The Comfort Zone

The rules of visual flight (VFR) are well stipulated and are designed to keep the non-instrument rated pilot out of harm’s way. However, the craft of successful VFR flight is more than merely measuring visibility or distance from cloud. It is about the ongoing assessment and application of a number of parameters beyond the regulations.

Am I Legal?

Safety in aviation should always be the foremost goal. Whether it is a quick scenic flight with friends or a trans-continental long haul flight with hundreds of fare-paying passengers, the primary obligation of the pilot is to ensure the safety of all on board. It is not an exercise in ego, or an absolute promise to arrive at the destination on schedule or even that day; it is about the duty of care for all on board and those whose roof-tops we overfly.

Through harsh lessons of the past and the ongoing review by governing authorities, guidelines and regulations have been established to point us in the right direction. However, there has never been a rule book, manual or computer program that is able to cover every scenario or cater to the varying levels of ability of the masses destined to apply the information. By their very nature, regulations tend towards the conservative side and rightly so; that is the safe thing to do. Yet even then the regulations may not be conservative enough for some individuals or situations and difficult to apply in the real world.

Visual Flight Rules are classic instance where the interpretation and application of a defined standard can prove difficult. They involve fixed parameters, calibrated in units of distance for in-flight visibility and the separation from cloud. Fixed units which are measured in the potentially highly dynamic air mass through which we fly at speed. Cloud bases fluctuate and visibility can shrink in the blink of an eye. This can be challenging stuff!

Furthermore, the average ability to gauge height and distance is, at best, marginal. One only has to look at the wide variation of responses from aircraft asked to report at 3 miles when there is no GPS or DME to assist them. To take this judgement and apply it to the fluid world of the weather raises the bar to a whole new level. 

Even so, as part of our cycle of activity, pilots must continually endeavour to assess the prevailing conditions against the legal requirements, bearing in mind that these are absolute minimums. Below these we are illegal; however, we were probably approaching an ‘uncomfortable’ situation some time before we actually reached the minimum requirements.

To safely operate in the visual flight regime, there is a need to not only strictly adhere to these pre-defined constraints, but tailor them to our own individual standards and the conditions that are set before us on the day. And all such tailoring MUST be applied on the CONSERVATIVE side of the equation as the countryside is marked with the wreckage of those who thought that their personal standards were better than the regulations.

Am I comfortable?

Flying should be enjoyable. Even when it is a paid profession, there should be a degree of gratification every time the world falls away from the wheels. That’s why we do it. There is very little fun to be had getting boxed into a corner which may ultimately cost your life. As such, one of the first and foremost questions a pilot should ask is, “Am I comfortable with this situation?”

This question can be applied to many aspects of aviation, but in the visual flight sense it rings particularly true as an early warning system. Generally speaking, well before the visibility drops to the minimum required or the fin starts cutting through the stratus, the heart rate will elevate and the hair on the back of the neck will start to twitch. This should serve as a signal to the pilot that they are starting to get towards the deep end of the pool; their feet may still be touching the bottom, but for how long?

The ‘comfort threshold’ will vary from person to person and change as the individual gains experience, hence the difficulty in applying a broad standard as defined by the regulations. The crosswind limit on an aeroplane may be 20 knots, but a lack of crosswind currency may render an inexperienced pilot to hesitate at going flying in those conditions. It would be legal, but would it be prudent? A dual check with an instructor would be a safer option and a sensible application of personal standards. In-flight weather is just the same. 5 kilometres visibility or 500 feet vertical separation may be legal, but may not be ‘comfortable’ to everyone.

In flight, at the first sign of discomfort with any particular scenario, the pilot should look at removing themselves from the situation or at the very least, critically review their circumstance and options. All VFR flight should be conducted with a ‘back door’, or a means of escape. It is foolhardy to continue towards deteriorating weather conditions but absolutely fraught with danger if the weather behind is also going bad.

Am I Orientated?

