Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
#1837360
Easy to see how this occured in hindsight, but I dont see how the instructor/training establisment is at fault. Those are pretty big visual turning points that were chosen, the kind of features you would look out of the window for even when using GPS as your primary nav tool just to confirm you were in the right place, and the Student had flown the route before. Lack of comment from ATC and complete lack of ATS is telling of the UK flying environment.

I can just imagine the Students train of thought "OK so Daventry was a bit bigger than I thought... Maybe thats not...what the hell is that airport?!?!?..." When he realised he did everything right.

Regards, SD..
TopCat, riverrock liked this
#1837364
I think that three things come out of this.

One is weakness in TEM, when briefing for the trip the obvious risk of misidentifying bodies of water should have been covered, when I was training ways of working out whether you were off course were considered and useful check points either side noted in the briefing and circled on the chart.

Second the pilot acted very sensibly as soon as he twigged he'd cocked up.

Third the value and use of the listening squawk in this scenario is questionable
lobstaboy liked this
#1837368
johnm wrote:One is weakness in TEM, when briefing for the trip the obvious risk of misidentifying bodies of water should have been covered, when I was training ways of working out whether you were off course were considered and useful check points either side noted in the briefing and circled on the chart.

What's the basis for concluding it wasn't covered as thoroughly as the procedure for being temporarily unaware of one's position? :wink:
#1837398
It beggars belief that before the introduction of GPS and the magenta line student pilots were actually able to navigate around the UK and its airspace using normal navigation techniques.

In fact once the 3 sector qualifying cross country with land aways was flown with an instructor the student was sent to do the same route solo, Halfpenny Green being a very popular destination via the Manchester low level route giving the student maximum benefit of using ATC services and navigating around controlled airspace.

Thankfully it looks as though this student had been taught by one of those dinosaur flying instructors @MattL by creating a proper PLOG, marking the map correctly and following a lost procedure by calling D&D and once his/her position was confirmed he/she was able to resume the flight to destination.
Rob P, skydriller, lobstaboy and 4 others liked this
#1837404
MattL wrote:Ps if you are allocated a dinosaur FE who doesn’t understand / won’t let you exploit GNSS then walk away and get another one.

It’s the only way we are going consign the past methods to history and do what is right for students.


Were you taught those dinosaur navigation methods by your dinosaur instructor ?
If not then good luck when your GPS stops working one day.

Obviously this student had been taught them along with the correct lost procedures and it saved the day for them.
lobstaboy, riverrock liked this
#1837424
MattL wrote:The only reference to dead reckoning is one line entry in Part FCL is Section 3 En Route Procedures, once this has been demonstrated to a pass standard it can be marked as pass. There is no Part FCL restriction on GNSS usage at any stage of the PPL or LAPL test in Part FCL or requirements for other specific legs etc in relation to GNSS usage. Standards Documents and the FEH are guidance documents only and years out of date (9 years in the case of Doc 19).


But that's my point, Matt. Judging from the thread that you and I took part in on the IFEA forum you and I are not in any disagreement about the archaic and ill-considered state of affairs with regard the CAA's line on navigational training and testing for ab initio pilots. But for as long as the CAA directs that tests are stadardised in line with Std Doc 19 and with the FEH (which incidentally was re-issued just last year) then it is unfair to point the finger at 'dinosaur FEs' or training organisations.

For sure this tale of an infringement highlights yet again (if that is really necessary) the lunacy of trying to navigate around the crowded airspace of the UK using 'traditional' navigation. And one's heart goes out to the poor student in this case. But the ire should be directed at the Regulator who regulates training and testing in the UK. For as long as that regulation is archaic and/or contradictory and/or just muddle-headed then we will continue to see a tension between common sense and the rules.

As you know from the other thread, I had the opportunity to discuss this issue face to face and then on email with a senior staff examiner at the time of my own FE reval a few months ago. I pointed out the discrepancies and was assured that the matter was under discussion within the CAA. Let's hope that we see some sensible clarification before too many more students find themselves in this predicament.
#1837440
When you get a NOTAM that GPS jamming will be in progress, do you ground yourself or do you trust a device when has effectively been NOTAMed as unreliable? Jamming can mean false signals as well as blocked.

