OzRunways as Nav Student?

[Roscoe]

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.

Ian you are 100% correct and the GPS will only display GPS derived GROUND SPEED not IAS!

 

 

[Roscoe]

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.

And Rob, what do you do when the electrics fail in remote country, and your Charts are in the Car?

 

 

[Roscoe]

When you buy a new GPS, the first thing the manual says is WARNING - NOT TO BE USED FOR PRIMARY NAVIGATION - USE AS BACKUP AS AN AID TO DEAD RECKONING..... or something very similar.

 

As others have said, why the objection to learning basic navigation?

 

 

[Roscoe]

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.

And in turbulence, in a high workload situation, try tapping the screen to change the map orientation or select a GOTO.

Chances are you will accidentally tap the wrong thing, and while staring at the screen trying to rectify it, the airplane will wander off altitude and or heading and make a stressful situation worse.

 

I use Avplan and find it a great BACKUP but where i fly, you MUST look out the window for obvious reasons.

 

Too much reliance on electronics for the average recreational pilot will end badly eventually.

 

 

[Kununurra]

I use both paper & Oz Runways on my IPad.

 

My back ups are GPS Garmin 196 & OzRunways on my phone.

 

I have flown from Albany WA to Kununurra in the Kimberley & return with no issues or the need to seek a redundancy as a back up.

 

Now there is a lot of “tiger country” in between those destinations, on any trip I do not use one source as the be all or end all. They are all just tools that I have in my kit.

 

I have also experienced turbulence, bad weather and the need to divert, my own experience has been that “I” find it easier to use my IPad and goto on my GPS then read a paper map while bouncing around.

 

This has been “my” experience I am not saying that it is a one size fits all it has just been what has worked for ME.

 

So in summary we are all different and all fly different aircraft with different forms of navigation and have varying levels of flight experience both local and extended journeys.

 

Cheers

 

 

[ian00798]

And in turbulence, in a high workload situation, try tapping the screen to change the map orientation or select a GOTO.Chances are you will accidentally tap the wrong thing, and while staring at the screen trying to rectify it, the airplane will wander off altitude and or heading and make a stressful situation worse.

I use Avplan and find it a great BACKUP but where i fly, you MUST look out the window for obvious reasons.

 

Too much reliance on electronics for the average recreational pilot will end badly eventually.

Valid points. And for the record it’s not the use of electronics I object to, it’s the over reliance I have the problem with and the lack of understanding people seem to have of how GNSS systems work. Putting all your eggs in the GPS basket when your not even running an approved GPS is just reckless.

 

 

[Aldo]

Do you guys recommend buying the Private VFR plan for OzRunways this stage or should I leave it until sometime later? Thanks

In my opinion I think you should wait and I believe you should learn to navigate by primary means first (i.e. map, clock and compass) but bear in mind, in my opinion this is not the most accurate, the least stressful or the safest way to navigate around this country, but if you learn correctly this old and tested method it is the one backup that will never fail. Learnt correctly no matter what type of flying you are doing you will forever note your departure time, your outbound track and your speed knowing these three things even without maps you should always be able to find your way home.

 

Enjoy your flying future.

 

Aldo

 

 

[Guest RobT]

My Bad I should have left the A off and posted SI (speed indication) if your ASI goes down you have a backup if you have a GPS but you also have to do a mental calculation to allow for the wind speed and direction. Way better than holding your map out the window and seeing who fast its flapping.

 

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.

This is not true your data is not delayed from the BOM. I have a mate who was flying IFR and was vectored thu a thunderstorm damaging his aircraft and when he asked why they said its because our BOM data is delayed 15 minutes sorry. I looked into it for him and the answer is more complicated and I am a little shocked professional ATC don't understand what they are getting when looking at a weather radar.

 

The weather radar has a time it take's to do a 360 deg sweep it then compiles the reflected data and then the results are available to everyone. 128 km Brisbane (Mt Stapylton) Radar Loop for brisbane radar as an example the time at the bottom is when the radar starts its sweep.

