More KAP 140 questions

[News]

I have another KAP 140 question for the group. Is there a way to have a
dual axis w/ pre-select model of the KAP140 act as though it is only a
single axis? Sometimes I want to engage the AP in heading mode but take
care of pitch myself. Engaging the AP in heading mode makes the AP
automatically go into vertical speed mode. When on a VOR approach (or other
non-precision approach) it would be nice to have the AP track a course or
heading, but I don't trust it to level off at the step down fixes in a
timely manner. During cruise, though, I might use altitude hold while I am
busy briefing the approach, getting ATIS, etc...
I can't figure out how to get one without the other. Is there a way to do
this?

Thank you.

[Craig Prouse]

"News" wrote:

> I have another KAP 140 question for the group. Is there a way to have a
> dual axis w/ pre-select model of the KAP140 act as though it is only a
> single axis?

No, with the KAP 140, either you are flying the airplane or the autopilot is
flying the airplane. When the autopilot is flying, you should not attempt
to control the airplane with the yoke in either axis. It controls the
horizontal. It controls the vertical. Do not adjust your set.

Whether you trust the autopilot to fly an approach, or whether you should,
is a matter for philosophical debate. I've always hand-flown all of my
approaches in actual. I've practiced with it under simulated conditions
where I've been impressed that the autopilot can do a fine job for me,
unless I misconfigure it -- in which case the resulting deviation can be
extremely disorienting.

[Peter Bondar]

The badly mistyped response I raised on the KAP140 reference the ILS is that
many installations have a relay/switch that slects either NAV1 or GPS as
the
source for the HSI and hence the KAP140.

In most installations the tuning of an ILS/LOC frequency AUTOMATICALLY
forces the switch/relay into
NAV mode.

If you have a real ILS frequency tuned you smoothly intercept and track the
localiser if you are lined up
in the area, if its a not real frequency it stays in nav mode but drifts on
in pace not really knowing where its going!

Personally twice I've had a helpful co-pilot collegaue tune in an ILS to get
the dne distance
only to find the plane doing a beautiful intercept!

In VFR conditions with everybody watching very amusing, other times?


peter
"Craig Prouse" > wrote in message
...
> "News" wrote:
>
> > I have another KAP 140 question for the group. Is there a way to have a
> > dual axis w/ pre-select model of the KAP140 act as though it is only a
> > single axis?
>
> No, with the KAP 140, either you are flying the airplane or the autopilot
is
> flying the airplane. When the autopilot is flying, you should not attempt
> to control the airplane with the yoke in either axis. It controls the
> horizontal. It controls the vertical. Do not adjust your set.
>
> Whether you trust the autopilot to fly an approach, or whether you should,
> is a matter for philosophical debate. I've always hand-flown all of my
> approaches in actual. I've practiced with it under simulated conditions
> where I've been impressed that the autopilot can do a fine job for me,
> unless I misconfigure it -- in which case the resulting deviation can be
> extremely disorienting.
>

[Aaron Kiley]

Seems if you have a GPS with a nice big display, that you'd want to have
that up for situational awarness and load the ILS for backup/reference.
Then it would be obvious if you were flying off course.

Slightly off topic, but, one item on the Bendix King KLN94 is that when
flying an ILS DME, you are supposed use the ILS identifier in the
intersection page of the GPS for DME. (our new club Cessna 172/182 don't
have DME) Does this mean you should not load the ILS for referance? Can
you do both? Seems doing a DirectTo the ILS identifier would put the loaded
ILS on hold until the DirectTo was canceled. ... Aaron


"Peter" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Peter Bondar" > wrote
>
> >The badly mistyped response I raised on the KAP140 reference the ILS is
that
> >many installations have a relay/switch that slects either NAV1 or GPS as
> >the
> >source for the HSI and hence the KAP140.
> >
> >In most installations the tuning of an ILS/LOC frequency AUTOMATICALLY
> >forces the switch/relay into
> >NAV mode.
> >
> >If you have a real ILS frequency tuned you smoothly intercept and track
the
> >localiser if you are lined up
> > in the area, if its a not real frequency it stays in nav mode but drifts
on
> >in pace not really knowing where its going!
> >
> >Personally twice I've had a helpful co-pilot collegaue tune in an ILS to
get
> >the dne distance
> >only to find the plane doing a beautiful intercept!
> >
> >In VFR conditions with everybody watching very amusing, other times?
>
> I think this is why the automatic override of the autopilot mode (or
> of the HSI source, if you have an HSI, with the AP working off the HSI
> bar) is not used much nowadays. My plane (2002 TB20) does not have
> such an override; so you DO have to remember to select NAV on the
> GPS/NAV switch if you are going to fly an ILS (whether you fly it
> manually, or with the AP in APR mode).
>
> If you leave the GPS/NAV switch in the "GPS" position and do an ILS,
> and the last leg of your GPS flight plan just happens to line up (more
> or less) with the localiser, you may not realise for quite a while
> that you tracking the GPS track and not the localiser!!
>
> I am not sure which "confusion mode" is more dangerous.
>
> When I made this mistake I realised it before I got to the FAF so I
> can't say what happens to the GS indication..... you might be
> tracking the GS down, while tracking the GPS track in a slightly
> different direction!!!
>
> Just shows that one needs to understand the equipment in detail. But
> here in the UK it is hard enough to find an instructor who knows what
> an autopilot is.......
>
>
>
> Peter.
> --
> Return address is invalid to help stop junk mail.
> E-mail replies to but remove the X and the Y.
> Please do NOT copy usenet posts to email - it is NOT necessary.

