OzRunways as Nav Student?

[ian00798]

Electronic flight bags are legal as a source of maps. The GPS in the system is not legal to use for navigation purposes. As such, even with the EFB you should still be using the DR techniques and not relying on the GPS.

 

 

[Keith Page]

Well said RobT..

 

I think the electronic way is out of the depths of some of the law makers and some of the old instructors hence they are shoving the electronic way under the carpet.

 

But alas there are young people out and about creating waves, "Good to see."

 

KP

 

 

[Neil_S]

There is zero reason to learn hard maps..

Hi Rob,

 

Having worked in IT for nearly 40 years there is one thing that is certain - it is not a question of IF hardware or software will fail but WHEN.

 

I know of iPads failing, overheating, and batteries running flat. It is also the case that software bugs exist. Don't get me wrong, I have AVPlan on an iPad Mini, and on my phone as a (non-legal) backup, I also have an Aera 500 in the panel, AND I also have paper charts and, of course, a compass.

 

You can never have too many backups, and Sod's Law says the hardware or software will fail at the most inconvenient time.

 

Learning to navigate from first principles using paper maps and compass as part of your initial training is beneficial, because it gives you the foundation to understand all the electronic stuff. If the electronic stuff failed you would still have the ability to track your position using map and compass, and navigate to a safe location.

 

Although it is very unlikely that we will have an off-airfield landing we still practice them - in the same way it is unlikely that the electronic stuff will all fail, but I still think it is good to have that knowledge as a backup, just in case.

 

Cheers,

 

Neil

 

 

[GraemeK]

Additionally if you don’t hold an NVFR/instrument rating you can’t use any of the nav aids for position fixing. Whether you like it or not, the rules are extremely clear on this one.

Not so sure it's that clear Ian. A VFR pilot can use any of the relevant instruments (AIP 4.1.1) for position fixing (AIP 4.1.2) provided the pilot is competent to use them under Part 61.385 which is just the general competency requirement.

 

Actually, 4.1.2 doesn't quite say even that - it says you can use instruments for a position fix without qualifying it - but then goes on to say you can only indicate in your flight notification aids in the aircraft which the pilot is competent to use. Confusing?

 

 

[Guest RobT]

Learning to navigate from first principles using paper maps and compass as part of your initial training is beneficial, because it gives you the foundation to understand all the electronic stuff. If the electronic stuff failed you would still have the ability to track your position using map and compass, and navigate to a safe location.

Hi Neil,

Here's the thing the maps are not going to be in the plane and if you lose 4 independent GPS's you are having a bad day. So the training should be EFB training and what to do if you where to lose all 4 gps's. If you did also have maps your day is so bad your maps will get wet, blown out the window catch fire etc. Nav in Australia is very simple anyway if you loose all you nav aids simply fly over a couple of towns find an airfield and land. We don't practice continuing with a flight when the engine fails losing 4 gps's have a strategy and train new pilots to handle this situation not the current crazy 1940's compass, paper, ruler, pencil, head in the cockpit, no real time update system that is being trained for now.

 

cheers

 

Rob

 

 

[ben87r]

Rob, I can’t tell if you’re pulling our legs or you’re Dick Smith under an alias...

 

 

[ian00798]

I’m really hoping he’s pulling our leg, otherwise I’m seriously worried for Rec flying in general

 

 

[KRviator]

Additionally if you don’t hold an NVFR/instrument rating you can’t use any of the nav aids for position fixing. Whether you like it or not, the rules are extremely clear on this one.

Bollocks. I've asked you to provide a reference for that before and you haven't. Care to do so this time?

[ian00798]

Well frankly I would have thought you would be competent enough to look up the regulations yourself, but since your too lazy I will do the job for you.

 

AIP ENR 4.1.2.1 (f) states that you must meet the general competency rule listed under CASR 61.385. As far as RA Aus aircraft go that seals the matter, you don’t hold a part 61 licence and as such can’t comply with that CASR, and the RA ops manual doesn’t give any kind of approval to use navaids for position fixing.