 

Weather radar takes time to do a 360 deg sweep and depending on how much resolution they want determiners the time it takes. At the time of this post it looks like around 6 minutes for the Brisbane radar to do its sweep based on the delay between there image time and my current time. Some of the radar image is 6 minutes late and some has hardly any delay but because we don't know the start and stop position we have to assume the worst case and go of the initial time. You cannot assume the whole scan is 6 minutes late however as it is not some of the data is only a few second's "old". The weather radar is in real time you just have to understand what that means re rotation of dish..

 

BTW here is some real time weather info available if you have an Electronic Flight Bag. Live Weather Cameras | Airservices

 

 

[nathan_c]

If your mate was competent he would have told ATC the heading was unacceptable as it would take him into a thunderstorm. We can not see the weather, we do not know what’s ahead of the aircraft unless told and flying his aircraft into a thunderstorm is poor pilotage full stop. Frankly the damage to his aircraft is on him.

 

I’m not going to continue arguing against you because you clearly have no idea. For anyone else reading, please do not rely on the BOM radar as real time information, use it as a guide only. You will get yourself into trouble. As of typing this post, the latest image available on the mt stapylton feed was 10 minutes old. A very fast moving thunderstorm can move a hell of a long way in 10 minutes trust me.

 

 

[ian00798]

I’m sorry and I’m going to very very agitated on this one, but are you seriously implying you know the ATC system better than an experienced controller who has done several years of training in this system and knows very well what the system provides? Tell me, when did you become the world expert on what information ATC provides? Have you ever even actually seen how this information is presented at an ATC console?

 

I know it’s not a book you ever read, but perhaps we should look at AIP GEN 2.13.2 which specifically states exactly what Nathan has told you (photo attached to this post). Pull your head in and stop making up your own stuff. I don’t really care what you do on your own when you fly, but there are some people on here who may think you know what your talking about who your going to kill when they listen to you.

 

 

 

[frank marriott]

Way better than holding your map out the window and seeing who fast its flapping.

I wonder if you have heard of or practised "attitude & power"?

 

Might surprise you just how accurate it can be.

 

 

[ian00798]

I wonder if you have heard of or practised "attitude & power"?Might surprise you just how accurate it can be.

Don’t you know old school techniques like that are irrelevant in the age of GPS?

 

 

[kaz3g]

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.

Hi ARO

 

I agree with all of the above except the last paragraph.

 

My WAC, VNC etc on OzRunways can be enlarged to a size significantly greater than a printed chart.

 

When I'm touring, I run 2 iPads (and a Garmin) and have one set with VTC if I'm going into controlled airspace at airports like Alice while the other is either WAC or VNC. But I also have my charts marked up, and my ruler, protractor and whiz wheel should I need them.

 

I confirm my position on the ground against landmarks as I fly and irrespective of whether the GPS signal drops out or the iPads die or whatever, I will know my position to within a very small margin and revert to the Stone Age procedure.

 

I confess I chuckle a little when I see comments about "following the magenta line" because that's exactly what you do when using an ADF or VOR to arrive at a destination. I don't have either of those in the AUSTER but the Cessna station hack we mustered in did and the ADF was both an important navigation aid and a means of breaking the monotony of travelling long distances by tuning into the ABC transmitters at places like Carnarvon, Meekatharra, Parraburdoo and Mt Newman.

 

Kaz

 

 

[ian00798]

Following the magenta line is more referring to people becoming over reliant on technology and automation to the point where they lose situational awareness. ADF and VOR both require a significant amount of situational awareness to use, in fact I find it takes nearly as long to teach students how to use them as it does to teach DR. Too many people have excessive faith in GPS despite the fact that it is subject to error as well, and the idea of removing DR Nav from the training syllabus as some want done would be a massive step backwards.

 

 

[frank marriott]

There is a big difference between "tracking" using an ADF as opposed to "chasing the needle".

 

Situational awareness is necessary when intercepting a VOR radial etc.

 

Hence the requirement for a particular endorsement on each before they can be legally relied on for tracking.

 

The argument seems to be straying from VFR really.

