Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Roads, railway lines, rivers, hills and anything man made will be useful to try and locate where you are in relation to the map. I would not like to be in this situation.

Which is a good reason to have a practice every few flights.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 95
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

There is one thing that rules overall, and which can't be trained for - practical, hands-on experience. The long experience of "old hands" who have experienced every possible combination of things going wrong, and who know the way to handle the current Charlie Foxtrot that has occurred, is invaluable. Thus the reason for older people for leaders, Many a country has run very successfully with a leader well past "retirement age".

 

Most of the Boomer generation has a trade or skill developed over a wide range of experiences, and training from many older people with their skills and knowledge handed down.

They have a multitude of skills that the younger "me-me-me, shallow entertainment, smartphone and computer generation" lack. Many young people lack good hands-on practical skills.

They can be very proficient at manipulating key strokes and finding ways to do things with computer programmes, but they lack the important hand-on skills such as handling equipment, approaches to jobs, construction and practical repair work.

 

I was intrigued to find that all the Railways in W.A. up to 1929 were built by men with no tertiary education. These blokes had no degrees in engineering, but they were masters of railway construction in the most practical manner, using time-honoured skills, approaches and rules. They knew the cross-slope required for certain curve radiuses to prevent trains falling off the rails at speed - or they knew the maximum speed limits for those curve radiuses.

Nowadays, a railway engineer relies on a computer programme to generate the figures - but he often has no hands-on practical skills directly related to railway building.

 

A mechanical engineer I was in partnership with told me a story of a Middle Eastern engineering graduate he worked with. The bloke asked him if he might know why his electric razor had stopped working.

My partner said to him, "Have you emptied the cut whiskers out of it recently?". The Middle Eastern bloke looked a bit stunned, and said, "No, how do you do that?"

So he was shown how to flip the top of the electric razor and empty the cut whisker remnants out - a move that amazed the Middle Eastern bloke. And my partner exclaimed, "And this bloke had an engineering degree!".

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

When you've worked on a lot of stuff and done a bit of Materials and Structures study you can look at some things and "see" by looking that certain Parts are too lightly built. Likewise that some are over designed. Naturally these should be backed up by calculating loads/stress and where appropriate static or inflight testing. often with strain gauges. The B 727 Tail when test flown was discovered that the flight loads were 250% (Two and a half) of what was expected. That's hell of a lot of underestimation and it's unusually high. Being essentially a new type (rear engines T tail) the assumptions must have been way off. Of course it was beefed up and never gave issues but is a very highly loaded component. Nev

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

When you've worked on a lot of stuff and done a bit of Materials and Structures study you can look at some things and "see" by looking that certain Parts are too lightly built. Likewise that some are over designed. Naturally these should be backed up by calculating loads/stress and where appropriate static or inflight testing. often with strain gauges. The B 727 Tail when test flown was discovered that the flight loads were 250% (Two and a half) of what was expected. That's hell of a lot of underestimation and it's unusually high. Being essentially a new type (rear engines T tail) the assumptions must have been way off. Of course it was beefed up and never gave issues but is a very highly loaded component. Nev

Interesting; they must have used multiple engineers. There's a film floating around of the wing root test of the B727.

They locked down the fuselage to the floor, hooked a chain on to a wingtip, and winched the wingtip upwards, quite slowly because it built up viewing suspence. Up through about 15 degrees, 20 degrees, 30 degrees, 40 degrees, 50 degrees, 60 degrees, 70 degrees and still it was going up noiselessly. By this time the wing tip section was pointing upwards at 90 degrees, and still on it climbed and finally there was a BANG! and the factory filled with dust, pigeons departed and the broken wind swung back and forth. Made me very happy to fly in a B727 when the weather was rough, although the way the luggage racks pulled away from the ceiling then back again hour after hour had me concerned.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They did test the wing through about 27 feet of movement of the tip. (the 707 was much more) They got way beyond required strength but kept going to see what would happen The top surface of the centre section failed in compression ending up in small pieces. They just beefed that up and never tested it subsequently because it was way over design requirements. Nev

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is a good reason to have a practice every few flights.