 

Now as far as GA goes, 61.385 states that you can only use the navaids if you have been deemed competent to operate them by someone who is qualified to assess your competency, ie a flight instructor. There would be very few instructors willing to sign off that unless you hold either an NVFR rating or an instrument rating, as you are required to demonstrate you meet all the competencies in the MOS.

 

 

[KRviator]

Well frankly I would have thought you would be competent enough to look up the regulations yourself, but since your too lazy I will do the job for you.AIP ENR 4.1.2.1 (f) states that you must meet the general competency rule listed under CASR 61.385. As far as RA Aus aircraft go that seals the matter, you don’t hold a part 61 licence and as such can’t comply with that CASR, and the RA ops manual doesn’t give any kind of approval to use navaids for position fixing.

 

Now as far as GA goes, 61.385 states that you can only use the navaids if you have been deemed competent to operate them by someone who is qualified to assess your competency, ie a flight instructor. There would be very few instructors willing to sign off that unless you hold either an NVFR rating or an instrument rating, as you are required to demonstrate you meet all the competencies in the MOS.

WTF? That's not what ENR 4.1.2.1 states at all...AIP ENR 4.1.2.1 (f) states, in effect, that you must only indicate systems on your flight plan that you have been deemed competent to use, IAW CASR 61.385. Read it again. Then go read ENR 4.1.2.1 (a).

 

The pilot in command of a VFR flight wishing to navigate by means of radio navigation systems or any other means must indicate in the flight notification only those radio navigation aids with which the aircraft is equipped and the pilot is competent to use under CASR 61.385.

If you are not planning on lodging a flight plan, AIP ENR 4.1.2.1(f) does not apply. And as you have already stated, CASR 61.385 does not apply as, under RAAus, we are not exercising the privileges of a Licence.

 

 

[GraemeK]

Now as far as GA goes, 61.385 states that you can only use the navaids if you have been deemed competent to operate them by someone who is qualified to assess your competency, ie a flight instructor. There would be very few instructors willing to sign off that unless you hold either an NVFR rating or an instrument rating, as you are required to demonstrate you meet all the competencies in the MOS.

No-one needs to sign off on general competency! There is no "endorsement" for general competency. As a pilot, it is up to you to ensure you meet general competency. It's a catch-all!

 

So, with my 2 TSO'd GPS units I can position fix using GPS while VFR. And I can back that up in court if need be with my training records which show I was trained in the use of the 430W's.

 

 

[Keith Page]

The digital age is here, so we have to embrace it. News papers come on tablet from.

 

EVEN the RAAus mag has a digital version.

 

With that said CASA, the school's manual of standards and all other relevant bodies must reflect the presents and use of the digital equipment.

 

So the teaching and the use of this equipment must be in the school curriculum. See digital age is here.

 

KP.

 

 

[frank marriott]

The digital age is here, so we have to embrace it. News papers come on tablet from.EVEN the RAAus mag has a digital version.

With that said CASA, the school's manual of standards and all other relevant bodies must reflect the presents and use of the digital equipment.

 

So the teaching and the use of this equipment must be in the school curriculum. See digital age is here.

 

KP.

I don't have a problem with your statement Keith but you have to be taught Navigation first to be able to use an EFB properly.

 

With the minimum time spent on navigation with an RPC, I doubt there is sufficient time to be taught both properly.

 

Given the current law in relation to non TSOed GPS & instruments I don't think there is any option to being competent navigating purely from a map FIRST.

 

I am a big believer in the multiple "toys" available today and do use them but to do so both competently & legally you need the foundation to build on - the magenta line followers just don't cut it, after all the RPC is VFR i.e. Visual not instrument.

 

As a flight planning tool the EFB is unbelievable.

 

 

[Keith Page]

That is correct Frank, we must have an understand the principals of navigation.