 

 

[KRviator]

My Bad I should have left the A off and posted SI (speed indication) if your ASI goes down you have a backup if you have a GPS but you also have to do a mental calculation to allow for the wind speed and direction. Way better than holding your map out the window and seeing who fast its flapping.

My EFIS does that for me too, but it needs IAS to do that computation. Just how do you plan on doing it yourself without IAS?

 

This is not true your data is not delayed from the BOM. I have a mate who was flying IFR and was vectored thu a thunderstorm damaging his aircraft and when he asked why they said its because our BOM data is delayed 15 minutes sorry. I looked into it for him and the answer is more complicated and I am a little shocked professional ATC don't understand what they are getting when looking at a weather radar.The weather radar has a time it take's to do a 360 deg sweep it then compiles the reflected data and then the results are available to everyone. 128 km Brisbane (Mt Stapylton) Radar Loop for brisbane radar as an example the time at the bottom is when the radar starts its sweep.

Weather radar takes time to do a 360 deg sweep and depending on how much resolution they want determiners the time it takes. At the time of this post it looks like around 6 minutes for the Brisbane radar to do its sweep based on the delay between there image time and my current time. Some of the radar image is 6 minutes late and some has hardly any delay but because we don't know the start and stop position we have to assume the worst case and go of the initial time. You cannot assume the whole scan is 6 minutes late however as it is not some of the data is only a few second's "old". The weather radar is in real time you just have to understand what that means re rotation of dish..

So, tell us how to work out which segments of the display are near-real-time and which have a 10 minute delay? Bear in mind that the images released are an average 10 minutes apart. You've just highlighted the very issue you're rebutting. 'Some' parts may be nearly current, but there is no way to tell, and given the 6-per-hour release rate, in a fast-moving storm the cell could be 10 miles away from where the radar tells you it is.This is nowhere near 'real time', and in no way can it be construed as suitable for weather avoidance. As an aid to inflight decision making when en-route, certainly it is useful. But that's taking a strategic view and going around it from 100+ NM away, rather than a tactical approach and using the BOM EFB feed to pick your way through it.

 

Hence the requirement for a particular endorsement on each before they can be legally relied on for tracking

That's the second time I've seen that comment recently, and be damned if I can find a reference for it. What endorsement are you referring to? As best I can tell, I can install a VOR in my RAAus RV, and so long as I can demonstrate competence with it, can legally use it for position fixing and enroute navigation in flight.

[djpacro]

My old CAR 5 licence listed NDB and VOR as those I was permitted to use - from memory, the rule was something about when I was using them as the sole source of navigation - never bothered to get the "ticket" to use my TSO'd GPS in the same way - I guess the rule has changed with the recent Part 61.

 

 

[ben87r]

General competency - pilots | Civil Aviation Safety Authority

 

States in that link that a FIR is required for the general competency rule, ild get a better reference but the MOS isn’t my area of expertise.

 

It’s no longer black and white (maybe it is but I like a lot don’t really know the regs since 2014) but if you’ve never been trained to use an aid, then proceed to use it for sole navigation (rather than situational awareness) ild not like to be representing you in court.

 

I have not renewed my NDB in my last 2 or 3 IFR renewal, and cant get a straight answer as to whether or not I’m allowed to use them as I conducted a 2D and 3D approach in the aircraft.

 

 

[djpacro]

Of course, Part 61 does not apply to RAA ops anyway.

 

 

[aro]

That's the second time I've seen that comment recently, and be damned if I can find a reference for it.

My memory from when I did the PPL test was that you were allowed to use navaids, but if you did you had to use them properly, i.e. not just tune it in and start following the needle.

 

AIP ENR 1.1 has the specific requirements:

 

4.1.2 Flight under the VFR

 

4.1.2.1 The following apply in respect of flight under the VFR:

 

a. The pilot in command must navigate the aircraft by visual

 

reference to the ground or water, or by using any of the

 

methods specified in para 4.1.1, except that when operating

 

at or below 2,000FT above the ground or water, the pilot in

 

command must be able to navigate by visual reference to the

 

ground or water.