An escape route should be ever-present. At all times the VFR pilot should have a ready made answer for, “Where would I go if…?” When the rain is thrashing the windscreen or visual reference is silently lost in cloud, it is probably too late. Furthermore, the stress and workload of the situation will not permit the brain to offer the best resolution. Flailing charts and tuning radio aids knobs will rate a poor second to keeping the aircraft upright and out of harm’s way.

Continually through a VFR flight, the pilot should be aware of the nearest landing field and ensure that there is a clear route to it. It may be a private airfield, a farmer’s crop-duster strip or even a friendly paddock, but it is an option and ideally should not be released from clear access until another presents itself ahead, particularly when the weather is deteriorating. The field does not have to be in sight, but access to it must be apparent.  Even with 5km visibility, with no clear route to a landing field means that the pilot will be forced to possibly conduct a precautionary landing on an unprepared surface should the weather close in further.

To have suitable options and an escape route, it is vital that the pilot remains orientated and ‘situationally aware’. ‘Situational awareness’ can be defined as “…being aware of what is happening around you to understand how information, events, and your own actions will impact your goals and objectives, both now and in the near future”. To be aware of what is happening around you and how that may evolve requires the pilot to continually review the situation...........

Check back for Part Two of 'The Comfort Zone' and the next instalment in the 'Practical Pilot' series.

The Practical Pilot. Friendly Words of Warning.

Hi All,

In 2010 I flew around Australia to raise funds for the Royal Flying Doctor Service.

Along the way I filmed the journey in HD and took a number of digital images. However, I also took a number of 'snaps' with my iPhone. I subsequently put these together as a short video for my own enjoyment, but given the interest being shown in this blog, I thought it might be a good time to share it.

Please spare a thought for the great work for the Royal Flying Doctor Service and if you're at all able, please spare a 'dollar for the Doctor'. Donate to the RFDS.

Many thanks.

Cheers,

Owen 

Thor's Stepping Stones.

This line of storm cells made interesting viewing enroute from Sydney to Melbourne yesterday afternoon. With each growing cumulonimbus cloud building rapidly, they appeared to form the stepping stones for the 'God of Thunder' himself.

...and don't forget to visit the very popular blog titled 'Moments'

   In flight over Australia's capital, Canberra, on my around Australia charity flight in 2010.

                                Photo: Paul Sadler, 'Australian Aviation' Magazine.

"Queenstown. The Remarkable Challenge of RNP", continues.......

Tools of Trade.

QANTAS operate the Boeing 737-800NG on its Queenstown route and of these 737s, only those equipped with the more powerful 26K engines are scheduled for the service.  Additionally, the aircraft is equipped with technology that is the envy of some of its bigger brothers. Beyond the glass cockpit and the satellite navigation at the heart of its RNP capability, the aircraft boasts a variety of new age equipment.

Of premium interest is the HGS, or ‘Head-Up’ Guidance System, a device which has long employed by military aircraft. The HGS provides a means of transposing vital flight information into the pilot’s primary field of vision, negating the need to alternate between an instrument scan within the cockpit and an external assessment of the flight-path ahead. This is achieved through a unit mounted above the Captain’s head, which in turn generates the information and symbology onto a transparent screen, or ‘combiner’, between the pilot’s face and the windscreen. An HGS Annunciator Panel on the First Officer’s side provides information about the HGS status and warning annunciations.

Via a panel on the centre pedestal between the pilots, numerous ‘modes’ can be selected for the HGS, varying the information presented to best suit the phase of flight. A wealth of information beyond that normally available from a traditional instrument panel can be overlaid on the world outside. An aim point can be placed upon the runway and flown to, the landing flare can be guided in both timing and rate, speed error tapes permit precise speed management and TCAS resolutions can be accurately flown with the eyes outside the flight deck. There is a myriad of purposes for this state of the art equipment, but fundamentally they all equate to more precise flying in all phases of flight with the eyes remaining safely ‘outside’.

Another piece of advanced equipment is the VSD, or Vertical Situation Display. A component of the EFIS instrument panel, the VSD can be selected to show the vertical profile of the aircraft, its projected flight-path and importantly, the terrain ahead. By offering a pictorial display of the aircraft’s vertical situation with direct reference to terrain offers an additional aid to situational awareness above and beyond the traditional map display.

