GPS and old-fashioned thinking?

With all these questions about how to integrate GPS into our everyday
operations, I'm tempted to believe we have allowed the advent of this
wonderful new technology to send our thinking back to the dark ages!

We want GPS to simply replace everything else - then all that "legacy"
stuff just becomes a backup, in case the GPS signal or on-board equipment
should become unreliable. This presents problems - as has been pointed
out in the above threads - as we are not usually flying airways and
overlays (at least that's the idea) so transitioning to the "legacy"
stuff is not always that quick and easy, especially in high workload
moments like approaches or missed approach procedures. I don't know why
we don't simply weave GPS into the RNAV web that was already part of our
mentality before GPS came along. With one integrator box, receiving
signals from VOR/DME/ILS/eLORAN and GPS we could fly random routes, RNAV
waypoints and approaches even with one primary system (GPS for example)
inoperative or unreliable. An in-flight failure of one such system would
still leave us with full RNAV capability, but might be our clue to fly an
overlay, such that the (unlikely) failure of a second system would make
transitioning easier.

We consider the old KNS-80 style RNAV boxes to be obsolete today - but in
a way they were more forward-looking than the way we're going about GPS
today.

G Faris

G Farris wrote:
: We consider the old KNS-80 style RNAV boxes to be obsolete today - but in
: a way they were more forward-looking than the way we're going about GPS
: today.

I happen to really like my KNS-80. Although my panel-mount GPS/COM is VFR
only, it's what I generally use to point myself in the right direction. Unlike what I
suspect to be many pilots, I still follow along with the other equipment enroute.
Even if I had an IFR-certified GPS, I wouldn't be comfortable flying without a finger
on the chart, a VOR dialed in, and a DME blinking numbers at me.

I think many pilots have gotten lazy and want to have their Garmin 295 in
their lap coupled to the autopilot so they can punch D- and take a nap while the
plane takes them where they want to go. That's the "new-fashioned" thinking causing a
lot of this mentality. Same with all the glass cockpit hubub... yeah, it's sexy and
modern and will practically shine your shoes while it flies you to your destination.
Will it keep your 172 from dropping out of the sky as an icy plane-cicle or getting
the wings torn off in a CB? No... laziness and complacency aren't a good thing to
encourage in GA. It's a pedantic argument of "primary means of navigation."

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

wrote:

I think many pilots have gotten lazy and want to have their Garmin 295 in
their lap coupled to the autopilot so they can punch D- and take a nap
while the
plane takes them where they want to go. That's the "new-fashioned"
thinking causing a
lot of this mentality.

Possibly, but so what?

Do we have any hard data that supports the idea that "excess" reliance on GPS
for navigation is raising the accident rate? Isn't it just as arguable that
GPS has a beneficial impact on safety by reducing the number of lost pilots?

--
Dan
C-172RG at BFM

GPS, especially handheld ones with terrain, roads, rivers and such, ADD
to my enjoyment of the flight. It also gives me and my passengers
something to do on a long flight.

Knowing EXACTLY where I am at all times and being able to direct to
pretty much everywhere (just the prohibited and restricted airspaces,
oh and TFR's to go around), save time, money and fuel.

GPS is a terrific invention.

I've started using one in my car. Nice to punch in "nearest Mexican
Resturants" and get a list.

Knowing EXACTLY where I am at all times and being able to direct to
pretty much everywhere (just the prohibited and restricted airspaces,
oh and TFR's to go around), save time, money and fuel.

And you cannot do that with a map and compass?

john smith wrote:

Knowing EXACTLY where I am at all times and being able to direct to
pretty much everywhere (just the prohibited and restricted airspaces,
oh and TFR's to go around), save time, money and fuel.


And you cannot do that with a map and compass?

OMG, a true reactionary!

john smith wrote:
Knowing EXACTLY where I am at all times and being able to direct to
pretty much everywhere (just the prohibited and restricted airspaces,
oh and TFR's to go around), save time, money and fuel.


And you cannot do that with a map and compass?

What's a compass?

John

And you cannot do that with a map and compass?

Nothing wrong with doing that way. But even when you can (and you can't
always, consider VFR on top), the GPS is more accurate. And when you
are flying over Canada, over unfamiliar terrain, it gives a level of
confidence that you don't get by map and compass. Compasses are subject
to magnetic anomolies, and many, many, aren't that accurate. When
coming into Las Vegas airspace (and never been there before) and I see
that the airport is 7.3 miles dead ahead, but still can't see the
airport, I KNOW where I am, where to fly next with ease and precision
you don't get with a map and compass. And I don't have to divert my
attention from flying the plane, just a glance at the GPS and I KNOW.

Also, it makes flight planning a breeze. No legs to figure. Just click
in your route, check for restricted/prohibited airspace and TFR's and
go direct! I have a Floatplane and I have put the Floatplane landing
lakes (and there are lots without anchors that you see on the charts),
into my GPS, so I have those without consulting some archane book.
Also, like I said, I have the names of the rivers and highways at my
fingertips for everyone to enjoy.

I flew direct (good to save fuel) from Sioux St Marie to a small
airport 200 miles north of Montreal over terrain that was remarkably
difficult to get good visual fixes on, and out of range of VOR's. There
were lakes, but one lake tended to look the same as the next. Other
than that, just rolling terrain that was endlessly similar.
Occasionally you would see a road or railroad (like every 150 miles),
but lets face it . What with tight on fuel, and such, I don't think I
would have gone direct here without a GPS. Too risky. I would have
diverted to the airways (which were NOT convenient), used more fuel and
taken longer.In that case enough longer I don't think I would have made
it in one day. That would have meant finding and airport with a hotel
and all that.

There seems to be some macho, hair on the chest attitude about not
using the GPS. Lots of instructors that ignore it's existence, won't
let their students use it, but lets face it, there isn't a pilot out
there that actually goes anywhere cross country that doesn't have one
and use it. No reason not too. They work great! There is a need to be
able to navigate by other means as there is always a chance the GPS
signal will not be there or your unit will malfunction. So cross
checking with other navigation techniques periodically is still a good
idea. I have over 2000 hours behind mine though, and have yet to really
loose a signal (a couple of times, temporarily, and I suspect it was my
unit, not the satellites).

When I land in a strange town and borrow the courtesy car (or rent
one), and want to see the sights, my Garmin car unit tells me where the
museums are, where the resturants are, where the rivers are. Great
little device for that too.

john smith wrote:

Knowing EXACTLY where I am at all times and being able to direct to
pretty much everywhere (just the prohibited and restricted airspaces,
oh and TFR's to go around), save time, money and fuel.

And you cannot do that with a map and compass?

A *real* pilot doesn't need a map or compass -- that kind of technology
just makes you too lazy to fly low and read highway signs.


All the best,


David

John,

And you cannot do that with a map and compass?


Yes, you can. You can also ride into town on a horse. Do you?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)