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
|
|||
|
|||
GPS and old-fashioned thinking?
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
GPS and old-fashioned thinking?
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 |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
GPS and old-fashioned thinking?
G Farris wrote:
I disagree. I think there is a more important problem. If you're flying direct routes and RNAV with GPS as primary(and only random route) source of navigation, in the event of a GPS signal degradation, you have a bit of a balancing act to do to get back to "legacy" navigation. If you're in the middle of the Great Plains that's no issue, but if you're shooting an approach to White Plains it may be. Wouldn't you be in the same situation if you were shooting an ILS approach and the localizer went U/S? All the best, David |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
GPS and old-fashioned thinking?
"Doug" wrote:
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! It helps to take a glance at the terrain too. I've got a flight planning exercise I give to people to plan a trip to a destination on the other side of what passes for a mountain range around here (the Catskills). I'll give them a weather forecast with ceilings just about at the mountain tops. It's amazing how many come back to me with "GPS direct" and seem to be totally clueless that they've just planed a trip into cumulogranite. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
GPS and old-fashioned thinking?
G Farris wrote:
I love GPS, and I see no problem in being highly reliant on it, because it is intrinsically reliable - however I believe it would be practical and desirable to build a system that maintains full RNAV capability in the event of a loss in GPS integrity. The big boys have it, it's called Inertial Nav. Whether that will ever become an affordable reality for GA is anybody's guess, but stranger things have happened. With the current crop of GPS gear on the market, there are already spam cans equipped with better nav systems than some jets. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
GPS and old-fashioned thinking?
Here is something you have with a GPS that you don't have with most
other Nav -- GROUNDSPEED. (Yes you can get it if you have DME and are flying to/from the station). How does that help? Helps with fuel planning and time. Will you be flying at night or will you make it before nightfall? I once used GPS for deciding if I should attempt flying ridge lift. I was heavily loaded in my Amphib. I can climb to 13000' I need to get over Corona, but its not easy. Usually there is a west wind causing ridgelift as you fly west to east. As I climbed, it was apparent that I wasn't going to make it without circling. But...that west wind..IF I was SURE it existed. So I turned into the wind (my destination was east) to make sure and checked my GS with my airspeed. Sure enough it was there. I went close to the ridge (so close you didn't want to be there if there were downdrafts), and the wind just lifted me right up and over the pass. WAY COOL! |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
GPS and old-fashioned thinking?
Ron Lee wrote:
Bob Noel wrote: In article xl0kf.62898$qw.59268@fed1read07, wrote: The FAA, and the rest of the world as well, want to eventually shut-down the VORs. The only remaining ground-based systems will be ILSes. DME, and probably MLS, will be around for a while longer. Don't count on it...elimination of all ground-based navaids. Even the FAA has reconsidered this flawed from the beginning concept. Ron Lee Which FAA? ;-) As the budget crunch deepens, and it will, the pressure to do away with most ground facilities other than ILS will be irresistable. One variation is to shut down the VORs but leave "geometrically desirable" DME facilites going until the legacy air carrer LNAV platforms retire. That would be a whole lot less expensive than maintaining aging VOR facilities. The bean counters want to do away with primary radars, too. But, so far, the security-minded have stopped that planning. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
GPS and old-fashioned thinking?
G Farris wrote:
I love GPS, and I see no problem in being highly reliant on it, because it is intrinsically reliable - however I believe it would be practical and desirable to build a system that maintains full RNAV capability in the event of a loss in GPS integrity. You're thinking in light aircraft terms. All modern air carrier jets and biz jets have IRUs, which will provide a decent RNAV platform for a reasonable length of time in the terminal area and for a very long time en route. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
GPS and old-fashioned thinking?
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|