The system is designed to alert the crew of any discrepancies that may compromise the integrity of the approach. Certain messages such as the loss of LNAV or VNAV information, or the actual navigation performance (ANP) failing to maintain the standard required highlight as bold messages across the pilot’s map displays. Additionally, as display functions, warnings annunciate when the pilot’s altimeter settings are in disagreement and the Navigation Performance Scales (NPS) also sum any cross-comparison errors to ensure containment is maintained. Protection also exists against barometric setting (QNH) errors on final approach by way of the display representing a vertical offset from the planned path.

The QANTAS 737NGs also feature an enhanced ground proximity warning system (EGPWS), that features a look-ahead alerting system as distinct to the older systems that offered warnings based upon a rate of closure and level of separation purely with the landscape directly below. The aircraft also has a predictive windshear function that can alert the crew of an impending event well in advance of the indications becoming obvious through conventional instrumentation.

Key to maximising performance in Queenstown operations is the Electronic Flight Bag (EFB). While company manuals are also held here in a digital form on this tough-built laptop computer, it is in the area of take-off and landing performance that the EFB is a critical tool for Queenstown. It allows the optimum figures for arrival and departure in a way that traditional manuals would struggle to match. This equates to the best possible outcomes for payload both into and out of a relatively performance-limited airfield.

For all of this investment in technology, the point is not wasted on the humans that must operate the systems. The pilots that operate into Queenstown for QANTAS are limited in numbers and form what is termed as the ‘Control Group’. The purpose of the Control Group is to ensure that pilot recency into Queenstown is maintained. Given the frequency of service and the challenges of the port, the goal is for pilots to operate to at least 3 times every two months to maintain a level of competency on the sector. Additionally, the crews operating to Queenstown undergo additional training above any mandated requirements, including additional simulator sessions and a mandatory day of ground school each year. Through limiting the numbers, it is also easier to disseminate any new information relating to Queenstown without delay. Landings are also limited to Control Group Captains at the New Zealand port. They undergo additional training which is staged through a defined syllabus which calls for a defined number of arrivals and simulator sessions before their approval is down to the lowest available minimum altitudes.

There is no denying the challenges of Queenstown operations, but as always the key to safety lies in a combination of both technology and the human factor. Both elements are well supported by the airline through the 737NG fleet and under the experienced, watchful eyes of Captains Ian Brinkworth and Alex Passerini.

       Turning 'Finals' Runway 05 at Queenstown. (S.Ruttley)

Flying the Route.

The QANTAS flights to Queenstown starts well in advance of the aircraft pushing back the international terminal. Flight dispatch and load control start looking at the possible prevailing conditions a couple of days before the flight. Similarly, most crews will start reviewing the situation the day before, particularly with reference to the anticipated weather, while an extensive briefing is provided by QMET on the morning of departure. The Integrated Operations Centre (IOC) is also critical in tying all the components together preflight, but also continues to monitor the flight and liaise with it throughout and provide timely information in relation to weather and anticipated payload ex-Queenstown.

Flight planning this ETOPS flight is a critical process as a change in runway surface conditions can have a significant effect on performance. Crews also carefully confirm the anticipated satellite coverage for arrival and departure as this directly impacts upon the level of RNP operations that can be conducted. As mentioned, regardless of the weather, the arrival is always planned with enough fuel to divert to another port, nominally Christchurch. Once at the aircraft, pre-flight is a busy time of verifying the validity of the EFB database, ensuring the additional overwater equipment is on board, tuning the HF radios and attending to the routine duties of the day’s first flight.

Not long after departure, the flight deck becomes quite a busy environment. The flight log is completed to check the ETA at Queenstown and this is then forwarded to both the company and the control tower via ACARS. The latest weather forecasts for all possible ports are obtained and the suitability to continue the ETOPS operation is confirmed. Much of this information gathering must be achieved in a timely manner before VHF ACARS coverage fades approaching top of climb, although the option of obtaining such information by HF radio still exists.

