Future of aviation - fact or fiction

[Gene Seibel]

Monday I made a stop on a cross country flight to have lunch with my
daughter. Afterwards we dropped in to a used book store to browse. As
usual I migrated to the aviation section. The gem I laid my eyes on
this time was written in 1957 and titled, "Flying the Omnirange." It
touts the advantages and incredible possibilities of the fantastic new
VHF onmidirectional radio range (VOR) that was replacing the
low-frequency rado ranges in the 1950's. Here are a few paragraphs that
you may find interesting and mildly amusing. ;)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Here is the long-range program as visualized by the CAA and planned for
completion in the 1960's:

Before a pilot takes off on a flight a landing time will be reserved
for him at his airport of destination. While he is enroute a dial will
tell him continually, in minutes and seconds, whether he is ahead of or
behind schedule, and he will slow his plane down or speed it up
accordingly. On a screen in the cockpit the pilot will see a pictorial
presentation of everything around him. This picture, probably televised
from the ground, will show his own aircraft in relation to others in
his vicinity, indicate obstructions or other hazards, and even show the
location of storms and turbulent air.

At the same time, radar will be continuously watching him from the
ground. By means of a block system, something like that used on
railroads, the pilot will be assured that he is in safe air space at
all times.

His aircraft will carry equipment which continuously transmits to the
ground the readings of the cockpit instruments. Electronic brains on
the ground will check these readings automatically against information
derived from radar and other sources. If, for example, the altitude
shown by ground radar differs from the altimeter reading in the
cockpit, the pilot will be instantly and automatically notified.

If the pilot wishes to change his altitude or his flight plan he will
be able to communicate with the ground stations by pushing an
appropriate button. Approval or disapproval will be flashed back to his
cockpit in a fraction of a second, since the calculations will be made
by automatic machines on the ground.

This system may sound a bit fantastic in some respects, especially
since it is due for realization within the next 6 or 7 years.
Nevertheless, nearly all of the mechanisms and instruments upon which
it is predicated already are in development and some of them are in
actual use. The program will almost completely solve the weather
problems which plague aviation today, and it will permit aircraft to
fly their schedules with clocklike precision and absolute reliability.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
--
Gene Seibel
Hangar 131 - http://pad39a.com/gene/plane.html
Because I fly, I envy no one.

[Dudley Henriques]

"Gene Seibel" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Monday I made a stop on a cross country flight to have lunch with my
> daughter. Afterwards we dropped in to a used book store to browse. As
> usual I migrated to the aviation section. The gem I laid my eyes on
> this time was written in 1957 and titled, "Flying the Omnirange." It
> touts the advantages and incredible possibilities of the fantastic new
> VHF onmidirectional radio range (VOR) that was replacing the
> low-frequency rado ranges in the 1950's. Here are a few paragraphs that
> you may find interesting and mildly amusing. ;)
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Here is the long-range program as visualized by the CAA and planned for
> completion in the 1960's:
>
> Before a pilot takes off on a flight a landing time will be reserved
> for him at his airport of destination. While he is enroute a dial will
> tell him continually, in minutes and seconds, whether he is ahead of or
> behind schedule, and he will slow his plane down or speed it up
> accordingly. On a screen in the cockpit the pilot will see a pictorial
> presentation of everything around him. This picture, probably televised
> from the ground, will show his own aircraft in relation to others in
> his vicinity, indicate obstructions or other hazards, and even show the
> location of storms and turbulent air.
>
> At the same time, radar will be continuously watching him from the
> ground. By means of a block system, something like that used on
> railroads, the pilot will be assured that he is in safe air space at
> all times.
>
> His aircraft will carry equipment which continuously transmits to the
> ground the readings of the cockpit instruments. Electronic brains on
> the ground will check these readings automatically against information
> derived from radar and other sources. If, for example, the altitude
> shown by ground radar differs from the altimeter reading in the
> cockpit, the pilot will be instantly and automatically notified.
>
> If the pilot wishes to change his altitude or his flight plan he will
> be able to communicate with the ground stations by pushing an
> appropriate button. Approval or disapproval will be flashed back to his
> cockpit in a fraction of a second, since the calculations will be made
> by automatic machines on the ground.
>
> This system may sound a bit fantastic in some respects, especially
> since it is due for realization within the next 6 or 7 years.
> Nevertheless, nearly all of the mechanisms and instruments upon which
> it is predicated already are in development and some of them are in
> actual use. The program will almost completely solve the weather
> problems which plague aviation today, and it will permit aircraft to
> fly their schedules with clocklike precision and absolute reliability.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I think I remember this one; and the first Omni we had in our airplane also.
It was a Narco Superhomer.
Cute little black box affair. Believe it or not, it was quite accurate and
fun to use :-))))
Dudley Henriques

[FLAV8R]

Sounds like the book is reffering more to a GPS than a VOR.
It's almost as if the author of this book knew what lay ahead
as far as computers and GPS with an MFD.