If a student has a moving map in the cockpit, it is a huge temptation for them to ignore the physical map / Plog and just follow the screen.
flybymike liked this
#1837441
The one, heart-warming, aspect of this thread is the lovely warm feeling of SkyGodness that it gives me having flown from 1988 to 2002 without any hint of GNSS assistance without once knowingly (or being caught at least) busting any airspace.

I have always considered myself a substantially below average pilot (someone, indeed 49% of us, has to be). I shall now bask in the glory of my achievements from those years.

Rob P
Lockhaven, AndyR, Ian Melville and 2 others liked this
#1837452
Rob P wrote:The one, heart-warming, aspect of this thread is the lovely warm feeling of SkyGodness that it gives me having flown from 1988 to 2002 without any hint of GNSS assistance without once knowingly (or being caught at least) busting any airspace.

I have always considered myself a substantially below average pilot (someone, indeed 49% of us, has to be). I shall now bask in the glory of my achievements from those years.

Rob P


Me too. Though of course we *did* bust airspace occasionally but just didn't get caught because Mode S transponders were not available as policing tools. I well remember the police coming round the flying clubs seeking "the pilot of a blue plane who had stared into the eyes of a 747 captain on his final approach into Gatwick".

Did controllers get suspended if someone bust their airspace in those days too?
#1837547
Lockhaven wrote:
MattL wrote:Ps if you are allocated a dinosaur FE who doesn’t understand / won’t let you exploit GNSS then walk away and get another one.

It’s the only way we are going consign the past methods to history and do what is right for students.


Were you taught those dinosaur navigation methods by your dinosaur instructor ?
If not then good luck when your GPS stops working one day.

Obviously this student had been taught them along with the correct lost procedures and it saved the day for them.


Quite able to cope with a GPS failure thanks for asking. Teaching and testing GNSS failure and MDR as a reversionary method is required and entirely appropriate; denying students GNSS to students in training is madness. Next you’ll be telling me schools are still teaching and mandating use of the whizz wheel for PPLs.

This forum perplexes me. People spend pages raving about SkyDemon etc then in a thread like this people seem to be arguing we should deny this new capability to students because ‘it was alright when I did it back in....’ perhaps people think we should disable power steering, ABS etc on driving school cars so those students don’t have it easy?
G-BLEW liked this
#1837554
MattL wrote:
Lockhaven wrote:
MattL wrote:Ps if you are allocated a dinosaur FE who doesn’t understand / won’t let you exploit GNSS then walk away and get another one.

It’s the only way we are going consign the past methods to history and do what is right for students.


Were you taught those dinosaur navigation methods by your dinosaur instructor ?
If not then good luck when your GPS stops working one day.

Obviously this student had been taught them along with the correct lost procedures and it saved the day for them.


Quite able to cope with a GPS failure thanks for asking. Teaching and testing GNSS failure and MDR as a reversionary method is required and entirely appropriate; denying students GNSS to students in training is madness. Next you’ll be telling me schools are still teaching and mandating use of the whizz wheel for PPLs.

This forum perplexes me. People spend pages raving about SkyDemon etc then in a thread like this people seem to be arguing we should deny this new capability to students because ‘it was alright when I did it back in....’ perhaps people think we should disable power steering, ABS etc on driving school cars so those students don’t have it easy?


Where exactly did I say anything about denying the student or not teaching the use of GPS, I clearly stated that obviously this particular student had been taught in your words the dinosaur methods of navigation and lost procedures.

And as for doing it back then well thats how it was done, however there are some on this forum that believe its impossible to fly from A to B without a GPS, and 2 iPads running Skydemon, with an iPhone as backup.

Next you’ll be telling me schools are still teaching and mandating use of the whizz wheel for PPLs.

I see on another thread you are flying UAS air cadets, are you now telling us the RAF doesn't teach the art of navigation in accordance AP3456 and the use the MK4A whizz wheel anymore.