Enroute to Queenstown, the crew will inevitably calculate a number of varied conditions for both runways for their arrival using the EFB. Some considerations include, the maximum acceptable tailwind components for landing on each runway, the performance penalties imposed should the runway surface become wet, and a modified approach reference speed should the aircraft have been loaded with a slightly more aft centre of gravity. They will also endeavour to work through some limiting scenarios for departure based on the current conditions if time permits.

The arrival to Queenstown is thoroughly briefed and this often includes the consideration of alternate approaches to a degree. This is because the fluctuating weather conditions at the airfield and the traffic sequencing can sometimes avail a change to routing and the assigned RNP procedure. Invariably a maximum flap setting, Flap 40, landing is planned and non-normal and diversion contingencies are discussed. This is all completed well before top of descent to allow the crew to focus on the approach ahead.

Given the potentially strong winds and high peaks that surround Queenstown, the aircraft is invariably slowed down earlier and the passengers and crew seated to safeguard against any possibility of mechanical turbulence. While containment along the route laterally and vertical limitations are closely monitored, ground speed also warrants due attention. Strong tailwinds can mean that the ground-speed of the aircraft may spike the EGPWS system. As always, a conservative approach to configuration management offers the safest solution.

The Queenstown RNP arrivals in clear conditions are stunning, with initial phases taking in spectacular views of the peaks, ski-fields and waterways. For Runway 05, the latter stages are conducted in the shadow of the towering ‘Remarkables’ before a descending right turn over Lake Wakatipu brings the runway threshold clearly into view. For Runway 23, the aircraft begins its turn back to the airfield near the hamlet of Cromwell and flies down the valley. Passing beneath is Bungy Bridge where A.J. Hackett started the past-time of bungy-jumping while ahead on short final, the 737NG makes a smooth transition around one final hill before aligning with the runway, at which time the autopilot is normally disengaged.

Once at Queenstown, the departure calculations are made and via the EFB a range of flap settings up to Flap 25 are available. The weather for the return flight is checked and the fuel/payload equation is refined to optimise the commercial aspects. As with arrival, satellite performance is confirmed to maximise the performance of the aircraft in the RNP sphere. The 737NG can also be operated ‘bleeds off’ on departure with the APU managing the pressurisation and the air-conditioning of the aircraft. This permits the bleed air that would be servicing such tasks to be used for engine power and maximise performance.

The departure is equally spectacular as the 737 climbs to a safe altitude overhead before setting course. The aircraft is maintained in the take-off configuration with a limiting speed of 180 knots until it is established at a safe point and heading away from the terrain. All the while, a safe ‘escape plan’ is available to the crew immediately in the event of a non-normal situation.

With the terrain well below and the aircraft re-configured for the climb and cruise, the course is set for home. However, regardless of how many times this arrival and departure is flown, it never ceases to amaze the crews themselves.                    

Where to from here?

Queenstown has often been seen as the RNP test case by many. Across the world, including in the US Congress, the development of RNP operations by QANTAS has been watched with great interest. Yet Queenstown stands in many ways as a test case for the broader use of RNP. The same elements that ensure safety in challenging terrain are also beneficial in avoiding noise-sensitive areas and facilitating efficient idle-thrust descents at less challenging ports. The future also sees RNP approaches transitioning onto existing ILS and GLS approaches, but at much closer proximity to the airport, obviating the need for long final approaches of 10-15 miles as they currently require.

As ICAO moves towards its 2016 goal of providing vertical path guidance to all runways, the QANTAS operations showcase the technology to its fullest potential. As other airlines adopt the technology at a growing rate, RNP will ultimately become the norm. For other types, such as the venerable Boeing 767, the future also lies with RNP. QANTAS recently decided to upgrade 17 of its  767 fleet for ADSB which means they'll be able to fly RNP-AR starting next year. The same flight guidance system found in the 767 currently operates RNP into Lhasa
Airport in Tibet.

RNP technology has brought the accessibility of airline services to Queenstown with an enhanced level of safety and service reliability. In its 90th year, QANTAS may pause to reflect on nearly a century of airline operations, but just as exciting are the years that lie ahead.  Destinations like Queenstown increasingly demonstrate that with the right technology and the right training, the future is already here.

