Why The Hell... (random rant)

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

And that tells you your course, not which direction the nose is pointed.

For navigation, your ground track is more important.

There is no GPS instrument available that will tell you which way
your nose is pointed.

As I've said, you just use two.

There is are GPS instruments available that can be linked to tell you
that.

The only two places on Earth a magnetic compass doesn't work in an
airplane are over the north and south magnetic poles.

No. There are thousands of local magnetic anomalies that can make a compass
useless.

Not at airplane altitudes and speeds.

If there are thousands, name just 30.

Piston engines have magnetos which generate the spark plug firing
voltage, and only the spark plug voltage.

Last time I checked, sparks counted as electricity.

Well, I can see electricity can be added to that ever growing list
of things about which you know nothing.

Magnetos generate pulses measured in the thousand of volts and microamps
of current. Even if they were hooked to something else, which they
aren't, the power generated would be useless for powering something like
a GPS.

My god, everytime you say something, more ignorance just roles out.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

In rec.aviation.piloting Maxwell wrote:

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
writes:

And that tells you your course, not which direction the nose is pointed.

For navigation, your ground track is more important.

There is no GPS instrument available that will tell you which way
your nose is pointed.

As I've said, you just use two.

The only two places on Earth a magnetic compass doesn't work in an
airplane are over the north and south magnetic poles.

No. There are thousands of local magnetic anomalies that can make a
compass
useless.

Piston engines have magnetos which generate the spark plug firing
voltage, and only the spark plug voltage.

Last time I checked, sparks counted as electricity.


Then hook up a spark plug wire to your GPS.

Better to his forehead; electroshock therapy sounds like it is called
for in his case.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

They are still big, heavy, and expensive.

Laser gyros are not big or heavy, although they are usually expensive.

I'll skip the rest of your post, as there are more anomalies than I care to
address.

Or in other words, you don't know what the hell you are talking about
and don't want to learn what an ignorant fool you are.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic wrote:
dgs writes:

So, when he attempts to label people as stupid (even if only by
implication), or treat others as if they're idiots, remember, he's
actually proposing that he be treated as if he's stupid too. At least
it's consistent.

No. When I give honest assessments of something or someone, I expect others
to do the same.

Honest does not equal true.

Honest just means that you aren't lying when you spout your ignorant,
incorrect, nonsense; you really believe your own crap.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic wrote:
Maxwell writes:

Odd..you are clearly the poster child for stupidity, but you don't see
hostile.

I'm neither stupid nor hostile.

A smart person wouldn't keep spouting the same ignorant nonsense
after they've been given references to eliminate the ignorance.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

"RomeoMike" wrote in message
...


wrote:


Astro navigation, but it's still an angle away from a standard
vector. So different sciences are using the same word with different
meanings.

However, you're of course correct that for magnetic navigation,
declination and variation are the same thing.

http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/seg/geomag/faqgeom.shtml

Kev


Thanks to you, farr1220, and Peter. I always wondered in the back of my
mind how the term declination came to mean variation. Now I'm ready to
navigate the outer space :-)

Hmmmm. I see that what I have been calling declination is called
inclination on the NOAA site, so I will correct as appropriate.

In view of my recollections of ground school, I believe that it might be
least confusing to continue using the term deviation for the instrument
error as installed, variation for the difference between true and magnetic
north, and inclination for the angle between the lines of force and the
horizontal--leaving the term declination unused.

Peter
(Planning to think about this at leisure)

"Peter Dohm" wrote in message
.. .

In view of my recollections of ground school, I believe that it might be
least confusing to continue using the term deviation for the instrument
error as installed, variation for the difference between true and magnetic
north, and inclination for the angle between the lines of force and the
horizontal--leaving the term declination unused.


You could use declination for the difference between the magnetic variation
a VOR is set to and the actual local magnetic variation.

On Apr 6, 12:31 am, Ron Natalie wrote:
wrote:
On Apr 5, 5:37 am, "EridanMan" wrote:
On Apr 4, 5:23 am, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:

"EridanMan" wrote in message
egroups.com...
Why in gods name are VOR's Mag heading based?
Tradition.
Best answer I've heard yet

Isn't the difference between your compass heading and the radial you
are flying the drift? Knowing drift is pretty useful...

The correction angle maybe. You aren't drifting at all if you are
on the radial.

Yes, that's what I mean, you are holding off "x" degrees of drift.
That fact is very useful and given the choice between a true and
magnetic VOR I think I would prefer magnetic for just that reason.
You?

Cheers MC

On Apr 6, 8:56 am, "Peter Dohm" wrote:
"RomeoMike" wrote in message

...





wrote:

Astro navigation, but it's still an angle away from a standard
vector. So different sciences are using the same word with different
meanings.

However, you're of course correct that for magnetic navigation,
declination and variation are the same thing.

http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/seg/geomag/faqgeom.shtml

Kev

Thanks to you, farr1220, and Peter. I always wondered in the back of my
mind how the term declination came to mean variation. Now I'm ready to
navigate the outer space :-)

Hmmmm. I see that what I have been calling declination is called
inclination on the NOAA site, so I will correct as appropriate.

In view of my recollections of ground school, I believe that it might be
least confusing to continue using the term deviation for the instrument
error as installed, variation for the difference between true and magnetic
north, and inclination for the angle between the lines of force and the
horizontal--leaving the term declination unused.


Yes and then aviators would be in perfect alignment with ocean
naavigators who use variation and deviation. The conversion from true
to compass heading makes a nice nemonic:

timid virgins make dull company

for TRUE (variation) MAGNETIC (deviation) COMPASS

Cheers MC

wrote in message
ups.com...

Yes, that's what I mean, you are holding off "x" degrees of drift.
That fact is very useful and given the choice between a true and
magnetic VOR I think I would prefer magnetic for just that reason.


Most are neither. The GRB VORTAC was aligned to a magnetic variation of 1E
in 1965. It's still there, but local magnetic variation is now 3W The
airways are more closely aligned with true north than magnetic north.