[Craig Prouse]

"Aaron Kiley" wrote:

> Seems if you have a GPS with a nice big display, that you'd want to have
> that up for situational awarness and load the ILS for backup/reference.
> Then it would be obvious if you were flying off course.
>
> Slightly off topic, but, one item on the Bendix King KLN94 is that when
> flying an ILS DME, you are supposed use the ILS identifier in the
> intersection page of the GPS for DME. (our new club Cessna 172/182 don't
> have DME) Does this mean you should not load the ILS for referance? Can
> you do both? Seems doing a DirectTo the ILS identifier would put the loaded
> ILS on hold until the DirectTo was canceled. ... Aaron

I have the older KLN 89B GPS and the database does not contain anything but
GPS approaches and GPS overlays. There's not an ILS to be found in there.
I still monitor my ILS approaches by selecting the paired DME waypoint, or
in lieu of that a LOM or other named fix aligned with the localizer, and
dialing in the final approach course in OBS mode.

This might be one way to do what you need to do, while still doing most of
what you want to do.

[AaronK]

"Peter" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Aaron Kiley" > wrote
>
> >Seems if you have a GPS with a nice big display, that you'd want to have
> >that up for situational awarness and load the ILS for backup/reference.
> >Then it would be obvious if you were flying off course.
>
> Do you mean making the last leg of the GPS Flight Plan aligned with
> the localiser?
>
> There are no official GPS approaches here in the UK but the KLN94B
> does contain some things e.g. approach fixes.
>
>
> Peter.

Peter, In the US, the new KLN94 GPS has all the non-gps approaches in it's
database for reference. So you can load an ILS (you get a disclaimer that
it's only to be used as reference) and use it as situational awareness. But
if you need a substitute for DME, the KLN94 manual says you should use the
ILS identifier (like KYIP) and load it from the intersection page of the GPS
rather than loading the approach. If you do that method, you could probably
set the GPS to OBS mode and twist the OBS to the inbound heading. ...
Aaron

[John Clonts]

AaronK > wrote in message
...
> "Peter" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Aaron Kiley" > wrote
> >
> > >Seems if you have a GPS with a nice big display, that you'd want to
have
> > >that up for situational awarness and load the ILS for backup/reference.
> > >Then it would be obvious if you were flying off course.
> >
> > Do you mean making the last leg of the GPS Flight Plan aligned with
> > the localiser?
> >
> > There are no official GPS approaches here in the UK but the KLN94B
> > does contain some things e.g. approach fixes.
> >
> >
> > Peter.
>
> Peter, In the US, the new KLN94 GPS has all the non-gps approaches in
it's
> database for reference. So you can load an ILS (you get a disclaimer that
> it's only to be used as reference) and use it as situational awareness.
But
> if you need a substitute for DME, the KLN94 manual says you should use the
> ILS identifier (like KYIP) and load it from the intersection page of the
GPS
[snip]

I think you mean "...(like IYIP)..." here...

Cheers,
John Clonts
Temple, Texas
N7NZ

[Greg Esres]

<<use the ILS identifier (like KYIP) and load it from the
intersection>>

That would be IYIP, rather than KYIP, at least in the US. KYIP would
give you the distance to the airport reference point, and would be off
a considerable distance.

[Greg Esres]

<<I never found anyone who knew what the OBS mode did >>

Essentially turns the active waypoint into a VOR, and you can dial in
a specific course to fly to or from that fix.

[John Clonts]

Peter > wrote in message
...
>
> I never found anyone who knew what the OBS mode did - not even the
> instructor on a KLN94B all-day course I went on. So I use only the leg
> mode, and use the GPS only en-route. Don't laugh :)
>

That's very sad indeed!

[AaronK]

"Peter" > wrote in message
...
>
> "AaronK" > wrote
>
> >Peter, In the US, the new KLN94 GPS has all the non-gps approaches in
it's
> >database for reference. So you can load an ILS (you get a disclaimer
that
> >it's only to be used as reference) and use it as situational awareness.
But
> >if you need a substitute for DME, the KLN94 manual says you should use
the
> >ILS identifier (like KYIP) and load it from the intersection page of the
GPS
> >rather than loading the approach. If you do that method, you could
probably
> >set the GPS to OBS mode and twist the OBS to the inbound heading. ...
>
> I never found anyone who knew what the OBS mode did - not even the
> instructor on a KLN94B all-day course I went on. So I use only the leg
> mode, and use the GPS only en-route. Don't laugh :)
>
>
> Peter.

