaJay1" wrote in message ... Coming into CLE the other day the controller ask if I had RNAV and I said no, that I was /G ,that is, IFR GPS. He said that it was the same and gave me direct..... Is it the same, should I have answered yes to his question? Of course I can navigate direct but do I have "RNAV"? Chuck |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
"John R. Copeland" wrote: wrote in message ... john smith wrote: Richard Hertz wrote: You are filing /G and you don't know the answer to this? Where do people get their IFR 'training' these days? That's not necessarily a fair criticism. For those of us who have been flying since the 70's, we still think and refer to airspace as TCA's, TRSA's and ARSA's. So we still remember RNAV as VOR/DME, while LORAN and GPS are essentially global navigation systems (although, technically, that's still another, different form altogether). I;ve been flying since the late 1950s and I adjust. TCA, and ARSAs seem quite alien to me these days. Then again TRSAs don't because we still have those. I think the criticism is quite justified. Me too, Sammy. I've been flying since the middle fifties, and I've adjusted pretty well, too. GPS approaches are a far cry from 4-course Range orientations, and the Range Approaches that I learned to do without an ADF. (Follow the edge of a leg into the cone of silence, then turn to xxxº and descend.) Oooh, those were fun! And why do I remember 3023.5 kHz? (Except they were kc back then.) ---JRC--- Right, that was before Ms. Hertz took over from Mr. Cycle. I remember 3023.5, except I can't recall what it was for. Was it a common HF tower frequency even though most of the equppage was VHF by then? Perhaps you had a VHF receiver, but only an HF transmitter? From the day I started the aircraft I flew either had no radios or they had VHF transceivers (perhaps with only a few transmit crystals and an analog receiver turner.) I remember my first IFR set well, the Narco Omnigator. Did a lot of ATCS en route communications with that equipment. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote: wrote in message ... He did not say that right. There is VOR/DME-RNAV as well as INS RNAV, IRS RNAV, GPS RNAV, and LORAN RNAV. IRS RNAV? Not in the airplanes you fly, Steve. In the big ships, three IRUs that provide the attitude platform and the basic inertial reference. If the GPS failes, the DME/DME fails, the VOR/DME fails, and the VOR/VOR fails then a slightly degraded, but noneless very good position is provided by the IRUs via the FMS, which in combination is known as the IRS (inertial reference system), which in turn is IRS RNAV when all external sensors are not available. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
From Chapter 7 of the current FAA Instrument Flying Handbook: INS Components INS is considered a stand-alone navigation system, especially when more than one independent unit is onboard. The airborne equipment consists of an accelerometer to measure acceleration—which, when integrated with time, gives velocity—and gyros to measure direction. Later versions of the INS, called IRS (inertial reference systems) utilize laser gyros and more powerful computers; therefore, the accelerometer mountings no longer need to be kept level and aligned with true north. The computer system can handle the added workload of dealing with the computations necessary to correct for gravitational and directional errors. Consequently, these newer systems are sometimes called strapdown systems, as the accelerometers and gyros are strapped down to the airframe, rather than being mounted on a structure that stays fixed with respect to the horizon and true north. INS Errors The principal error associated with INS is degradation of position with time. INS computes position by starting with an accurate position input which is changed continuously as accelerometers and gyros provide speed and direction inputs. Both the accelerometers and the gyros are subject to very small errors; as time passes, those errors likely will accumulate. While the best INS/IRS display errors of 0.1 to 0.4 NM after flights across the North Atlantic of 4 to 6 hours, smaller and less expensive systems are being built that show errors of 1 to 2 NM per hour. This accuracy is more than sufficient for a navigation system that can be combined with and updated by GPS. The synergy of a navigation system consisting of an INS/IRS unit in combination with a GPS resolves the errors and weaknesses of both systems. The GPS is accurate all the time it is working but may be subject to short and periodic outages. The INS is made more accurate because it is continually updated and will continue to function with good accuracy if the GPS has moments of lost signal. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