Hi All,

Welcome to the ‘Friday Flyer’. The working week may be drawing to a close, but this blog just keeps humming along. This aviation blog continues to grow from strength to strength due to your ongoing support. The numerous positive comments and emails reinforce that the diverse and original aviation content is what you’re looking for, so I’ll continue to endeavour to provide it.

It’s been a busy week here at the aviation blog. There was a late night chat with the lads from PCDU for Episode 82 of their popular podcast. It is currently being edited and should be set for release next week. There was my first ‘Guest Blog’ at Airline Reporter regarding the Boeing 737.  These last few days also saw the first instalment of the new “Learning to Fly” series with "A Matter of Course" and this is set to become a popular ongoing series if the traffic numbers are any indication. As always there were interesting stories to complete for the upcoming edition of Australian Aviation.

As always, the new content is ever-popular, but some of the older posts continue to attract the visitors.

1. So You Want to be a Pilot?

2. The Fatal Stall

3. The Big Bang Theory....of aircraft engines.

I am hard at work on my next manuscript and the good news is that it is nearing completion, so stay tuned for the latest news. One person who has completed the process and is celebrating the release of her first book is Karlene Pettit. An established aviation blogger from the United States, Karlene’s book "Flight for Control" hit the shelves this week. Congratulations! Having been through the process with "Down to Earth", I can truly share the excitement of seeing that first book ‘in the flesh’.

So what’s for next week? Another instalment in the “Learning to Fly” series and a look at another “Fatal Stall”. There will be the conclusion to "The Remarkable Queenstown RNP" and more original content and images. Thanks again for your support as it is your interest that keeps me writing. So tell your friends and spread the word and together we can share this journey of aviation.

Cheers for now,

Owen

For over 90 years of aviation, QANTAS has been at the forefront of numerous technological advances. From the dawn of the jet age and the Boeing 707 to the certification of the Future Air Navigation System (FANS) was in 1995. Today the airline is once again at the cutting edge with advanced navigation development. Nowhere is this more evident than in its challenging operations into New Zealand’s Queenstown Airport where the latest technology has their Boeing 737-800s setting the pace.

A Remarkable Place.

As destinations go, they don’t come much more dramatic or scenic than Queenstown, New Zealand. The mountain range known as The Remarkables tower 7,500 feet above sea level and along with the surrounding peaks draw ski enthusiasts from around the globe. But there is more to the region’s beauty than its seasonal white blanket of snow. On a clear day, its dramatic peaks reflect in the glassy surface of Lake Wakatipu and it is easy to see why it was found suitable as the mythical “Middle Earth” in filming “The Lord of the Rings”.

It is undoubtedly one of the most beautiful areas around which to fly and this is further evidenced by the amazing amount of general aviation traffic that operates from the airport and the surrounding waterways. There are aerobatic joy-flights, parachute operations, scenic journeys to the nearby Milford Sound, heli-skiing and so much more, giving the region a distinct sense of aviation. Yet the location of Queenstown Airport (NZQN) is not what one may regard as geographically ideal for aviation.

The airport effectively sits in a natural bowl, surrounded by peaks and ridge lines. The terrain is not the only challenging aspect as the winds that swirl around the basin can vary significantly in both speed and direction at different levels. Even on a crystal clear day, the combination of traffic and terrain can make manoeuvring an airline category aircraft challenging, so any deterioration of weather conditions further contributes to the demands of making an approach or departure.

The airfield has long been serviced by traditional non-precision approaches and specific visual procedures; however they are less than ideal. The absence of vertical path guidance is one factor, while the inability to align the approaches with the runway or achieve an effective instrument approach are others.

At the bottom end of the instrument approach, the runway is 30 metres wide and a touch under 1800 metres in length, effectively limiting the port to operations by Boeing 737s and Airbus A320s. While a very proficient control tower is operational, there is no radar coverage, further increasing the tolerances required for procedural separation. However, in the near future, a Wide Area Multilateration system will be introduced to aid situational awareness.