Whatever gets you there safely :-)

Was there a KLN94B? There is an older model that's a KLN89B. If that's the
one you have, it's a somewhat different animal.

Correction in my earlier post. KYIP is the name of the airport. I meant
IYIP the identifier for ILS Rwy 5R at KYIP. Thanks for catching that. ...
Aaron

[Mike Rapoport]

Yes. The OBS also stops waypoint sequencing on an approach or flight plan,
at least it does on the 430/530 but I am fairly sure that it does the same
thing on all the boxes.

Mike
MU-2


"Peter" > wrote in message
...
>
> Greg Esres > wrote
>
> >Essentially turns the active waypoint into a VOR, and you can dial in
> >a specific course to fly to or from that fix.
>
> Where do you dial the course? On the HSI course pointer?
>
> It sounds useful...
>
>
> Peter.
> --
> Return address is invalid to help stop junk mail.
> E-mail replies to but remove the X and the Y.
> Please do NOT copy usenet posts to email - it is NOT necessary.

[Doug]

What happens with the KAP 140 when you loose vacuum or the DG goes stops spinning?

[Ross Magnaldo]

Used a KLN89B for my instrument rating - the OBS mode was very handy for
holds and partial panel. When you set the GPS up in OBS mode the KLN89B
puts a line through the waypoint on the Nav 4 page and you can very quickly
visualise your position with regards to the inbound heading.

Ross
"Peter" > wrote in message
...
> It also sounds like it might be useful for flying an en-route hold
> (one which is specified at a DME distance from a real VOR). However
> they are easy enough to fly with the standard instruments.
>
> Peter.
> --
> Return address is invalid to help stop junk mail.
> E-mail replies to but remove the X and the Y.
> Please do NOT copy usenet posts to email - it is NOT necessary.

[Craig Prouse]

"Doug" wrote:

> What happens with the KAP 140 when you loose vacuum
> or the DG goes stops spinning?

It's a rate-based autopilot driven by the electric turn coordinator. If you
were to lose vacuum, the autopilot would continue to fly just fine as a wing
leveler, but it wouldn't reliably fly a selected heading and it might be
erratic or unreliable tracking a VOR/GPS course.

[Greg Esres]

<<Where do you dial the course? On the HSI course pointer?>>

Depends on the installation. On the 172R, yes, you just turn the OBS
knob or the HSI course pointer. However, if your setup is not wired
this way, you'd have to turn the cursor on and change the setting in
the lower left of the screen.

(Be careful...over time, the OBS selector can become misaligned. The
GPS will read the wrong course.)

As the other poster mentioned, it does stop sequencing as well. If
you have a flight plan, and you turn OBS mode on, then when you arrive
at the waypoint, it will not sequence to the next waypoint. It will
merely flop to a FROM, just like a VOR.

[Greg Esres]

<<It also sounds like it might be useful for flying an en-route hold>>

Yes, but you really need to put it in terminal mode to hold,
otherwise, the needle will barely budge when outbound.

[Peter R.]

Peter ) wrote:

> I never found anyone who knew what the OBS mode did - not even the
> instructor on a KLN94B all-day course I went on. So I use only the leg
> mode, and use the GPS only en-route. Don't laugh :)

With my KLN94 I use the OBS mode for VOR approaches. Direct to the VOR
used in the approach, then OBS mode. This allows the GPS to provide more
relevant distance information. The VOR approach in the GPS database many
times does not provide published approach distance information, since often
these distances are measured to the MAP, rather than to the VOR.

Additionally, I use the OBS mode to provide situational awareness when
intercepting an airway. If I just departed an airport and am given a
heading and a request to intercept an airway, I switch the GPS to OBS mode,
hit direct-to the VOR (or intersection) defining that leg of the airway,
dial in the airway radial on the VOR OBS, and momentarily flip the GPS/NAV
switch to NAV.

This draws the airway on the moving map (both the KLN94's map and the
multi-function display map), which gives me a good idea where the airway is
relative to my position. Once I intercept the airway, I place the GPS back
in LEG mode and again hit direct-to VOR.

It reads as if it is a lot of work, but it has become second nature over
time.



--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Peter R.]

I wrote:

<snip>
> and momentarily flip the GPS/NAV switch to NAV.

Uh, that should read "... GPS/NAV switch to GPS."

Proofread? What's that?

--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Greg Esres]

<<This allows the GPS to provide more relevant distance information.>>

I don't understand what you're saying. I don't see how OBS mode has
any relation to this. The distance information should always be to
the active waypoint, either in leg mode or OBS mode.