David

[Greg Farris]

If you selected those quotes because they seemed the most amusing or
'far-fetched', then they're actually impressively close to reality. It
seems to me the only really 'wrong' thing in his vision is the idea that
the new technology will free us from the constraints of weather. The
majority of flight delays today are still due to weather.

I like the part about the data being beamed back to the ground for
cross-check. I've often wondered why we still use flight data recorders,
with short (30min) recording capacity, when the data could be compiled
every minute or so, compressed and sent in packets to a ground station,
where it would be easily recoverable.

GF

[John Huthmaker]

Thats exactly what I was thinking.

--
John Huthmaker
PPL-SEL P-28-161

http://www.cogentnetworking.com
"FLAV8R" > wrote in message
...
> Sounds like the book is reffering more to a GPS than a VOR.
> It's almost as if the author of this book knew what lay ahead
> as far as computers and GPS with an MFD.
>
> David
>
>
>

[Grumman-581]

On Thu, 11 May 2006 08:46:24 +0200, Greg Farris >
wrote:
> I like the part about the data being beamed back to the ground for
> cross-check. I've often wondered why we still use flight data recorders,
> with short (30min) recording capacity, when the data could be compiled
> every minute or so, compressed and sent in packets to a ground station,
> where it would be easily recoverable.

Perhaps because the air transport pilots don't want it... We could
store more than 30 minutes right now if we so desired and it wouldn't
really cost any more... Hell, look at how much data gets put on an MP3
player...

[Bob Noel]

In article >, Greg Farris >
wrote:

> I like the part about the data being beamed back to the ground for
> cross-check. I've often wondered why we still use flight data recorders,
> with short (30min) recording capacity,

because those are the old FDR and CVRs. Newer ones record more data
and longer periods. Eventually the old ones will be replaced.

Note that instrumenting an aircraft, especially a non-digital aircraft is
incredibly expensive.

>when the data could be compiled
> every minute or so, compressed and sent in packets to a ground station,
> where it would be easily recoverable.

Consider how much spectrum would be required for this. Who would pay for
the air time and the ground infrastructure?

Consider how few crashes occur each year for larger aircraft.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[Jim Macklin]

The new VLJ Eclipse 500 will have data link and on-board
data storage for maintenance.



"Bob Noel" > wrote in
message
...
| In article >, Greg Farris
>
| wrote:
|
| > I like the part about the data being beamed back to the
ground for
| > cross-check. I've often wondered why we still use flight
data recorders,
| > with short (30min) recording capacity,
|
| because those are the old FDR and CVRs. Newer ones record
more data
| and longer periods. Eventually the old ones will be
replaced.
|
| Note that instrumenting an aircraft, especially a
non-digital aircraft is
| incredibly expensive.
|
| >when the data could be compiled
| > every minute or so, compressed and sent in packets to a
ground station,
| > where it would be easily recoverable.
|
| Consider how much spectrum would be required for this.
Who would pay for
| the air time and the ground infrastructure?
|
| Consider how few crashes occur each year for larger
aircraft.
|
| --
| Bob Noel
| Looking for a sig the
| lawyers will hate
|

[Jay Honeck]

> If you selected those quotes because they seemed the most amusing or
> 'far-fetched', then they're actually impressively close to reality.

Well, maybe for the rarified elite who can afford to buy brand new
planes equipped with G1000 glass panels.

For the rest of us, that prediction is still far, far in the future.
And, of course, weather is still the same deal-killer it was in the
50s.

The author was only off by, say, 70 years? :-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Peter Duniho]

"FLAV8R" > wrote in message
...
> Sounds like the book is reffering more to a GPS than a VOR.
> It's almost as if the author of this book knew what lay ahead
> as far as computers and GPS with an MFD.