 

When the only form of navigation was compass, paper, rulers, slide rulers and protractors not one person would have dreamt of what we have now.

 

Think of what we have now, what will be next? That is what I was trying to say move along with the digital age. Technology moves too fast for the law makers they have to catch up and embrace it with new laws which will encompass it. They can not stay asleep as the boat is floating along.

 

KP

 

 

[aro]

Anyone can follow a GPS and end up at their destination. That's no great feat of navigation.

 

The important questions are:

 

• Do you know where you are, or only where your device tells you you are?
   
   
  
• Do you know where you are going, or are you going where-ever the device tells you?
   
   
  
• Do you have enough awareness to recognize if your device is giving you bad information, sending you in the wrong direction (either due to device error or user error)?
   
   
  
• Do you know what airspace, terrain, airports etc. are around you, e.g. 20-50 miles either side of your track?
   
   
  
• Do you have enough awareness of where you are going to e.g. modify your track to avoid passing downwind of hills and mountains on a windy day?
   
   
  

 

 

In other words, are you navigating or is the device?

 

I have noticed that the Ipad screen is very small compared to a paper map. There is a lot of information on a paper map that is virtually impossible to get from an Ipad, simply because you can't see enough of the map at a large enough scale.

 

 

[djpacro]

I have noticed that the Ipad screen is very small compared to a paper map. There is a lot of information on a paper map that is virtually impossible to get from an Ipad, simply because you can't see enough of the map at a large enough scale.

Nothing better than spreading the charts out on the kitchen table as a student learning how to plan a flight.

[Guest RobT]

• Do you know where you are, or only where your device tells you you are?
   
   
  

Do you know your air speed or only what your device tells you, do you know your altitude or only what your device tells you, If you have multiple gps's they will not have your position wrong. If you are flying IFR this is your primary nav aid since jumbo's are not flying off in the wrong direction you can assume the gps is pity good. B.T.W a gps will give you a back up asi, altimeter, plus low terrain warning.

 

Do you have enough awareness to recognize if your device is giving you bad information, sending you in the wrong direction (either due to device error or user error)?

Multiple devices with multiple satellite services nothing else in the plane has this much redundancy 1 USA and 1 Russian gps positioning system. Plus if you are flying VFR you are doing position checks. Does the moving map agree with whats out the window. If yes proceed on wards.

 

• Do you know where you are going, or are you going where-ever the device tells you?
   
   
  

Since you have to program your route you have a good idea where your going.

 

• Do you know what airspace, terrain, airports etc. are around you, e.g. 20-50 miles either side of your track?
   
   
  

 

 

.

This is one of the great strengths of EFB you have way more information at you finger tips the fact you even ask this question indicates you really should learn how to use a GPS nav system.

 

• Do you have enough awareness of where you are going to e.g. modify your track to avoid passing downwind of hills and mountains on a windy day?
   
   
  

 

 

.

Once again a huge strength of Electronic Flight Bags you get real time weather overlays you can look up real time weather along your route and within seconds alter your flight plan EFB's make changing your track effortless and simple. With EFB's you can spend more time looking out the window instead of trying to map read and trying to measure distances etc.

 

Anyone can follow a GPS and end up at their destination. That's no great feat of navigation.In other words, are you navigating or is the device?

 

.

Its an aid that make flying way less work, less stressful, easier to plan fuel use, low terrain warnings, real time weather, airspace, other aircraft and so much more, It make you a better pilot. The real question is why wouldn't you want this for new pilots?

 

I have noticed that the Ipad screen is very small compared to a paper map. There is a lot of information on a paper map that is virtually impossible to get from an Ipad, simply because you can't see enough of the map at a large enough scale.

So very very wrong you can zoom in or out in fact if you use a satellite overlay and zoom in enough you can see individual buildings an map does not come close to being able to impart this level of information not even close.

 

 

[Guest RobT]

Rob, I can’t tell if you’re pulling our legs or you’re Dick Smith under an alias...

Not Dick Smith but thanks for the complement.