[Craig Prouse]

"Peter R." wrote:

> With my KLN94 I use the OBS mode for VOR approaches. Direct to the VOR
> used in the approach, then OBS mode. This allows the GPS to provide more
> relevant distance information. The VOR approach in the GPS database many
> times does not provide published approach distance information, since often
> these distances are measured to the MAP, rather than to the VOR.

This is not an approved use of the GPS equipment. VOR approaches are
supposed to be flown using actual VOR course guidance, or as a GPS overlay
approach. The latter must be loaded from the database because there are
operational consequences when you do it that way. Substitution of GPS for
ground-based navaids in the approach phase is limited to DME and ADF.


> Additionally, I use the OBS mode to provide situational awareness when
> intercepting an airway. If I just departed an airport and am given a
> heading and a request to intercept an airway, I switch the GPS to OBS mode,
> hit direct-to the VOR (or intersection) defining that leg of the airway,
> dial in the airway radial on the VOR OBS, and momentarily flip the GPS/NAV
> switch to NAV.

Why just use GPS for situational awareness, when you can use it to navigate?
What you're describing is just the normal GPS technique for radar vectors to
an airway, except that you've added the byzantine step of bring your VOR
back into the equation. You don't need the VOR. If you don't trust the
GPS, you can always back it up with the VOR; turn on the digital readout so
you can see what radial you're on, but leave the NAV/GPS selector set to GPS
and let your GPS navigate for you.


> This draws the airway on the moving map (both the KLN94's map and the
> multi-function display map), which gives me a good idea where the airway is
> relative to my position. Once I intercept the airway, I place the GPS back
> in LEG mode and again hit direct-to VOR.

It's not necessary or desirable to hit direct-to VOR in this case. Now this
gets into one of the more esoteric operational characteristics of your GPS,
but whenever you take the GPS out of OBS mode and back to leg mode, if the
TO/FROM flag is presently indicating TO the station (the VOR station is
still in front of you), the GPS will automatically set DTK to the correct
value for your selected OBS course which is ostensibly the airway. In other
words, it automatically does the right thing.

If, on the other hand, you do not roll out precisely on your airway, then
you insist on doing a Direct operation after returning to Leg mode, you have
now decided that it's OK to proceed to the VOR Direct from wherever you
happened to roll out rather than along the charted airway.

[Peter R.]

Greg Esres ) wrote:

> <<This allows the GPS to provide more relevant distance information.>>
>
> I don't understand what you're saying. I don't see how OBS mode has
> any relation to this. The distance information should always be to
> the active waypoint, either in leg mode or OBS mode.

Of course, you are correct.

My previous post's intent was not to strictly compare the distance
abilities of leg mode to OBS mode. I was comparing using the VOR approach
in the database (in leg mode) to "rolling my own" approach with OBS mode,
so to speak.

Many VOR approaches in the KLN94 GPS database (at least here in the NE US)
count down distance to the MAP. However, as you know, VOR approaches are
often published with distance to/from the VOR. For me, using the GPS to
monitor the VOR approach is situationally more beneficial using OBS mode
because the distance reported by the GPS now matches the published approach
plate.

Additionally, by using OBS mode I am able to set up the GPS ahead of time
so that the VOR final approach course is accurately depicted on the moving
map. If I leave the GPS in leg mode and hit direct-to the VOR, the course
is drawn from my current position direct to the VOR, rather along the final
approach course.

--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Peter R.]

Craig Prouse ) wrote:

> This is not an approved use of the GPS equipment. VOR approaches are
> supposed to be flown using actual VOR course guidance, or as a GPS overlay
> approach. The latter must be loaded from the database because there are
> operational consequences when you do it that way. Substitution of GPS for
> ground-based navaids in the approach phase is limited to DME and ADF.

<sigh> I am not *substituting* the VOR with GPS during a VOR approach.
Sorry if my post reads that way. I fly the VOR approach primarily with VOR
and use the GPS for distance and situational awareness (by having the
course drawn on the moving map) only. Properly setting up the GPS for
this type of SA monitoring is what I was describing.

> Why just use GPS for situational awareness, when you can use it to navigate?
> What you're describing is just the normal GPS technique for radar vectors to
> an airway, except that you've added the byzantine step of bring your VOR
> back into the equation. You don't need the VOR.

I respectfully disagree. The VOR becomes the waypoint that defines that
leg of the airway. Unlike other GPS's (notably the UPSAT CNX80), setting
up the KLN94 GPS to navigate along airways is a bit cumbersome in that it
involves programming all waypoints, intersections and VORS, where the
airway changes direction. To have the airway drawn on a moving map
correctly, you need to direct the GPS to the closest fix (VOR or
intersection) of the desired airway, then OBS off that fix the proper
radial.