In so many ways, operations to and from Queenstown can present a variety of challenges to crews. As a destination the enhanced safety and efficiency on offer through RNP operations elevated the profile of the South Island ski resort in the aviation world. If RNP could be proven to work here, then its overall potential and credibility could only grow.

The Right Approach.

RNP approaches dispense with the limiting rigid straight lines, arcs and trapezoidal obstacle clearance of traditional instrument approaches and departures. By maintaining an ‘area of containment’ relative to the designed track, it is possible to permit optimised routing, clear of terrain, noise sensitive areas and high density airspace.

In the case of Queenstown, terrain is the limiting factor. While the challenges of terrain are obvious, operationally it makes the design of conventional VOR approaches and departure procedures a very challenging task and this equates to higher instrument approach minimas. Higher minimas in turn equate to a lowered assurance of being able to become visual when weather descends upon the airfield and this impacts directly upon the commercial reliability of the service.

For example, the best case scenario for a traditional VOR approach minima into Queenstown is 4,600’ or around 3,400’ AGL. In comparison, the RNP-AR 0.1 onto Runway 05 as pioneered by QANTAS can achieve a minimum altitude of 1451’, or a mere 291’ AGL. Furthermore, the RNP-AR approaches establish the aircraft on final, stable and aligned with the runway. By comparison, the VOR approach still calls for some challenging manoeuvring within the basin to ultimately achieve a landing as the approach leaves the aircraft well above profile to effect a straight-in landing.

Similarly, on departure, the RNP calls for a minimum cloud base 300’, while the old-style departure tracks require a 4000’ ceiling or greater. Like the arrival, the departure provides both lateral and vertical guidance to maintain the aircraft within its safe area of containment as it climbs to achieve the minimum safe altitude (MSALT) of 10,600’ within 15 miles.

Even so, there are RNP approaches and there are RNP-AR approaches. The former are generic approaches designed under the limitations of PANS-OPS Doc 9905, while the latter ‘Authorisation-Required’ tailored approaches are designed by GE/Naverus in conjunction with QANTAS. However, both containing the critical element of vertical path guidance and position the aircraft favourably to conduct a landing. However, the improvements are not merely at the minimum altitudes, as the vertical path guidance offered by RNP approaches is also a significant safety enhancement.

At Queenstown, safety is also enhanced through RNP by the precise ‘engine-out’ procedures on offer. In the event of either an engine failure on departure, or a single-engine missed approach, the RNP offers a safe resolution despite the challenges of the surrounding terrain. The complex tracking is automatically availed to the crew through the FMC when the engine fails. They need only execute the modified routing and continue to fly the aircraft along the new track, ensuring containment at all times. As with normal RNP operations, judicious use of the autopilot provides the best means of ensuring flight within the specified tolerances, while managing the aircraft’s flight-path and configuration.  So much so, that its use is not simply preferred, but required beyond certain points on the approach and departure.

In the face of challenging conditions, the growth of RNP operations into Queenstown has offered not only greater schedule reliability, but an enhanced level of safety. Even so, nothing is ever taken for granted and all QANTAS aircraft operating to Queenstown are required to carry an alternate, regardless of the weather. Even with the best technology, aviation is a dynamic environment......

Check back for the conclusion of  Queenstown. The Remarkable Challenge of RNP.

This article first appeared in Australian Aviation Magazine.

"A Matter of Course" (Part Two)

.......The direct line “go to” function bypasses these waypoints and can stretch the sector length and consequently the time between any cycle of cockpit organisation. It can increase the period between radio calls and seduce single engine pilots over inhospitable terrain where their options are limited should the engine go silent. Even with a serviceable aircraft, rising hills can reduce the corridor beneath cloud  and add a further risk factor should the visibility drop and a 180 degree turn be called for. Even for flight in instrument conditions, the straight line can lead to higher LSALTs and lower freezing levels.