 

it does not work this way. If it is DR and other independent navigation - it must be done every time, with full precision and procedures, not only practiced when you have time and resources, like a funny toy. Or at the moment when everything collapsed you are in the same nowhere. So it is obvious unreal, it rises the cost (efforts, time spent, risks due to distraction from control, requirements for track planning etc) so high that the whole process becomes impossible. Its like to always carry full month survival kit with you, 50 kg backpack even if you are walking to grocery store.

 

So all these emergency procedures must work without prehistory, ie they are obligatory absolute means dependable - GPS, radio beacons etc. You fear that your panel GPS fails? take 5 more GPSes with you - tablet, mobile phone, wrist watch, radio and fitness bracelet, everything now has built-in GPS. Even if it does not give precise information, real map and course directly to home door it will be enough to be not lost. At least you find the way to somewhere, not obligatory to where you wanted, but to safety.

 

And in the case of global GPS fault (sudden nuclear war with space explosions, killing all satellites in minutes without any preliminary signs) navigation will be not the most significant problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything in aviation is based on risk, calculated risk, life without risk is not life at all? All one can do on a personel level is reduce their own risks, that could be by carrying a dozen GPS devices all the way up to not even getting out of bed in the first place??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having redundancy based on ONE source system isn't redundancy. In Aviation never rely on only one source of info without an independent verification process existing . Eg Erebus & 3 AH's in an IFR cockpit and numerous fire warning circuits with test systems..etc Nev

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having redundancy based on ONE source system isn't redundancy. In Aviation never rely on only one source of info without an independent verification process existing . Eg Erebus & 3 AH's in an IFR cockpit and numerous fire warning circuits with test systems..etc Nev

 

The main thing is, however you configure your navigation scheme and it’s backup.....it must be a simple operation.

I have just gone through grief with AvPlan, just too complicated but I contacted support today and I am now on a ‘lite’ IOS version to see how I go with it. Whilst I have never used anything in a real world flight environment, I am planning for the day:-)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you retire without a plan or interests you usually don't last long. Boredom, then health issues, then the down hill slide till it's all over.

 

 

The indispensable Man

 

When you are feeling that you are important

And your ego is out in full bloom

You stand there and take it for granted

You're the best qualified in the room

 

When you feel that the thought of your going

Will leave an unfillable hole

Just follow this simple example

And see how it humbles your soul

 

Take a bucket & fill it with water

Put your hand in it up to your wrist

Pull it out and the hole that's remaining

Is the measure of how much you'll be missed.

 

You can splash all you like when you enter

And stir up the water galore

But stop and you'll see in a minute

It looks just the same as before

 

The moral of this quaint example

Is do just the best that you can

Be proud of yourself but remember

There is No Indispensable Man

This used to be on the back of the main door at 482 SQN Field Training Flight at Amberley in the eighties.

It has stuck with me all those years.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The thread is" navigation using the VOR" (VHF Omi Range). Clearly it is becoming decommissioned and there's less ground radar which once you could have used in emergencies. GPS is fine but dependent on factors over which a pilot has no control.. IFR flights had to PLAN with certain TSO'd Instruments on which the pilot is currently rated ticked off so it can be approved.. IF it's part of the planes equipment (often duplicated)and you were rated on it and it's sufficient for the route and conditions likely to be encountered you GO. Your plan is approved .

IF an aid goes U/S and you don't have another SUITABLE to cover you, you don't comply with the clearance any more. You were often trained on a DME homing procedure also which could get you down to a level where you could expect to be visual if the forecast allows it.. Use of any of these aids relates to weather and fuel for alternates, let down procedures and holding requirements as well as navigation between waypoints on specific IFR routes.

ALL that doesn't have much relevance to what WE do which should still rely mostly on map reading whether google maps or paper ones. and track keeping The WAC chart with height indications (Hypsometric tints) and contour lines is basic to that at a planning stage and in flight though not without issues in an open cockpit aircraft. On one of your flights just cover your GPS and see how you go after a while. It's easy to be too dependent on the GPS. Nev

s

The Ultra EFIS I have has a VOR but is based on GPS and doesn’t use radio signals

The good bit about that is that you can load your own points of interest and still navigate to them using VOR as if they had their own station.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of VOR's didn't quite line up depending on where they are sited. You changed over at about mid distance. VHF is line of sight so the higher you fly the better the signal. You wound the radial for the track that you wanted into it. Nev

Link to post
Share on other sites

can anybody help me with this one please?

