i think I flew into class c airspace accidentally withoutestablishing communication

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

Your sound more like MX every time you touch your keyboard.

Let's try something.

A. Is there a requirement in the PP standard to show use of a electronic
navigation system?


Yes.



If Yes go to B.
If No you're an idiot I already posted the requirement.

B. If VOR is the only electronic navigation system in the plane how will
one be tested on an ADF, GPS or anything else?


They won't be tested on anything else.

Has this little exercise helped you to understand that use of a VOR is not
in the PP requirements, and that the PP requirements are not altered by the
equipment in the
aircraft used for the checkride?

If "No", you're an idiot.

"gatt" wrote in message
...

Try to pass a PPL written, oral or practical without understanding how to
use a VOR.


That's not the issue.

"gatt" wrote in message
...

It's on the written exam. You won't make it as a Private Pilot if you
can't even pass the written exam.


Well, unless more than 30% of the test is on VOR the written can be passed
without knowing anything about VOR.

But that's not the issue.

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

Actually the original assertion was NOT that a VOR is required I listed a
whole bunch of devices that could apply. It was is a quick reply to Bertie
that only VOR was mentioned.

And even my original assertion was in reply to a student pilot that stated
everyone but instrument rated pilots should only be using charts as
primary navigation.


On 1/28/2008 "Gig 601XL Builder" asserted:

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



God I love USENET.


That's an odd thing for you to say.

wrote:

On the other hand, it's of no practical consequence. Anyone looking at
the email address would guess that the poster's name is R. Faulkiner,
and the FAA online database--which is presumably where Larry looked up
his information--lists only two such pilots, the other of whom has a
commercial certificate. But the FAA doesn't mine r.a.p. in search of
violations, and filing an ASRS form will provide protection in any
event.

Unfortunately, human nature will many times dictate an impression that
determines reaction to something seen without the benefit of a detailed
search for substantiating data.
It would be quite common for a student pilot for example, to simply read
through a post like that, see the reaction from others to the admission
of an error, and even more importantly, envision a punitive action as
the result of admitting an error like this. The result of that could
easily be an unconscious or even a conscious decision not to subject
themselves to possible investigation or penalty down the line, thus
denying both themselves and others any benefit from learning.
It's just not necessary to cause, or even take the chance for causing
someone new to flying to be afraid of reporting something and learning
something from a mistake.
--
Dudley Henriques

On Jan 30, 9:19*am, Gig 601XL Builder
wrote:
WingFlaps wrote:
I was of course talking about pure VFR and am well aware that one may
require IFR skills at times. My concern is that the color GPS screens
are far too seductive and really do stop you keeping a mental
reference on a VFR chart. The trouble is, if you get too out of sync.
with the chart it's damn hard to find yourself -at least for me. Of
course you can always call up ATC and admit you are lost... * :-o
That said, provided you can stop and think time and heading from last
known position seems to generally get you in the right "square". As
for PPL test, I've not seen a requirement for using electronic aids
and the test does not involve an actual Xcountry and the Xcountries I
have completed did not use any electronic aids (the VOR was INOP). I
do know how to tune in a VOR and find a radial but never actually used
it -I'm too busy looking out the window (and that's why I fly)...

Cheers

Cheers

SSR *without using paart of the traaining requires hood time an...

You better start practicing because the requirement is there. Now I
don't know where you are in your training and will admit that the head
up or down issue is greater for a student or new pilot but there is no
reason for you not to be able to check a moving map with any more
difficulty than checking your altimeter or ASI. IMNSHO Moving Map GPS
have done more for the positive for situational awareness than anything
since windshields.

As far as the checkride not having a real XC flight in it. Let me tell
you how mine went.

Sit and plan a cross country. He said make sure we have a checkpoint
around some little town (don't remember which) that was about 20 miles
away. We took off and flew it like it was a XC using a VOR and after a
while he reached over and covered up the CDI for on the VOR I then tuned
the ADF for the outbound course and followed that a while then he
reached over and covered that up. When we got to the check point he
ended the XC portion of the ride by pulling power and saying, "Oops your
engine just failed."

F. TASK: RADIO COMMUNICATIONS, NAVIGATION
SYSTEMS/FACILITIES, AND RADAR SERVICES
(ASEL and ASES)
REFERENCES: FAA-H-8083-3, FAA-H-8083-15, AC 61-23/FAA-H-8083-25.
Objective. To determine that the applicant:
1. Exhibits knowledge of the elements related to radio communications,
navigation systems/facilities, and radar services available for use
during flight solely by reference to instruments.
2. Selects the proper frequency and identifies the appropriate facility.
3. Follows verbal instructions and/or navigation systems/facilities for
guidance.
4. Determines the minimum safe altitude.
5. Maintains altitude, ±200 feet (60 meters); maintains heading, ±20°;
maintains airspeed, ±10 knots.

Interesting. In our PPL there is no VOR requirement as far as I know.
It could be that there are few stations to tune into anyway... Sounds
like you were lucky to have your waypoint on a direct radial tho. But
did you actually track your position on the chart by visual reference
as you flew? if you did, would I be correct to say the map was (should
have been) your primary tool? I see your heading requirement is easier
than ours -ours is 5 degrees and within 100' and 5 knots. Could that
be because we have to fly DR and maps more often?