"Stan Gosnell" wrote in message = ... wrote in : =20 I remember 3023.5, except I can't recall what it was for. Was it a common HF tower frequency even though most of the equppage was VHF = by then? Perhaps you had a VHF receiver, but only an HF transmitter?=20 From the day I started the aircraft I flew either had no radios or they had VHF transceivers (perhaps with only a few transmit crystals and an analog receiver turner.) I remember my first IFR set well, = the Narco Omnigator. Did a lot of ATCS en route communications with = that equipment.=20 =20 3023.5 KHz is 3.0235 MHz, and I doubt this is what you remember. = 3023.5 Hz=20 is possible, since this is in the HF band, being just over 3 KHz. =20 MegaHertz band receivers weren't in general use in the 50's. =20 --=20 Regards, =20 Stan =20 No, Stan, it was 3023.5 kHz AM, in the HF Aeronautical Mobile band, which spans 2850-3155 kHz even to this day. 3.0235 kHz would be VLF, with a 100-km wavelength! As VHF gear began to be emplaced in the 1950s, they couldn't just suddenly abandon HF communications. And as Sammy said, it was either the common Tower frequency, or the common "Radio" frequency (meaning Flight Service Station). I *think* 3023.5 kHz was for calling "Radio", who could respond either on VHF or on the local LF/MF 4-course Adcock Range station. If that's right, then 3105 kHz probably was the frequency for calling = the Tower, who could respond on the fixed frequency of 278 kHz as standard, or on a small number of alternative HF frequencies if other towers were = nearby. Whew. I'd have to dig through some old stuff to remember this exactly, but I'd lay money on Steven P. McNicoll's ability to turn it up easily. ---JRC--- |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
"John R. Copeland" wrote: "Stan Gosnell" wrote in message ... wrote in : I remember 3023.5, except I can't recall what it was for. Was it a common HF tower frequency even though most of the equppage was VHF by then? Perhaps you had a VHF receiver, but only an HF transmitter? From the day I started the aircraft I flew either had no radios or they had VHF transceivers (perhaps with only a few transmit crystals and an analog receiver turner.) I remember my first IFR set well, the Narco Omnigator. Did a lot of ATCS en route communications with that equipment. 3023.5 KHz is 3.0235 MHz, and I doubt this is what you remember. 3023.5 Hz is possible, since this is in the HF band, being just over 3 KHz. MegaHertz band receivers weren't in general use in the 50's. -- Regards, Stan No, Stan, it was 3023.5 kHz AM, in the HF Aeronautical Mobile band, which spans 2850-3155 kHz even to this day. 3.0235 kHz would be VLF, with a 100-km wavelength! As VHF gear began to be emplaced in the 1950s, they couldn't just suddenly abandon HF communications. And as Sammy said, it was either the common Tower frequency, or the common "Radio" frequency (meaning Flight Service Station). I *think* 3023.5 kHz was for calling "Radio", who could respond either on VHF or on the local LF/MF 4-course Adcock Range station. If that's right, then 3105 kHz probably was the frequency for calling the Tower, who could respond on the fixed frequency of 278 kHz as standard, or on a small number of alternative HF frequencies if other towers were nearby. Whew. I'd have to dig through some old stuff to remember this exactly, but I'd lay money on Steven P. McNicoll's ability to turn it up easily. ---JRC--- I have some 1945 WACs for Southern California. I don't see that frequency on those charts. I do see 126.18 all over the place, and some 140+ MHz. And, some really low frequency stuff as well. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
"John R. Copeland" wrote: And as Sammy said, it was either the common Tower frequency, or the common "Radio" frequency (meaning Flight Service Station). Air Traffic Communications Station, not FSS. ;-) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
RNAV approaches | Kevin Chandler | Instrument Flight Rules | 3 | September 18th 03 06:00 PM |
Are handheld GPSes becoming a defacto primary nav source? | Paul Tomblin | Instrument Flight Rules | 44 | September 13th 03 10:36 PM |
GPS-Y GPS-Z database question | John Clonts | Instrument Flight Rules | 3 | September 5th 03 04:54 AM |
Another IFR "oops" | Dan Luke | Instrument Flight Rules | 15 | July 21st 03 09:02 PM |