 

 

[Guest RobT]

I’m really hoping he’s pulling our leg, otherwise I’m seriously worried for Rec flying in general

Have you seen the trend in aviation in the last 20 years and this discussion worries you, really?

 

 

[KRviator]

Do you know your air speed or only what your device tells you, do you know your altitude or only what your device tells you, If you have multiple gps's they will not have your position wronge.

No, but multiple GPS' can suffer simultaneous, independent failures. The Garmin GA35 active antenna has a well-known failure mode that causes it to oscillate in the GPS band, thus effectively jamming any oth nearby GPS units until you turn off the GPS using the offending GA35.

 

If you are flying IFR this is your primary nav aid since jumbo's are not flying off in the wrong direction you can assume the gps is pity good. B.T.W a gps will give you a back up asi, altimeter, plus low terrain warning.

My KLN-90B does not provide terrain warning, nor any ASI functions. I think you misunderstand exactly what you can get. I do get Synthetic Vision with my SkyView system, but that is not TSO'd and this is advisory only. 747's and their ilk are provided with automated position source monitoring and will flag an EICAS/ECAM message if there's a disagreement. We don't have that.

 

Multiple devices with multiple satellite services nothing else in the plane has this much redundancy 1 USA and 1 Russian gps positioning system.

That can, and have been, jammed simultaneously by a failed antenna. If you have a second TSO'd GPS, carry on as normal using that as your primary. If you only now have an EFB, you're down to VFR map-to-ground.

 

Plus if you are flying VFR you are doing position checks. Does the moving map agree with whats out the window. If yes proceed on wards.

I use my KLN for position checks primarily, as it is TSO'd for Area Nav, IAW the AIP. It's only when low level I use the map.

 

Once again a huge strength of Electronic Flight Bags you get real time weather overlays you can look up real time weather along your route and within seconds alter your flight plan EFB's make changing your track effortless and simple.

No, no no. Please do not be lulled into this false sense of security about 'real time' weather, the BOM overlays while pretty good, can be delayed by 10-15 minutes and this has been proven to have caused accidents overseas before, with pilots relying on NEXRAD returns to avoid weather and unintentionally flying into a rapidly developing storm because it 'looked clear' on the EFB.

 

Its an aid that make flying way less work, less stressful, easier to plan fuel use, low terrain warnings, real time weather, airspace, other aircraft and so much more, It make you a better pilot. The real question is why wouldn't you want this for new pilots?

Because while it does indeed do most of those things, it also has some very significant limitations that you need to be aware of, and a brand-spanking new pilot is not likely to fully grasp them until he has had time to understand that concept, something unlikely in the early stages of flying.Don't get me wrong, I am all for sole-means GPS Nav for VFR vs DR, but and it is a huge BUT, a pilot need to understand the limitations of the system he is using in order to keep themselves and their passengers safe. Using OzR/AvPlan for maps only during a PPL test, I have no problem with. If the ATO simulates a failure and you have a backup EFB, no problems, continue using that. But a lot of the functionality built into EFB's can provide a false sense of security that needs to be understood.

 

 

[Guest RobT]

No, but multiple GPS' can suffer simultaneous, independent failures. The Garmin GA35 active antenna has a well-known failure mode that causes it to oscillate in the GPS band, thus effectively jamming any oth nearby GPS units until you turn off the GPS using the offending GA35.My KLN-90B does not provide terrain warning, nor any ASI functions. I think you misunderstand exactly what you can get. I do get Synthetic Vision with my SkyView system, but that is not TSO'd and this is advisory only. 747's and their ilk are provided with automated position source monitoring and will flag an EICAS/ECAM message if there's a disagreement. We don't have that.

This is the problem with TSO it takes so long for the certification that the experiment stuff is years in front with software evolving so quick TSO stuff looks outdated. BTW I have terrain warning but I only fly VFR so of course its advisory(I think anyone who flys IFR in a single engine aircraft is mad).