It seems to me that, at the time, for pilots who were used to flying MUCH
more primitively, with A-N radio courses, maybe NDBs, and no radar coverage
most of the time, the advances that brought VORs and near-100% radar
coverage were likely much like to them as GPS is to us.

In another 50 years, when we have navigation that positions airplanes to the
inch and tracks timing to the tenth of a second, we'll be reading
descriptions of GPS and thinking, "gee, it's almost as if the author knew
what lay ahead".

Pete

[Marco Leon]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> > If you selected those quotes because they seemed the most amusing or
> > 'far-fetched', then they're actually impressively close to reality.
>
> Well, maybe for the rarified elite who can afford to buy brand new
> planes equipped with G1000 glass panels.
>
> For the rest of us, that prediction is still far, far in the future.
> And, of course, weather is still the same deal-killer it was in the
> 50s.
>
> The author was only off by, say, 70 years? :-)

C'mon Jay, it's only about 40 years off. This falls exactly in line with the
typical FAA project timeline!

I enjoyed Gene's post. Gives us all incentive to keep dreaming.

Marco




Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

[Allen]

"Gene Seibel" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Monday I made a stop on a cross country flight to have lunch with my
> daughter. Afterwards we dropped in to a used book store to browse. As
> usual I migrated to the aviation section. The gem I laid my eyes on
> this time was written in 1957 and titled, "Flying the Omnirange." It
> touts the advantages and incredible possibilities of the fantastic new
> VHF onmidirectional radio range (VOR) that was replacing the
> low-frequency rado ranges in the 1950's. Here are a few paragraphs that
> you may find interesting and mildly amusing. ;)
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I have a sectional chart from the Roswell, NM area dated 1945. There are
Danger Areas, Prohibited Areas, a handful of NDBs (the Roswell NDB still has
the same frequency that it had then). There is a note on one corner that
says if you are caught passing the information on the chart to the enemy you
will be charged with treason. On the other corner is the price: twenty-five
cents : )

Allen

[B A R R Y]

Allen wrote:
>
> I have a sectional chart from the Roswell, NM area dated 1945. There are
> Danger Areas, Prohibited Areas, a handful of NDBs (the Roswell NDB still has
> the same frequency that it had then).

Of course it does! Do you think UFOs have access to current charts and
NOTAMs?

[Greg Farris]

In article . com>,
says...
>
>
>> If you selected those quotes because they seemed the most amusing or
>> 'far-fetched', then they're actually impressively close to reality.
>
>Well, maybe for the rarified elite who can afford to buy brand new
>planes equipped with G1000 glass panels.
>

What G1000? I was thinking GIVSP!! ;-)

Actually I was thinking more about airlines - the arrival slot prediction
corresponds closely to today's reality of "fully coordinated" airports.

GF

[Greg Farris]

In article >,
says...

>In another 50 years, when we have navigation that positions airplanes to the
>inch and tracks timing to the tenth of a second, we'll be reading
>descriptions of GPS and thinking, "gee, it's almost as if the author knew
>what lay ahead".
>
>Pete
>
>


>In another 50 years, when we have navigation that positions airplanes to the
>inch and tracks timing to the tenth of a second, we'll be reading
>descriptions of what it was like back in the days when private individuals
were allowed, and could afford to fly their own airplanes.

GF

[Montblack]

("Jay Honeck" wrote)
> Well, maybe for the rarified elite who can afford to buy brand new planes
> equipped with G1000 glass panels.
>
> For the rest of us, that prediction is still far, far in the future.


Two of Kevin's posts (below) about flying around on the taxpayer's nickel -
he's kidding. <g>.

....still, $35 wet* for a 172 is pretty good - if you can find it.

I suspect, with CAP, he'll be flying around in a "brand new" Cessna 182
G1000 glass panel plane pretty soon. (IIRC, I saw one last fall belonging to
CAP, at the MSP "Grand Openning Event" for Runway 17/35)

All I'm saying is...
There are options for ascending into the 'rarified air of the elite.' Call
it the backstairs. :-)

[Posts by: Kevin Dunlevey - rec.aviation.student]
Mon, Apr 24 2006 9:42 pm

I've gotten a lot out of joining CAP, in flying, training and having a
purpose to fly.

