GPS and ground speed

Since

(a) Ground Speed can be determined by GPS,
(b) the relationship between the aircraft's attitude and the angle of
attack should theoretically be unvarying and
(c) the attitude indicator is a gyroscopic instrument,

is it possible to assume with any correctness that during cruise, an
aircraft can only be at *a* particular ground speed at *a* particular
altitude at *a* particular attitude? If the answer is Yes, is it
possible to develop some formula where the pilot can at least arrive
at a rough airspeed figure using the GPS should his pitot tubes get
blocked or iced for whatever reason? I acknowledge that this will only
be a rough estimate since headwind and tailwind can't be measured.

I'm thinking about the recent Air France crash and wondering if at all
it could've been prevented using such a calculation to roughly
estimate the actual airspeed instead of having to rely on entirely
inaccurate IAS...

Thanks in advance for your views,

Ramapriya

On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 20:32:52 -0700 (PDT), D Ramapriya wrote:

Since

(a) Ground Speed can be determined by GPS,
(b) the relationship between the aircraft's attitude and the angle of
attack should theoretically be unvarying and
(c) the attitude indicator is a gyroscopic instrument,

is it possible to assume with any correctness that during cruise, an
aircraft can only be at *a* particular ground speed at *a* particular
altitude at *a* particular attitude? If the answer is Yes, is it
possible to develop some formula where the pilot can at least arrive
at a rough airspeed figure using the GPS should his pitot tubes get
blocked or iced for whatever reason? I acknowledge that this will only
be a rough estimate since headwind and tailwind can't be measured.

I'm thinking about the recent Air France crash and wondering if at all
it could've been prevented using such a calculation to roughly
estimate the actual airspeed instead of having to rely on entirely
inaccurate IAS...

Thanks in advance for your views,

Ramapriya

http://tinyurl.com/lsjcab

On Jul 28, 9:54*am, Gezellig wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/lsjcab

Got a "Error has occurred on this pages. The System Administrator has
been notified." Hope it'll get better later.

Ramapriya

On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 23:05:38 -0700 (PDT), D Ramapriya wrote:

On Jul 28, 9:54*am, Gezellig wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/lsjcab

Got a "Error has occurred on this pages. The System Administrator has
been notified." Hope it'll get better later.

Ramapriya

http://www.ars.usda.gov/research/publications/Publications.htm?seq_no_115=157208

On Jul 28, 9:34*pm, Gezellig wrote:

http://www.ars.usda.gov/research/publications/Publications.htm?seq_no...


Thanks. Interesting read, especially this intriguing part: "...the
direction of travel had an effect on the type of latency. When
traveling in a north or south direction, the GPS position of the
aircraft was in front of the actual aircraft position, but when
traveling in an east or west direction the GPS position of the
aircraft was behind its actual position..."!

Ramapriya

On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 20:32:52 -0700 (PDT), D Ramapriya wrote:

Since

(a) Ground Speed can be determined by GPS,
(b) the relationship between the aircraft's attitude and the angle of
attack should theoretically be unvarying and
(c) the attitude indicator is a gyroscopic instrument,

is it possible to assume with any correctness that during cruise, an
aircraft can only be at *a* particular ground speed at *a* particular
altitude at *a* particular attitude? If the answer is Yes, is it
possible to develop some formula where the pilot can at least arrive
at a rough airspeed figure using the GPS should his pitot tubes get
blocked or iced for whatever reason? I acknowledge that this will only
be a rough estimate since headwind and tailwind can't be measured.

I'm thinking about the recent Air France crash and wondering if at all
it could've been prevented using such a calculation to roughly
estimate the actual airspeed instead of having to rely on entirely
inaccurate IAS...

Thanks in advance for your views,

Ramapriya

Obviously you are a troll.

On Jul 28, 9:55*am, Franklin "Franklin
wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 20:32:52 -0700 (PDT), D Ramapriya wrote:

Obviously you are a troll.

Try not looking into the mirror the next type you key in alphabets.

Ramapriya

On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 23:04:41 -0700 (PDT), D Ramapriya wrote:

On Jul 28, 9:55*am, Franklin "Franklin
wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 20:32:52 -0700 (PDT), D Ramapriya wrote:

Obviously you are a troll.

Try not looking into the mirror the next type you key in alphabets.

Ramapriya

http://www.autostalk.com/porsche/928-advice-sought-395696.html

Amazing how "Indian" your posts get after having such flair for (y)our
language. Troll.

Could you explain that to us?

On Jul 28, 11:03*pm, Franklin "Franklin
wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 23:04:41 -0700 (PDT), D Ramapriya wrote:
On Jul 28, 9:55*am, Franklin "Franklin
wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 20:32:52 -0700 (PDT), D Ramapriya wrote:

Obviously you are a troll.

Try not looking into the mirror the next type you key in alphabets.

Ramapriya

http://www.autostalk.com/porsche/928-advice-sought-395696.html

Amazing how "Indian" your posts get after having such flair for (y)our
language. Troll.

Could you explain that to us?


Instead of snagging along a slew of people with posts that have little
relevance to either the thread or aviation itself, why not write
offline? In my case, the name and mail ID you see are both echt.

I won't rejoin you here unless it's germane to the subject.

Ramapriya

On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 19:53:07 -0700 (PDT), D Ramapriya wrote:

On Jul 28, 11:03*pm, Franklin "Franklin
wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 23:04:41 -0700 (PDT), D Ramapriya wrote:
On Jul 28, 9:55*am, Franklin "Franklin
wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 20:32:52 -0700 (PDT), D Ramapriya wrote:

Obviously you are a troll.

Try not looking into the mirror the next type you key in alphabets.

Ramapriya

http://www.autostalk.com/porsche/928-advice-sought-395696.html

Amazing how "Indian" your posts get after having such flair for (y)our
language. Troll.

Could you explain that to us?

Instead of snagging along a slew of people with posts that have little
relevance to either the thread or aviation itself, why not write
offline? In my case, the name and mail ID you see are both echt.

I won't rejoin you here unless it's germane to the subject.

Ramapriya

Your English gets better all the time, Troll.