In fact, the apparent ease of GPS begs its use beyond its purpose. Some misguided pilots will ‘design’ their own instrument approach into their home port and fly unpublished approaches. Obviously these unsurveyed ‘approaches’ do not account for terrain in the splay, loss of an engine and adequate missed approach tolerances. Additionally, unqualified pilots have been caught out flying legitimate GPS approaches. Whilst this has also occurred in the past, the complexity of NDB and VOR approaches has provided a hurdle in many cases. GPS offers seemingly straight-in, runway aligned approaches to one and all at the touch of a button.

Even the ‘touch of a button’ can prove to be a trap. Visual flight calls for the vast majority of the pilot’s scan to be outside the cockpit. Impressive map displays and the need for data input drag that focus back into the cockpit and the expense of lookout. It leads to the pilot becoming ‘head down’ in a visual environment with increased risk of collision and reduced awareness of the surrounding terrain and potential forced landing fields.

It is a problem not limited to the VFR pilot. The rapid growth of technology in all areas of aviation has brought a new set of problems as humans interface with computers. Even the ‘big boys’ in multi-crew jets are prone to fixation and vulnerable to the errors of push-button data entry, The difference being that they often have rigid procedures in place to provide cross-checking and restricting ‘heads down’ operation in the terminal area. The single pilot doesn’t have this benefit.

The list of potential traps of GPS can go on. However, the benefits of the system undoubtedly outweigh these. It is the management of GPS, not the tool itself that generates the risks. GPS needs to be integrated into the visual pilot’s navigation toolbox; it is not designed to replace it.

Making it Work.

Used properly, GPS is the greatest aid to navigation available to the VFR pilot. It can provide a wealth of information at a moment’s notice. However, it needs to become part of the pilot’s overall navigation strategy, from pre-flight planning to post-flight review. Cross-checked and re-confirmed with the healthy mistrust that defines the situationally aware pilot.

In the planning phase, airmanship rather than expediency should always remain the determining factor. Even twin-engined airliners in the Flight Levels plan their route within range of alternate airfields in the event of engine failure or depressurisation. Look at potential waypoints enroute, navigable features, airfields and terrain with a view to them assisting your navigation and providing safe alternatives in the event of emergency. It can be surprising how few additional track miles are required to provide a significantly better route over ‘forced-landing friendly’ terrain.

GPS fits into this planning wonderfully with its ability to create waypoints along your route. Manually calculated tracks and distances can be cross-checked against those generated by the GPS when the waypoints are entered. Consequently, your navigation becomes an effective two-pronged attack in which visual reference and precision GPS complement each other.

Similarly enroute, the GPS information becomes a component of your cockpit cycle. Time, heading, fuel, track, log are all items that are re-assessed at regular intervals. By referencing the GPS within this cycle, its information can be directly compared to other navigational aspects and assists in avoiding fixation solely on GPS. This fixation can lead to dependency and that is when other supporting forms of navigation can fall away. An old rule is to confirm a landmark by three supporting features, perhaps a town, a rail junction and a river. Applying this to the GPS equipped cockpit, the GPS position can be one of these elements, but you still need to at least see the rail junction and the river.

It must always be remembered that it is visual navigation and the eyes remain outside the cockpit most of the time. This is not purely for the purpose of map-reading, but for collision avoidance and the ongoing assessment of weather. Not to mention that outside is where you’ll find the scenery too!

Post flight, the GPS generated data can be used to cross-check fuel consumption and what should remain in the tanks. As with the navigational aspects, calculate your long hand figure first so that the GPS figure doesn’t lead you to the same outcome by the power of suggestion.

GPS has revolutionised navigation. It has brought even the most basic cockpit blazing into the 21st century via a yoke-mounted moving map. It should always be treated with healthy caution as all interaction with automation must. Take care when entering data by small buttons in a dim cockpit and use gross error checks in advance to confirm the information generated for the pilot. Treat GPS with respect as a component of your navigational array and it will offer tremendous benefits.

Above all, you remain the pilot in command. The GPS is a tool for you to use and not the other way around. By adhering to the sound principles of navigation and airmanship, GPS will allow you to fly with a level of precision and assurance not previously experienced. Arriving overhead, on time and on track will simply be a matter of course.