Cheers

Cheers

may be -maybe that's because you don't have such streict

Cheers

Cheers

there are few s

On Jan 30, 1:04*pm, "gatt" wrote:
"WingFlaps" wrote in message

news:3605c0f3-af3f-4b88-a004-

Any pilot better be prepared to use electronics as the primary nav tool..
For example, eastern Washington state looks awful nondescript at night
and
if there's a cloud layer above, putting the north star off of one wingtip
or
another isn't going to work.
Yes, I agree. My point is that most of the time you use primary tools
and in that case it would be a chart for VFR

I can't think of an instance where that's not true. * *The (current)
sectional is authoritative for VFR flights compared against GPS or whatever
else you're using.

-c

Thankyou for answering my question. I guess I was right in my ideas.
Tha's one down for the practical test!

Cheers

On Jan 30, 9:19*am, Gig 601XL Builder
wrote:
WingFlaps wrote:
I was of course talking about pure VFR and am well aware that one may
require IFR skills at times. My concern is that the color GPS screens
are far too seductive and really do stop you keeping a mental
reference on a VFR chart. The trouble is, if you get too out of sync.
with the chart it's damn hard to find yourself -at least for me. Of
course you can always call up ATC and admit you are lost... * :-o
That said, provided you can stop and think time and heading from last
known position seems to generally get you in the right "square". As
for PPL test, I've not seen a requirement for using electronic aids
and the test does not involve an actual Xcountry and the Xcountries I
have completed did not use any electronic aids (the VOR was INOP). I
do know how to tune in a VOR and find a radial but never actually used
it -I'm too busy looking out the window (and that's why I fly)...

Cheers

Cheers

SSR *without using paart of the traaining requires hood time an...

You better start practicing because the requirement is there. Now I
don't know where you are in your training and will admit that the head
up or down issue is greater for a student or new pilot but there is no
reason for you not to be able to check a moving map with any more
difficulty than checking your altimeter or ASI. IMNSHO Moving Map GPS
have done more for the positive for situational awareness than anything
since windshields.

As far as the checkride not having a real XC flight in it. Let me tell
you how mine went.

Sit and plan a cross country. He said make sure we have a checkpoint
around some little town (don't remember which) that was about 20 miles
away. We took off and flew it like it was a XC using a VOR and after a
while he reached over and covered up the CDI for on the VOR I then tuned
the ADF for the outbound course and followed that a while then he
reached over and covered that up. When we got to the check point he
ended the XC portion of the ride by pulling power and saying, "Oops your
engine just failed."

F. TASK: RADIO COMMUNICATIONS, NAVIGATION
SYSTEMS/FACILITIES, AND RADAR SERVICES
(ASEL and ASES)
REFERENCES: FAA-H-8083-3, FAA-H-8083-15, AC 61-23/FAA-H-8083-25.
Objective. To determine that the applicant:
1. Exhibits knowledge of the elements related to radio communications,
navigation systems/facilities, and radar services available for use
during flight solely by reference to instruments.
2. Selects the proper frequency and identifies the appropriate facility.
3. Follows verbal instructions and/or navigation systems/facilities for
guidance.
4. Determines the minimum safe altitude.
5. Maintains altitude, ±200 feet (60 meters); maintains heading, ±20°;
maintains airspeed, ±10 knots.

Interesting. In our PPL there is no VOR requirement as far as I know.
It could be that there are few stations to tune into anyway... Sounds
like you were lucky to have your waypoint on a direct radial tho. But
did you actually track your position on the chart by visual reference
as you flew? if you did, would I be correct to say the map was
(should
have been) your primary tool? I see your heading requirement is
easier
than ours -ours is 5 degrees and within 100' and 5 knots. Could that
be because I will have to fly DR and use visual reference/maps more
often?

I'd like to suggest another factor why a chart visual should be
considered primary for VFR. If you know where you are on the map it's
really quick to give a reference for say a mayday. e.g. 5m nne
townsville rather than have to check the scale etc. on the GPS
display?

Cheers

Cheers

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in
:


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

Actually the original assertion was NOT that a VOR is required I
listed a whole bunch of devices that could apply. It was is a quick
reply to Bertie that only VOR was mentioned.

And even my original assertion was in reply to a student pilot that
stated everyone but instrument rated pilots should only be using
charts as primary navigation.


On 1/28/2008 "Gig 601XL Builder" asserted:

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



God I love USENET.


That's an odd thing for you to say.




Why, you hate it?


Bertie

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in
:


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

Your sound more like MX every time you touch your keyboard.

Let's try something.

A. Is there a requirement in the PP standard to show use of a
electronic navigation system?


Yes.



If Yes go to B.
If No you're an idiot I already posted the requirement.

B. If VOR is the only electronic navigation system in the plane how
will one be tested on an ADF, GPS or anything else?


They won't be tested on anything else.

Has this little exercise helped you to understand that use of a VOR is
not in the PP requirements, and that the PP requirements are not
altered by the equipment in the
aircraft used for the checkride?

If "No", you're an idiot.



Actually, the examiner isn't some automaton who sits there checking
boxes. (well there're probably one or two who do)
If he gets into an airplane with a candidate who can't operate the ****
on board and he imagines this guy putting around like a cow on crack,
long fingering the day he might learn to use the equipment installed,
he's going to fail him on general princple.
He won't say that, of course....



Bertie