In addition to being a Mission Pilot, I fly cadet orientation flights, work
mission staff and am a legal officer. I've logged two or three hundred
hours at taxpayer expense in the last two or three years flying as a Mission
Pilot or Cadet Orientation Pilot. I like kids, and flying the cadets has
taught me amount about human nature in a training environment. Flying the
search and rescue missions fulfills my desire to volunteer for a public
purpose.

I joined when I had just over 100 PIC hours. After passing a Form 5, which
is essentially the same as the FAA private pilot checkride and oral exam,
you can rent CAP aircraft, typically C-172s and C-182s. (CAP is
transitioning from 172s to 182s, and I think is only buying 182s now.) I
typically pay about $50 per hour tach time wet for a 172. If I keep the
throttle back at 2100 RPMs, my tach time is usually about 2/3s of Hobbs
time. So I can do 10 touch and goes, and clear my mind of petty things, for
about $35.

After you have 175 PIC hours you can train as a Mission Pilot. After 200
PIC hours you can fly Cadet Orientation Flights. After 300 hours and a
commercial rating, you can fly ROTC Cadet Orientation Flights.

CAP is a good way to build hours, but I'm not in CAP to build hours. I fly
because it makes me feel good, and CAP keeps me flying. I also like the
opportunity to give public service, and the chance for dual time with lots
of pilots far more experienced than me.


[Post by: Kevin Dunlevey - rec.aviation.student]
Tues, Jan 31 2006 11:15 pm

My son recruited me into Civil Air Patrol when I had about 150 hours. I'd
taken my kids to everyplace within an hour flight that I could feed them.
They were getting bored with flying, and my wife was stridently bored. After
joining CAP, passing a Form 5 test, which is essentially flying to PTS
standards, and getting up to 200 PIC hours, I began flying cadets. Flying
them, and letting them fly, has given me good insight into the human nature
of pilots. About the same time I began flying cadets, I began training for
search and rescue missions. Now only a few years later I have about 800
hours and most of it has been in service of society.

CAP has given me a purpose for my flying, beyond the recreation and mental
rinse therapy I get from flying, and it has been much more affordable than a
$125 per hour 172. In addition to getting more purpose, I've gotten a ton
of training. I have more dual hours with seasoned instructors now than I had
in total PIC hours when I started in CAP. I fly for proficiency, for cadet
orientation flights, or for mission training about twice a week. I know if
I go more than about a week or two without flying that my proficiency begins
to deteriorate.

When I fly cadets, I need to pick up a plane about a half hour from where I
pick up the cadets. That half hour flight gives me time to get my head into
flying that I wouldn't have if the cadets were at the same airport as the
plane. That tells me that half an hour around the cabbage patch will get
you back up to speed.


Montblack

[Gene Seibel]

Actually, for me, the unknowns are what makes flying interesting.
--
Gene Seibel
Tales of Flight - http://pad39a.com/gene/tales.html
Because I fly, I envy no one.

[Jay Honeck]

> I have a sectional chart from the Roswell, NM area dated 1945. There are
> Danger Areas, Prohibited Areas, a handful of NDBs (the Roswell NDB still has
> the same frequency that it had then). There is a note on one corner that
> says if you are caught passing the information on the chart to the enemy you
> will be charged with treason. On the other corner is the price: twenty-five
> cents : )

My A&P showed me an old Des Moines Sectional Chart (long since
eliminated) from the 1960s. It was:

- Printed on very sturdy paper, unlike the ones we have today that must
be scotch-taped at the seams immediately, or they shred.

- The color was quite vibrant, compared to today's, even 40 years old.

- The map was one-sided. The flip side contained a plethora of
information that we can only wish was on today's sectionals.

- The price was forty cents.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Greg Farris]

In article . com>,
says...

>
>- The map was one-sided. The flip side contained a plethora of
>information that we can only wish was on today's sectionals.
>


Was it twice as big as ours today?

[Greg Farris]

In article >,
says...

>
>I have a sectional chart from the Roswell, NM area dated 1945. There are
>Danger Areas, Prohibited Areas, a handful of NDBs (the Roswell NDB still has
>the same frequency that it had then). There is a note on one corner that
>says if you are caught passing the information on the chart to the enemy you
>will be charged with treason. On the other corner is the price: twenty-five
>cents : )
>

Now if we could only have Google Earth from 1945 - see what's going on in
those Danger Areas!

GF