Check back for the next in the ongoing "Practical Pilot" series and follow me via the RSS feed or Facebook for updates.

The Practical Pilot. Friendly Words of Warning.

                                        Three de Havilland Tiger Moths put on a show.

Hi All,

Here is the first in an ongoing series of 'Learning to Fly ' blog posts.

Cheers,

Owen

"A Matter of Course" (Part One)

A Revolution.

When Elrey Jeppesen plotted his way around protruding peaks and wild weather 75 years ago, he set in motion aeronautical charts as we’ve come to know them today. Decade after decade, the art of navigation has sought further precision and reliability as aircraft have increased in speed, range and capacity while our planet has seemingly shrunk at a similar rate.

The stars upon which the ancient mariners once gazed have been crowded by a sea of man-made satellites skimming across the night sky. From a constellation of these satellites in medium earth orbit, the signals are relayed that permit the calculation of a position down to a matter of metres, or less. And this is not the realm of lunar modules or long haul flight decks, this information can today be found on the dashboards of hire cars and mobile phones.

These Global Positioning Systems (GPS) have revolutionised not only the ‘how’ of navigation, but the ‘who’. Precision is at the fingertips of the masses on a moderate budget. For aviators who transit the three dimensions without the comfort of pulling over to the kerb, GPS has proved a blessing. It has also reinforced that in navigation we should look before we leap.

The Hills Are Alive.

It was once said that the only hard thing about aviation is the ground. Whilst a gross over-simplification, there is no denying that controlled flight into terrain (CFIT) has plagued aviation from its earliest days. Perfectly serviceable aircraft have been flown into the ground for all manner of reasons. For visual pilots, often weather has played a major role, forcing pilots down amongst the treetops or diverting them off track as they struggle remain clear of cloud and rain.

In such scenarios, correctly used, GPS is potentially a pilot’s greatest ally. The ever-improving moving map displays and terrain overlays offer a greatly enhanced aid to situational awareness. Furthermore, in these high workload situations flailing charts and dropped protractors have been replaced by an accurate, track-oriented display.

So why are the old demons still with us and VFR pilots impacting the terrain?

Obviously the reasons are many, from airmanship issues to planning and enroute decision making. However, one aspect of these tragedies involves GPS. In some cases, this great advance in navigation can actually reduce the level of a pilot’s situational awareness and lead to fixation and dependency. This is not the fault of GPS, rather the way that we as pilots interface with it.

A Double-Edged Sword.

Visual navigation has always been a challenging aspect of aviation and consequently one of the most satisfying. At the mercy of the invisible wind and the seasonal changing of terrain, the picture can look significantly different from 500 feet to 5000 feet. These variables must always be factored into the mathematics of speed, heading and time. Consequently, this form of navigation is often thought of as an art as well as a science.

GPS has increased the science by offering not only precise position information, but direct tracking and so much more at the touch of a button. For some, the ease at which these numerous functions can be achieved has come at the cost of their basic navigation skills. The art has been replaced by a dependence upon technology.

In navigation, straight lines are preferable, right? The shortest distance equates to reduced flight times and savings through reduced fuel burn and engine wear. In truth, the answer is both yes and no. It is true that straight lines are more efficient, but airmanship encompasses so much more than pure numbers. Direct tracks do not always consider terrain, freezing levels or airspace organisation.

Where possible, visual flight routes have traditionally been planned to permit the confirmation of an aircraft’s position and progress by reference to ground based features. By default, these features have generally equated to better terrain. Roads and rail lines have sought to wind their way around particularly rugged country due to ease of construction. Towns have subsequently grown along these thoroughfares and waterways, all of which offer aids to the task of map reading.

Such waypoints offer more than merely a visual fix of one’s position. They prompt a cycle of cockpit management that encompasses many elements, including fuel management, time-keeping, compass alignment, log-keeping, chart organisation and so on. Without these waypoints it calls for a different skill set and self discipline to avoid motorway-style, cruise control and white line fever. Just set and forget..........

Check back for Part Two and the next instalment in the 'Practical Pilot' series.

The Practical Pilot. Friendly Words of Warning.