i think I flew into class c airspace accidentally withoutestablishing communication

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrote in message
...

Which is one of the systems I mentioned to start off with. But when I took
my PPL test ride ADF and GPS weren't options so I shortened it.


You said use of a VOR was in the PP requirements. It's not.

Larry Dighera wrote in
:

On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:04:29 -0800 (PST), Cary wrote
in :

Organization: http://groups.google.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 152.131.11.16

But don't expect GoogleGroups to provide complete anonymity. For
instance, you posted your article from: Department of Veterans
Affairs. I just thought you'd like to know.


Netkkkoping ****.


Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Well, what I'm advocating is a bit more nuts and bolts nav sense if
people are going to start dicing with weather, rather than just rely on
GPS, so I think we're on the same page. The one in sixty rule just
means, for example, that every sixty miles you are from a navaid, each
degree is about one mile. So, if you're sailing along roughly abeam a
VOR with no DME, and you know your groundspeed is about 2 miles a minute
and you cover two degrees in about a minute, well, you know that that
VOR is sixty miles away. If you cover four degrees in a minute, you're
thirty miles and so on. It's rule of thumb, but it works well.
Likelyise, if you are dead reckoning on top and there is one quick
visual reference and you know how far it is off your dsired track since
our last known position, you can calculate your drift quite accurately
for your next leg. There's a thousand and one uses for it.

Cool eh?

Bertie



Yes it is cool and I'm pretty sure somebody taught it to me at some
point. It's back up in the front of the memory system now so, Thanks.

Peter Clark wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:38:59 -0600, Gig 601XL Builder
wrote:

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
wrote in message
...
VOR is obviously implied by the language to even the most casual reader.

It's not implied at all to an informed reader.



OK Steven, please inform us what electronic navigation
systems these lines are referring to...

2. Demonstrates the ability to use an airborne electronic navigation
system.
3. Locates the airplane's position using the navigation system.
4. Intercepts and tracks a given course, radial or bearing, as
appropriate.

GPS? LORAN? ADF?

And........?

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:


How many know the 1/60 rule?

Bertie

Looks like the worthwile posts to crap ratio.

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums...ation/200801/1

On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:50:25 -0600, Gig 601XL Builder
wrote:

Peter Clark wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:38:59 -0600, Gig 601XL Builder
wrote:

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
wrote in message
...
VOR is obviously implied by the language to even the most casual reader.

It's not implied at all to an informed reader.



OK Steven, please inform us what electronic navigation
systems these lines are referring to...

2. Demonstrates the ability to use an airborne electronic navigation
system.
3. Locates the airplane's position using the navigation system.
4. Intercepts and tracks a given course, radial or bearing, as
appropriate.

GPS? LORAN? ADF?

And........?

Of course VOR. I was agreeing that there are multiple choices of
radio style thing that can satisfy that section of the PTS.

"Kloudy via AviationKB.com" u33403@uwe wrote in news:7ee616c22803b@uwe:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:


How many know the 1/60 rule?

Bertie

Looks like the worthwile posts to crap ratio.




Could be worse....

Bertie

Gig 601XL Builder wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Well, what I'm advocating is a bit more nuts and bolts nav sense if
people are going to start dicing with weather, rather than just rely
on GPS, so I think we're on the same page. The one in sixty rule just
means, for example, that every sixty miles you are from a navaid,
each degree is about one mile. So, if you're sailing along roughly
abeam a VOR with no DME, and you know your groundspeed is about 2
miles a minute and you cover two degrees in about a minute, well, you
know that that VOR is sixty miles away. If you cover four degrees in
a minute, you're thirty miles and so on. It's rule of thumb, but it
works well. Likelyise, if you are dead reckoning on top and there is
one quick visual reference and you know how far it is off your dsired
track since our last known position, you can calculate your drift
quite accurately for your next leg. There's a thousand and one uses
for it.

Cool eh?

Bertie



Yes it is cool and I'm pretty sure somebody taught it to me at some
point. It's back up in the front of the memory system now so, Thanks.


I still use it al the time, eve with teh pink string in front of me.


Bertie

On Jan 29, 5:25 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Gig 601XL Builder wrote in news:13prvb8h2m12219
@news.supernews.com:



Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

What if you are VFR over a cloud layer? There are lots of times that
GPS, VOR and even ADF are the primary navigation aids for VFR pilots.

Well, there are other, more traditional, methods that are really pretty
essential if you're going to do that. 1 in 60 rule, for instance.
Determinging drift from aircraft ref points and celestial bodies, that
sort of stuff.

Bertie

Last time I checked celestial navigation wasn't in the PP requirements
and use of a VOR was.

I know, but going vfr on top is kinda heavy territory for someone with a
fresh ppl anyway.

How many know the 1/60 rule?

Me. But I'm old :-)

On Jan 28, 11:21*am, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrote in ...

Last time I checked celestial navigation wasn't in the PP requirements and
use of a VOR was.

When did you last check? *"VOR" does not appear in Part 61.

The PP written exam expects you to know about VORs though.