Graham wrote:
3 hours of navigation training isn’t going to fix this. He knows how to navigate (it isn’t with a stopwatch and compass – giving him training in dead-reckoning is laughable) and he knows about controlled airspace (and ATZs, now). The problem is that he just isn’t giving the matter the attention it requires because his brain is 500 steps ahead (rather than the necessary 5).
@Graham, I’m not sure what is going to fix it for a non-instrument pilot flying a lot OCAS VFR using dead rec.
And even using Sky Demon – how many people had a proper lesson using SD?
For me the biggest problem with the CAA/DfT is that they delcare the rules, but not offer any real solution.
For example: “Take 2” (200ft/2nm), fly above MSA avoid CAS. I’d prefer to see some proposed routes around London for that. Uni-directional, just to aviod a/c flying in the opposite directions at the same alt! :) It is great that they say “take 2” but how could you do it in the South? You can’t! And if someone from the CAA (or pilot organisaitons?!) proposed the routes that are flyable, don’t require any clearances and give you some margin and some clearly identifiable landmarks/VRP, that would have been at least half-fair.
I don’t believe flying through a TFR is treated that leniently
Very true, but very different when viewed against the backdrop of
I don’t think anyone in GASCO is becoming personally rich out of administering them.
Not personally rich; we are only talking of tens of thousands which isn’t “real money” in modern terms. It barely buys you a kitchen 
I think it comes from the DfT and the CAA here is just doing what it is told, as CAA is not really making major policy decisions – that is in the hands of the Department for Transport.
I am not sure where it comes from, and I never met anyone who seems to know.
The majority, just fly in familiar local area, nearby places they know by heart
Indeed. If you got every new PPL to fly from Shoreham to say Oban, dead reckoning, the result would be total mayhem. In fact the result would be mayhem even with Skydemon :smil:
arj1 wrote:
And even using Sky Demon – how many people had a proper lesson using SD?
Who is even ‘qualified’ to give a proper lesson using SD?
I put ‘qualified’ in inverted commas to stress that although there are obviously no qualifications for doing this, I am not for a moment suggesting there should be. If you cannot teach yourself to use a relatively simple piece of software, do you have the smarts to be flying an aeroplane?
@lbra I took my 90hp Cub all the way to Barcelona once, and there are plenty permit to fly pilots out there doing quite ambitious cross country flights. (Should add that it may explain why the Garmin 196 is still popular, so I expect 95% of the no gyro, no radio nav community have a handheld GPS in the flight bag:))
Aren’t they likely to be using something like SkyDemon or ForeFlight rather than a Garmin 196?
Graham wrote:
Who is even ‘qualified’ to give a proper lesson using SD?I put ‘qualified’ in inverted commas to stress that although there are obviously no qualifications for doing this, I am not for a moment suggesting there should be. If you cannot teach yourself to use a relatively simple piece of software, do you have the smarts to be flying an aeroplane?
@Graham, I’m talking about a buttonology for the experienced pilots and the cockpilot flow for the less experienced (so they actually look outside!).
That is another issue – CAA wants us to fly the VFR route with an IFR precision (so that there is definitely no confusion between different VRPs) and still look outside. And no autopilot for most planes.
I took my 90hp Cub all the way to Barcelona once
Not wishing to minimise what must have been a great trip, but having done something similar under VFR too I would say the danger of getting busted is far less than going say Shoreham-Oban, with devils like “going for MOR world record” Barton on the way
Once out of the UK, it’s an easy route, and the French west coast RAs are either flyable at ~500ft along the coast, or you can get a transit, or you go a bit inland. In Spain, nobody cares.
With modern planning tools, one could fly fairly easily Oxford to Iraklion, with 99% of the “danger” being between Oxford and the UK south coast
I expect 95% of the no gyro, no radio nav community have a handheld GPS in the flight bag
For sure.
there are plenty permit to fly pilots out there doing quite ambitious cross country flights
It’s how you back it off with technology 
Old story: after getting lost many times while navigating in US and South America, Charles Lindbergh decided that crossing Atlantic without live wind data on wet compass will be his death sentence, he made a tailored earth inductor compass (have more stable heading than wet compass and even better than gyros), carried drift sight (for live wind data), a stopwatch and eight-day clock…anyone who flies with printed PLOG on forecasted wind using wet compass while hoping to dead recon in water would call him a cheater, better than dead or loser
arj1 wrote:
That is another issue – CAA wants us to fly the VFR route with an IFR precision (so that there is definitely no confusion between different VRPs) and still look outside. And no autopilot for most planes.
Yep, they tied themselves in a knot there. They still tell us that dead-reckoning is our primary tool, but clearly it isn’t suitable for the level of precision they now find themselves demanding. If pushed on the matter I expect they’d tell you to solve it through very defensive planning and staying well away from any CAS, but in the south east that isn’t realistic.
Take2 is a farcial suggestion when you’re already squashed beneath the 2,500ft base of the LTMA, unless of course you’re flying something light and slow that can be stuck in just about any field. I don’t mind it in the PA17 but in the TB10 I really don’t like being under that base – anything below 3,000ft is not a valid cruise altitude for me in that aeroplane.
Charles Lindbergh decided that crossing Atlantic without live wind data on wet compass will be his death sentence
Not really; if you work out the required track accuracy to start on the US east coast and hit somewhere in Europe, preferably Ireland, you have lots of leeway. His real issue was engine reliability; not a problem in today’s GA.
Also in the “old days” (basically anytime before about 1970) nobody cared where you flew. Lots of trips were possible, where doing the same today would prob90 end up with you brewed up into soup
They still tell us that dead-reckoning is our primary tool
The CAA cannot introduce GPS into the syllabus because the training industry would be mostly against mandatory GPS installation in aircraft or mandatory training in some satnav tablet product. I once spoke to their then head of licensing (a jolly old chap who liked his food and was about to retire on a comfortable civil service pension) and suggested that they could fudge it the “FAA way” (mandate a demonstration of all installed kit on a checkride). He said it was a jolly cunning idea… nothing happened. Of course the standard FTO workaround is to have a GPS but with an out of date database; this prevents the FE examining competence on it