 

I know about TTI etc, however on the modern glass cockpits the identifier will show on the VOR frequency eg "CG" Gold Coast, "TL" Townsville etc.

My question is - when the identifier appears beside the frequency, does it satisfy the Test requirement and dispense with the necessity of listening to the morse.

 

I ask cos "SU" doesn't appear for Sunshine Coast for some reason. If so, can you point me to the relevant clause in the legislation or the authority?

 

The reason I ask is because I'm sure I have read somewhere in the past that an identifier is all that is is required to use a VOR but I can't find and it may be from the US or Europe and not applicable to Australia.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know about the glass set up but the usual VOR had a failure flag .You always had to ident when transferring or setting a course.. perhaps none of this is relevant to you. nev

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know about the glass set up but the usual VOR had a failure flag .You always had to ident when transferring or setting a course.. perhaps none of this is relevant to you. nev

Most modern EFIS have a red 'NAV' flag as well if reception is lost.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having redundancy based on ONE source system isn't redundancy. In Aviation never rely on only one source of info without an independent verification process existing . Eg Erebus & 3 AH's in an IFR cockpit and numerous fire warning circuits with test systems..etc Nev

 

if GPS system (satellites etc) fails - loss of your current position will be the smallest problem in the world. At least any smart mobile/tablet can position you with precision of 2-3 miles just on mobile network, without gps reception at all, this is enough to find the way home.

 

Erebus and other DR losses happened due to independent systems, where you have to rely on youself only.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the GPS systems fail due to a CME the mobile phone system and practically all electrical communications world wide will also go down. If your aircraft engine is not dependent on electronics it should continue to function but navigation will be 100% manual and if you do not have any steam instruments it will be seat of the pants flying like you have never experienced before.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the GPS systems fail due to a CME the mobile phone system and practically all electrical communications world wide will also go down. If your aircraft engine is not dependent on electronics it should continue to function but navigation will be 100% manual and if you do not have any steam instruments it will be seat of the pants flying like you have never experienced before.

 

Some of us have that seat of the pants experience ??20190613_122527_resize_1.thumb.jpg.6cdf29c743912c747799aca7d53bc183.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of us have that seat of the pants experience ??[ATTACH alt=20190613_122527_resize_1.jpg]53209[/ATTACH]

Could be eye-watering in bindii country!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could be eye-watering in bindii country!

Or scotch thistle....

Link to post
Share on other sites
Having redundancy based on ONE source system isn't redundancy. In Aviation never rely on only one source of info without an independent verification process existing . Eg Erebus & 3 AH's in an IFR cockpit and numerous fire warning circuits with test systems..etc Nev
Except that CAsA have decreed that having only 1 TSO'd GPS (C145/6) is sufficient for sole-means IFR navigation without requiring an alternate! What would happen at night, in IMC enroute if that single GPS were to fail is the million-dollar question.

 

I don't have a VOR in the RV, and don't see the point either. Any TSO'd GPS newer than C129 is sufficient to push the "Time to positive fix" out from 30 minutes for VFR to 2 hours, you don't need station passage or intersecting radials from a VOR. A waste of time, money and weight in a modern cockpit. The only reason I'd install one would be for an ILS, but never a standalone VOR.

 

Anyway...Here's a bit of my handiwork from a few years ago, showing the remaining VOR's in Australia and their effective ranges.

 

Nationwide coverage at 10,000'. Red is ASA, Blue is private. Green is DoD.

27644816906_8d7ac505e8_z.jpg

 

Victoria 5,000'.

27644818466_e246ae6930_z.jpg

 

Victoria 10,000'.

27579108472_a54e23f5ce_z.jpg

 

NSW 5,000'.

27579114352_36b5866804_z.jpg

 

NSW 10,000'.

27069300073_9b7d5b2949_z.jpg

 

Queensland 5,000'.

27644822566_de5fc18d43_z.jpg

 

Queensland 10,000'.

27644818876_50fd0d222a_z.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...