The Garmin GPS failure would not jam the Russian GPS GLONASS they work on different band widths so the irony here is all the TSO gps's would fail and the humble ipad would have continued to work go figure.

 

You can look up real time picture's of many locations to see what the weather is doing and what you are flying into that does not have a delay while not a gps function it is a function of an EFB.

 

Because while it does indeed do most of those things, it also has some very significant limitations that you need to be aware of, and a brand-spanking new pilot is not likely to fully grasp them until he has had time to understand that concept, something unlikely in the early stages of flying

This is why the training should be based around EFB's not old school maps train for what people are going to use not the current crazy 1940 method. I never posted GPS was perfect but it is way better than the old method.

 

 

[Guest RobT]

My KLN-90B does not provide terrain warning, nor any ASI functions. I think you misunderstand exactly what you can get. I do get Synthetic Vision with my SkyView system, but that is not TSO'd and this is advisory only.

.

class B (TAWS B) CASR Part 135 - Australian Air Transport Operations - Small Aeroplanes | Civil Aviation Safety Authority

Class B TAWS is GPS only terrain warning system and yes they are TSO'd

 

 

[nathan_c]

Woh woh woh, you are making a lot of claims and suggestions that simply are not true and if followed by new or inexperienced pilots could be dangerous. Excuse me for not being able to quote specific posts, but I am on my phone at the moment.

 

Are you sure your GPS is displaying indicated airspeed? I have only seen units (EFB included) that display ground speed, though that’s not to say they aren’t out here. However if they are displaying ground speed, please be so careful about suggesting this as a back up airspeed indicator. If you are aiming for a landing speed of 60 knots indicated, it only takes a 20 knot headwind and you are all of a sudden WAY over your target airspeed if you maintain a GS of 60. God forbid you accident land with a tailwind because you are stressed from your instrument failure and misread the wind, you could start pulling the speed back and easily hit stall speed.

 

GPS needs TSO’s for a good reason. Even then they can and do fail. Having multiple non TSO devices is not a guarantee, and the big jets are a very different beast in terms of redundancies. Also a reminder here, EFB’s are not an approved source of GPS, so even though they have this capability, it should NOT be being used for navigation, you should be using it only as a map and flying DR from that.

 

Last point for now, any online/ electronic source or weather you are getting IS delayed, no matter where you get it from. Your online source of BOM is a delayed feed, and that’s where your EFB overlay gains its data. As has been explained, accidents have been caused by people thinking this was real time data and making decisions based solely on this information. As an ATC, the best weather information I can get is delayed data from the BOM, do you think if there was non delayed info available we wouldn’t have it too?

 

Please have a think about what you are telling people, for other pilots sake if not yours.

 

 

[ben87r]

I’m with Nathan, it’s to nice a day to sit here and nit pick too much but a lot of that post is incorrect.

 

The WX is far from real time, I fly with more shiny glass than most and don’t get IAS and without a known wind (which you need ias to derive) can’t think of a way it could be displayed, relying on the airspace features is a VCA waiting for a place to happen.

 

 

[ian00798]

An iPad GPS has no accurate way to determine the accuracy of the GPS signal as it has no fault detection/exclusion like a TSO gps does.

 

The GPS on the iPad is not approved by casa to be used as a primary source of navigation, and on several occasions I have seen the GPS display a massively inaccurate position. Even the airliners don’t rely on GPS solely for navigation, their systems constantly update/crosscheck the navigation solution against ground based navaids and most of them also have an IRS so if GPS stops working they still have a system that works.

 

If we don’t train people how to use basic DR as some people on here suggest doing, how can a pilot conduct a gross error check on what the electronics are telling them? Where do they get the basic map reading skills from? Where do they get the basic understanding of things like track, heading and all the basics? Teaching someone to follow a purple line on a GPS doesn’t train pilots with situational awareness. And frankly, basic DR navigation isn’t that hard, what is everyone’s problem with learning another skill that will serve them well as a pilot?