See CAP3176 freshly published by the CAA training department which gives their guidance on the use of Moving Map Displays during a PPL skill test/prof check.
Skydemon can be used for some stages of the navigation part of the skill test but only as backup, and it will be failed for one leg and also for the diversion.
I support the idea of allowing the candidate to use the map as primary navigation source (because thats what they will do after passing) but also quite like the idea of failing the GPS (including onboard screens) so that candidates have some consideration of what they’d do in these circumstances.However it seems to me that a double failure of GPS receivers (we all have at least two onboard, although jamming is a growing threat) at the same time as the need for an unplanned diversion is a fairly unlikely scenario.
I presume this is a first and that no other European country permits the use of SkyDemon etc in skill tests. Is that true?
By contrast, my US instructor earlier this year explained how short his PPL skill test was and that he only used ForeFlight throughout.
While I belive what to do when the GPS fails should be in the curriculum, I really think flying without a moving map is a thing of the past.
To still test this is like insisting on teaching how to use the fax. I’m happy that someone at least sees a tiny bit of sense, but I preditct that vestiges of this annoyance will still remain when all the dinosaurs insisting on it have died out…
It’s a good move. Not teaching it and then leaving fresh PPLs to learn how to use SkyDemon on their own, solo, is not safe either. I remember doing it myself – instantly heads down fiddling around not looking outside
Failing all GPSs is good as they all depend on the same signal. Have a friend who had all GPSs fail on him last week in a short period of time, flying in Finland. You should also know what requires a GPS signal to work on your plane (where will the X’s appear on the screen, Autopilot, etc).
If I was having such a test, I would use DR for most/all of it, because suddenly switching to DR, when not having been watching the ground features, is going to be very difficult.
Will the CAA allow the use of the autopilot, during DR?
I agree that it’s good that pilots get training on how to use a GPS properly. It’s obviously not difficult but teaching good practice and getting to know the system you will use is all good.
The only issue I have with DR being side-lined to a short diversion is that unlike GPS, DR is REALLY hard to learn to do properly with any confidence. If it just becomes a quick diversion, I don’t think many pilots would be happy using it if they need to.
Having said that, I’m not sure I’d be all that happy to continue a flight under DR now. I plan my flights using GPS entirely differently than I would plan a DR flight.
For example,
- if a waypoint is a IFR intersection, obviously you’d not use it if planning to fly on DR as there is no way to verify it.
- Waypoints chosen would be much more obvious features, selected because they are easy to identify even if off track (eg a large town or a lake) instead of convenient for the route (small town or VFR reporting point on the edge of controlled airspace).
- I’d leave much bigger gaps between airspace and my route as I wouldn’t be sure that I could scape through that 1 mile gap or cut the corner so tight with DR and be sure of missing the airspace.
So maybe all you really need to know is how to divert to an airfield if you loose GPS so that you can re-plan.
dublinpilot wrote:
Exactly. And for that all you need is FIS and a transponder, asking for a heading to fly – at least that’s my plan A if I ever have the issue that all three GPS receivers fail at the same time.So maybe all you really need to know is how to divert to an airfield if you loose GPS so that you can re-plan.
What happened to basic knowledge of using VOR/DME at PPL level?
Will the CAA allow the use of the autopilot, during DR?
No autopilot during a PPL test. It may be used during an IR skill test but only in the cruise phase in level flight and using only heading and alt hold modes.
In my experience, the vast majority of PPL training aircraft don’t have a working autopilot.
What happened to basic knowledge of using VOR/DME at PPL level?
This is a fundamental part of the curriculum that differentiates between the LAPL and PPL. It’s included in the written theory exams, is taught in the syllabus and examined in the skill test. The PPL skill test profile requires position fixing, intercept and tracking which can be either VOR/VOR or VOR/DME.
I plan my flights using GPS entirely differently than I would plan a DR flight.
I think this is a really good point. It’s something that was clear to me when I last flew in the US, and am aware that it’s also very much the case for many of the local instructional flights I do, especially those involving General Handling/Basic Skills rather than straight line nav legs.
I do feel that the whole navigation syllabus really needs a thorough revision, and that should involve GA pilots who fly further afield. This is also important to set potential commercial pilots on the right track* who will likely never use a whizz wheel or paper chart after passing their skill tests.
*Sorry about the bad pun ;)
My instructor told me that VORs are slowly disappearing, because they are too expensive to maintain. And indeed, in my short flying carier, Ive seen at least one VOR being shut down (the one at EBLG). In belgium we have some VORs left that are useful for VFR flying (Flora, Bruno, Nicky, Bruno was even moved to shoot through the corridor between EBAW and EBBR, my dads 25 year old VFR chart shows it at a slightly different position). But in the netherlands all VORs are in the middle of a controlled airspace… Pampus is only a DME transmitter…
I am using a lot of IFR waypoints now, which I do annotate on my VFR map, should anything go wrong. Some IFR waypoints are put on an obvious landmark, most not. But it is often close enough to another landmark for emergency use… Thinking about it, if you can jam a GPS signal, you can also jam a VOR signal, so I don’t see why VORs are safer.
Regarding DR: in Belgium we have a 1:250.000 VFR map, which is super detailed. But honestly, on the German or Dutch 1:500.000, even the Waal or the Rhine are difficult to spot… So even with the complex Belgian airspace, I would be more comfortable losing GPS here in Belgium than over Germany…