Let me ask you this: You depart an airport and are given a heading to
intercept an airway. The heading you are given is not direct to an
intersection or VOR of that airway. Instead, the heading you are given
will eventually cross some undefined point of the airway. How do you
program the GPS to fly to this point?

I don't. I fly the heading, but for SA I like to set up the GPS as
described to give me a picture of where the airway is in relation to my
current course. I also back that up that with both VORs. Perhaps you
might think this both redundant and overkill; I do not.


--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Greg Esres]

<<For me, using the GPS to monitor the VOR approach is situationally
more beneficial using OBS mode because the distance reported by the
GPS now matches the published approach plate.>>

Gotcha. That makes sense. Quite often students want to go missed on
a GPS overlay when the GPS indicates something like 1.3 nm to the MAP,
because the underlying approach has a MAP 1.3 nm from some Navaid.
That's part of the problem having two approachs on one plate.

[Greg Esres]

<<I also back that up that with both VORs. Perhaps you might think
this both redundant and overkill; I do not. >>

I think you're using all of your available resources, which is a good
thing. It also seems like you're very knowledgeable about the
limitations and advantages of your equipment, which is another good
thing--and not so common. ;-)

[Peter R.]

Greg Esres ) wrote:

> <<For me, using the GPS to monitor the VOR approach is situationally
> more beneficial using OBS mode because the distance reported by the
> GPS now matches the published approach plate.>>
>
> Gotcha. That makes sense. Quite often students want to go missed on
> a GPS overlay when the GPS indicates something like 1.3 nm to the MAP,
> because the underlying approach has a MAP 1.3 nm from some Navaid.
> That's part of the problem having two approachs on one plate.

About three months after receiving my instrument rating I took a lesson
with a CFI who was also an active airline pilot. He surprised me by
directing me to fly a partial panel VOR approach when we were already
somewhere inside a VOR approach. Overload the pilot, then see how he flies
was his intention.

For distance and SA, I pulled up the VOR approach from the database, tuned
the VOR, pulled out the plate to brief it, and began trying to figure out
where I was. I used the GPS distance, which was counting down to the MAP,
not counting up from the the VOR (the VOR was was located early in the
approach, not beyond the airport) so I was unable to place myself on the
approach plate. Thus, I could not determine what my current altitude
should have been.

Needless to say, I failed his test miserably, but I learned several things,
which made the lesson a complete success. One of the lessons was how (for
me) to use the GPS to properly monitor a VOR approach. I spent the next
several practice approach sessions with a safety pilot practicing VOR
approaches.

--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Craig Prouse]

"Peter R." wrote:

> <sigh> I am not *substituting* the VOR with GPS during a VOR approach.
> Sorry if my post reads that way. I fly the VOR approach primarily with VOR
> and use the GPS for distance and situational awareness (by having the
> course drawn on the moving map) only. Properly setting up the GPS for
> this type of SA monitoring is what I was describing.

OK, I misunderstood. But that raises the question, why fly the VOR approach
with a VOR when you can fly it as a GPS overlay? You've got this great
technology sitting there, ready to give you nice stable course guidance with
the approximate precision of a localizer...


>> Why just use GPS for situational awareness, when you can use it to navigate?
>> What you're describing is just the normal GPS technique for radar vectors to
>> an airway, except that you've added the byzantine step of bring your VOR
>> back into the equation. You don't need the VOR.
>
> I respectfully disagree. The VOR becomes the waypoint that defines that
> leg of the airway. Unlike other GPS's (notably the UPSAT CNX80), setting
> up the KLN94 GPS to navigate along airways is a bit cumbersome in that it
> involves programming all waypoints, intersections and VORS, where the
> airway changes direction.

What did I say that is open to disagreement?

What you're describing is mostly the normal GPS technique for radar vectors
to an airway.

To clarify terminology, perhaps, you don't need a VHF NAV receiver to join
or fly an airway. So what I'm asking is in what sense is your GPS a
"situational awareness" tool vs. a navigation tool? Don't you just put your
IFR flight plan in your GPS and fly it?

You're also talking about changing back and forth between NAV/GPS modes
while doing something as mundane as joining an airway, and I don't
understand why. So I'm asking.


> To have the airway drawn on a moving map
> correctly, you need to direct the GPS to the closest fix (VOR or
> intersection) of the desired airway, then OBS off that fix the proper
> radial.

I don't think there's any disagreement here, although in some cases, a
"virtual" route can be contrived in the flight plan which will obviate the
need for OBS mode. You can, for example, add excess waypoints to make the
course line work out, even if you don't plan on flying via every single
waypoint in the plan. The GPS will sequence automatically while you're on
vectors and everything will work out nicely.


> Let me ask you this: You depart an airport and are given a heading to
> intercept an airway. The heading you are given is not direct to an
> intersection or VOR of that airway. Instead, the heading you are given
> will eventually cross some undefined point of the airway. How do you
> program the GPS to fly to this point?