 

...

 

e. When navigating by reference to radio navigation systems,

 

the pilot in command must obtain positive radio fixes at the

 

intervals and by the methods prescribed in paras 4.1 and

 

4.1.5.

 

paras 4.1 and 4.1.5:

 

4.1 Flight under the IFR

 

4.1.1 An aircraft operating under the IFR must be navigated by:

 

a. an approved area navigation system that meets performance

 

requirements of the intended airspace or route; or

 

b. use of a radio navigation system or systems on routes where,

 

after making allowance for possible tracking errors of ±9°

 

from the last positive fix, the aircraft will come within the rated

 

coverage of a radio aid which can be used to fix the position

 

of the aircraft.

 

4.1.5 Position Fixing

 

4.1.5.1 A positive radio fix is one determined by:

 

a. the passage of the aircraft over an NDB, VOR, TACAN,

 

marker beacon or a DME site; or

 

b. the intersection of two or more position lines which intersect

 

with angles of not less than 45° and which are obtained from

 

NDBs, VORs, localisers or DMEs in any combination. For the

 

purpose of this paragraph, a position line must be within the

 

rated coverage of the aid with the exception that if a fix is

 

determined entirely by position lines from NDBs, the position

 

lines must be within a range of 30NM from each of the NDBs;

 

or

 

c. GNSS meeting the equipment requirements of GEN 1.5

 

Section 2

 

So it doesn't seem to be prohibited, but the actual requirements to do it legally seem pretty strict. In particular, without an approved GNSS the routes you can fly are probably pretty limited - mostly direct from aid to aid, unless you want to get fancy and start doing intersecting position lines. Even that might be impractical given the small number of radio navaids these days.

 

For practical purposes, VFR navigation is very much focused on navigation by visual reference to the ground.

 

 

[ian00798]

That's the second time I've seen that comment recently, and be damned if I can find a reference for it. What endorsement are you referring to? As best I can tell, I can install a VOR in my RAAus RV, and so long as I can demonstrate competence with it, can legally use it for position fixing and enroute navigation in flight.

Krviator, I think you and I are going to have to agree to disagree on some aspects of this issue as I believe the requirements are different to how you interpret them, but surely you can agree that some type of training would have to be done prior to actually being competent to use these navaids for primary navigation in anger?

 

 

[ian00798]

I have not renewed my NDB in my last 2 or 3 IFR renewal, and cant get a straight answer as to whether or not I’m allowed to use them as I conducted a 2D and 3D approach in the aircraft.

Unlikely as your probably not current for azimuth, you would only be signed off on CDI approaches at the moment I suspect. Similar to how you have to demonstrate a circling approach within the last 12 months to be able to do one in anger. If you had an aircraft that lets you do VOR azimuth approaches then possibly you could.

 

 

[ben87r]

Na, we did an AZI in the sim just wasn’t an NDB.

 

 

[Aldo]

Here are a couple of references that state that GNSS (GPS) should only be used as a supplementary tool for VFR flight. However there appears to be no mandatory qualifications for VFR flight by day using GNSS.

 

http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/wp-content/uploads/Safety_Net_Using_GPS_as_a_VFR_navigation_tool.pdf (not sure if this is still relevant)

 

CAAP 179A

 

5.1 Visual Navigation Pilots operating under the VFR may use GPS to supplement map reading and other visual navigation techniques. It must be stressed that this is not an approval to replace visual navigation techniques with GNSS. “Blind” faith in GPS is often blamed for a sharp rise in the number of violations of controlled and restricted airspace by VFR aircraft. Pilots should also be aware of the human factors and technical standards issues associated with different types of receivers and installations, as described earlier in this CAAP.

 

Pilot Qualifications

 

There are no mandatory qualifications required to use GPS by day under the VFR. However, pilots are strongly encouraged to become familiar with their equipment before flight and keep appropriate operating instructions within easy reach.

 

Aldo

 

 

[ian00798]

Na, we did an AZI in the sim just wasn’t an NDB.[/quoteThen I believe you can use NDB