I don't. How could I even know what that point is going to be?

I do it the way you describe that you do it, because that's the normal way
one does it, except I never have to mess with the NAV/GPS annunciator. My
desired airway is already depicted because I have entered waypoints into my
GPS flight plan to cause it to be depicted. All I have to do is fly my
vectors until the needle centers and then resume own navigation (turn and
track).


> I don't. I fly the heading, but for SA I like to set up the GPS as
> described to give me a picture of where the airway is in relation to my
> current course. I also back that up that with both VORs. Perhaps you
> might think this both redundant and overkill; I do not.

You can fly the intercept using VHF NAV, with or without GPS backup for SA;
or you can fly the intercept using GPS, with or without VHF NAV backup.

The only way NOT to have the GPS for SA is to use VHF NAV and not back up
with the GPS, which seems like a waste of a perfectly good GPS. One could
fly using VHF NAV and back it up with the GPS, but that seems like extra
effort and wasted opportunity to set up the GPS and then not use it for
navigation. It also sounds like the GPS is not fully integrated and
utilized in the best interests IFR CRM.

It is still somewhat ambiguous to me how you do it, but I submit that you
make it sound more difficult than it needs to be, so I'm trying to
understand what it is that you're doing and perhaps cajole you to try
something a little different.

For the record, I usually navigate exclusively by GPS. I may or may not
back up my navigation by keeping the appropriate frequencies dialed in on
NAV1 and NAV2, keeping both OBS aligned with my airway. It depends on how
critical it is that I have an immediate backup ready to go. In good VMC
it's usually not that critical. It's very rare that I ever need to select
the NAV mode on the NAV/GPS switch except to fly an ILS. So it's not like I
think in terms that my GPS is set up especially for situational awareness of
the airway intercept. The GPS is set up because that's simply how I
navigate. How else would I get established on the airway? See where I'm
coming from?

[Tarver Engineering]

"Craig Prouse" > wrote in message
...

<snip>
> For the record, I usually navigate exclusively by GPS. I may or may not
> back up my navigation by keeping the appropriate frequencies dialed in on
> NAV1 and NAV2, keeping both OBS aligned with my airway.

wouldn't it make sense to tune the radios as a source of "situational
awareness"?

It depends on how
> critical it is that I have an immediate backup ready to go.

I think tuning those radios has a lot to do with knowing where you are
enroute, in the case of some GPS failure.

> In good VMC
> it's usually not that critical.

A knapping we will go ...

> It's very rare that I ever need to select
> the NAV mode on the NAV/GPS switch except to fly an ILS. So it's not like
I
> think in terms that my GPS is set up especially for situational awareness
of
> the airway intercept. The GPS is set up because that's simply how I
> navigate. How else would I get established on the airway? See where I'm
> coming from?

We need to get sole means caught up to you.

[Peter R.]

Greg Esres ) wrote:

> It also seems like you're very knowledgeable about the
> limitations and advantages of your equipment, which is another good
> thing--and not so common. ;-)

Thanks, Greg. I imagine that many pilots who come from a computer
background really enjoy exploring and learning new computer equipment, so
learning the GPS is natural.

However, knowing the old reliable equipment cannot be ignored either. I
learned this last year when I and a copilot were flying to Boston in IMC.
I opened a soft-plastic bottle of water at 9,000 feet and the water sprayed
all over the GPS, causing a short in the Message button and rendering the
GPS temporarily useless. It certainly paid off that we had both VORs
already dialed in.

--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Peter R.]

Craig Prouse ) wrote:

<snip>
> OK, I misunderstood. But that raises the question, why fly the VOR approach
> with a VOR when you can fly it as a GPS overlay?

For practice of flying VOR approaches. :)

> You've got this great
> technology sitting there, ready to give you nice stable course guidance with
> the approximate precision of a localizer...

Oh, I agree. If I had to choose between GPS and VOR approaches, it would
be GPS any day in actual IMC, assuming the approaches were nearly identical
(mda, descent rate, straight-in versus circle-to-land, etc).

<snip>
> > I respectfully disagree. The VOR becomes the waypoint that defines that
> > leg of the airway. Unlike other GPS's (notably the UPSAT CNX80), setting
> > up the KLN94 GPS to navigate along airways is a bit cumbersome in that it
> > involves programming all waypoints, intersections and VORS, where the
> > airway changes direction.
>
> What did I say that is open to disagreement?

I was disagreeing to your comment about bringing the VOR back into the
equation. I thought you were wondering why I was navigating to a VOR in my
example.

I agree with you that it would be easier to simply program in excess
waypoints (perhaps one even at a point prior to my departing airport), if
those waypoints help to display the first airway.

> To clarify terminology, perhaps, you don't need a VHF NAV receiver to join
> or fly an airway. So what I'm asking is in what sense is your GPS a
> "situational awareness" tool vs. a navigation tool? Don't you just put your
> IFR flight plan in your GPS and fly it?

Mostly I do, but I also like to keep current from a FAR standpoint.
Sometimes I purposely will navigate with VORs to remain current as per the
instrument currency requirements, as wells as to maintain proficiency with
VOR navigation.


> You're also talking about changing back and forth between NAV/GPS modes
> while doing something as mundane as joining an airway, and I don't
> understand why. So I'm asking.

See above.

> I don't think there's any disagreement here, although in some cases, a
> "virtual" route can be contrived in the flight plan which will obviate the
> need for OBS mode. You can, for example, add excess waypoints to make the
> course line work out, even if you don't plan on flying via every single
> waypoint in the plan. The GPS will sequence automatically while you're on
> vectors and everything will work out nicely.

Yes, excellent point. I sometimes fly with another pilot who programs the
GPS from the first airway (including those extra points that define the
first leg of the airway) rather than the departing airport. I always start
at the departing airport.

Although I don't agree with leaving out the departing airport (in the event
one needs to get back to it quickly in IMC), I now see the value of putting
in those extra waypoints that show the entire first airway, rather than
having the first waypoint my first (usually VOR) waypoint en route.

<snip>
> The GPS is set up because that's simply how I
> navigate. How else would I get established on the airway? See where I'm
> coming from?

Yes. But don't forget those free opportunities to track a few VOR radials
for currency during those routine flights. :)

--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Peter R.]

Peter R. ) wrote:

> However, knowing the old reliable equipment cannot be ignored either. I
> learned this last year when I and a copilot were flying to Boston in IMC.

This should have read last summer, not last year. I only received my
instrument rating in March of this year.

Last summer does seem like a long time ago already. :)

--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Ron Natalie]

"Peter R." > wrote in message ...

> Mostly I do, but I also like to keep current from a FAR standpoint.
> Sometimes I purposely will navigate with VORs to remain current as per the
> instrument currency requirements,

There's no instrument currency requirements that say you have to use the VOR.
It says intercepting and tracking courses using navigation systems.

[Craig Prouse]

Peter R. wrote:

> Mostly I do, but I also like to keep current from a FAR standpoint.
> Sometimes I purposely will navigate with VORs to remain current as per the
> instrument currency requirements, as wells as to maintain proficiency with
> VOR navigation.

Ah yes, but 61.57(c)(1)(iii) only requires that you "intercept and track
courses through the use of navigation systems." It doesn't specify that you
have to be current on VOR navigation systems.

Since GPS is not approved for "sole means," I of course do my 30-day VOR
receiver checks. That's perhaps the main use of my NAV/GPS button, since I
don't get to fly an ILS every 30 days.


> Although I don't agree with leaving out the departing airport (in the event
> one needs to get back to it quickly in IMC), I now see the value of putting
> in those extra waypoints that show the entire first airway, rather than
> having the first waypoint my first (usually VOR) waypoint en route.

I would never leave out my departing airport. Best of both worlds. I
commonly depart SE from here after joining V107. The local segment of V107
is defined by OAK and PXN VORs. There is an intersection on V107 called
VINCO. Even though OAK is several miles north of here and my departure
takes me immediately south and east, I program my route as:

KPAO OAK VINCO PXN ...

The clearance is always:

Turn right heading 060° radar vectors ...

I simply ignore the fact that the GPS is telling me to fly to OAK, and fly
my assigned vectors. As I get oriented near V107, which is already
depicted, the GPS automatically sequences and makes VINCO my next active
waypoint. The reason I have to put VINCO in there is not because of a bend
in the airway, but because sometimes the clearance will morph into "direct
VINCO when able, resume own navigation." If I fly across V107, I fly into
the side of a mountain, so it's important that I not be screwing around
trying to dial in all the letters in VINCO right then. You can bet that
when it's IMC, I have that airway dialed in, identified, and displayed on
NAV2, so I won't miss the turn.


> Yes. But don't forget those free opportunities to track a few VOR radials
> for currency during those routine flights. :)

Once a year, I fly the Hayward Air Race, where GPS units and (even DME) are
disabled and impounded, and we fly a rigorous navigational exercise down the
Central Valley of California and across the Mojave Desert to Bullhead City
AZ, by pilotage and VOR navigation only.

It's great practice because you're trying to find sometimes obscure little
landmarks at the turn points, and you need to be low to see them, so service
volume becomes a consideration in flight planning.

[Peter R.]

Ron Natalie ) wrote:

>
>
> "Peter R." > wrote:
>
> > Mostly I do, but I also like to keep current from a FAR standpoint.
> > Sometimes I purposely will navigate with VORs to remain current as per the
> > instrument currency requirements,
>
> There's no instrument currency requirements that say you have to use the VOR.
> It says intercepting and tracking courses using navigation systems.

Yep, my mistake. Without an ADF, I have no choice but to practice VOR
navigation.

What other forms of navigation meet these regulations?

--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Peter R.]

Craig Prouse ) wrote:

> Once a year, I fly the Hayward Air Race, where GPS units and (even DME) are
> disabled and impounded, and we fly a rigorous navigational exercise down the
> Central Valley of California and across the Mojave Desert to Bullhead City
> AZ, by pilotage and VOR navigation only.
>
> It's great practice because you're trying to find sometimes obscure little
> landmarks at the turn points, and you need to be low to see them, so service
> volume becomes a consideration in flight planning.

Now that sounds like a blast! I definitely need to expand my aviation
horizons.

--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Everett M. Greene]

Peter R. > writes:
> Craig Prouse ) wrote:
>
> > Once a year, I fly the Hayward Air Race, where GPS units and (even DME) are
> > disabled and impounded, and we fly a rigorous navigational exercise down the
> > Central Valley of California and across the Mojave Desert to Bullhead City
> > AZ, by pilotage and VOR navigation only.
> >
> > It's great practice because you're trying to find sometimes obscure little
> > landmarks at the turn points, and you need to be low to see them, so service
> > volume becomes a consideration in flight planning.
>
> Now that sounds like a blast! I definitely need to expand my aviation
> horizons.

Navigation: head south keeping mountains to your left and
right until mountains also ahead. Identify Bakersfield and
turn left to follow Cal58 to Barstow. Proceed east until
Colorado River identified. Find Bullhead City. Stay low
east of Techachapi to avoid high-speed kerosene burners
(who may be lower than you -- ever seen an F-16 at 100
feet, inverted?).

[EDR]

> This is not an approved use of the GPS equipment. VOR approaches are
> supposed to be flown using actual VOR course guidance, or as a GPS overlay
> approach. The latter must be loaded from the database because there are
> operational consequences when you do it that way. Substitution of GPS for
> ground-based navaids in the approach phase is limited to DME and ADF.

On the KLN 94, if you do not keep the database updated, the box will
not allow you to select any approaches from the database.

[Teacherjh]

>>
On the KLN 94, if you do not keep the database updated, the box will
not allow you to select any approaches from the database.
<<

So what do you do in an emergency if you need an approach from the box?

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[Greg Esres]

<<On the KLN 94, if you do not keep the database updated>>

That maybe software configurable. Our schools DBs are now kept
up-to-date, but they didn't used to be, and I don't remember ever not
being able to select an approach.

[EDR]

In article >, Teacherjh
> wrote:

> >>
> On the KLN 94, if you do not keep the database updated, the box will
> not allow you to select any approaches from the database.

> So what do you do in an emergency if you need an approach from the box?

That's what paper is for. You do carry current approach plates and
enroute charts, don't you?

[[email protected]]

I've been partially following this thread over the last few days, but I
must say that I wish the 140 would allow a pure wing leveler or HDG mode
capability without the VS control. I must admit that I (now know that I)
hadn't completely RTFM'd before using it in a 172SP, and got caught by
surprise that I was getting VS control as well as HDG control.

I know I should've briefed the manual more, but in my defense the
single-axis Bendix/King APs that I'd seen before do (by the very fact
that they're single-axis) behave differently. My "logic" thought that
the dual-axis 140 would behave the same when I pressed the same button.
Doh!

But that's OK, I'm now flying an SR20 with the Meggitt 55X which behaves
the way I think it should 8^) .

Dave Blevins

On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 05:19:02 GMT, Craig Prouse >
wrote:

>"News" wrote:
>
>> I have another KAP 140 question for the group. Is there a way to have a
>> dual axis w/ pre-select model of the KAP140 act as though it is only a
>> single axis?
>
>No, with the KAP 140, either you are flying the airplane or the autopilot is
>flying the airplane. When the autopilot is flying, you should not attempt
>to control the airplane with the yoke in either axis. It controls the
>horizontal. It controls the vertical. Do not adjust your set.
>
>Whether you trust the autopilot to fly an approach, or whether you should,
>is a matter for philosophical debate. I've always hand-flown all of my
>approaches in actual. I've practiced with it under simulated conditions
>where I've been impressed that the autopilot can do a fine job for me,
>unless I misconfigure it -- in which case the resulting deviation can be
>extremely disorienting.

[Teacherjh]

>>
> So what do you do in an emergency if you need an approach from the box?

That's what paper is for. You do carry current approach plates and
enroute charts, don't you?
<<

So I pull out the chart for the GPS approach, and manually dial in all the five
letter fixes I'd be using? (Whoever designed this twist and look to cycle
through the alphabet should be given his own room in Hell). In an emergency
I'd rather take the entire approach out of the box, even if it's old (dialing
it in by hand won't guarantee fresh data if the database is old)

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)