Back In The Day

[Guest2]

CP pioneered the polar route from Western Canada to Amsterdam and of course the great circle route from Vancouver to Japan, the aircraft carried a navigator and had an astrodome to enable star sights and thus navigation due to the magnetic compass being inaccurate on the polar route. My father flew the aircraft (DC6, DC8 and Bristol Britannia and I would have loved to there more from him but he died at 56 years young in 1968.

Following  is an account, not about CP, but navigation before GPS. I imagine some of our members remember those days and I would love to read your accounts. 

How Aircraft Navigated Before GPS

 

Modern avionics have made navigation the least of the concerns for any pilot, with computers giving precise route coordinates. Still, how did aircraft navigate before GPS became a standard navigation tool? Aircraft used different methods to navigate pre-GPS, including dead reckoning, celestial navigation, and more.

How Aircraft Navigated Before GPS© Provided by SimpleFlying

 

The history

When aircraft first took to the skies in the 1900s, flights would use visual aids for all navigational purposes, with very little in the way of hardware. However, with the entry of aircraft into military use, flying at higher altitudes and longer distances, accurate navigation became essential for any flight.

Of course, planes could use onboard radios to communicate with the ground, receiving instructions from the ground crew. Even though this was workable during takeoff and landing, radios had a limited range in terms of distance, meaning communication became impossible once aircraft were a few hundred miles away. Instead, crews used several manual ways to calculate their position.

Celestial navigation was a common method of finding a plane's location, where navigators would use a bubble sextant to calculate the aircraft's position relative to the sun, moon, or stars. This method was used up until the jet age in the 1960s, with early 747s even having a sextant port on the cockpit roof.

Dead reckoning was another common navigation method on long flights. With this process, navigators would use previously known positions to estimate the plane's current position using speed and flight time. While the weather could hamper these estimates, it was a relatively accurate way to calculate the plane's location.

To better provide information while in flight, ground bases would use a system known as long range navigation (LORAN). Two land-based radio transmitters would send each other signals at a set interval, allowing plane navigators to use the time difference to find their exact location. While this was an ideal solution, weather and frequency disruptions could easily distort the transmission, leaving the crew with unreadable data.

 

On commercial aircraft

Planes have been flying commercially for decades now, but GPS has only come into active use in the last two decades. Prior to using GPS as we know it, modern aircraft had a number of other tools at their disposal.

Some may recall that flight decks previously used to have navigators onboard, a person dedicated to tracking the aircraft's route and radio communications. This was mainly found on long flights over the ocean, where radar contact could be lost, and fewer diversion airports were available.

Modern avionics, and a push to reduce inflight crew, have resulted in these navigators now no longer being needed on commercial flights. Air Force One, which is a modified 747-200, interestingly still has a navigator in the cockpit due to the aircraft's age. It remains one of the last commercial-made planes to have one, although some military aircraft still use navigators too.

Prior to the jet age, some aircraft used a radio-based system known as Very High Frequency Omni-Directional Range (VOR) flying. In this system, aircraft would receive communications from fixed ground beacons, allowing it to continue its flight path and find its position. This navigation method was quite reliable in areas with radio coverage and continued to be in use until GPS became the norm.

The beginning of the jet age also marked the introduction of a new navigation method: inertial navigation systems (INS). The INS phased out older celestial systems, relying on highly sensitive motion and rotation sensors instead. This marked the first use of partially-computerized navigation sensors, a trend that would continue until GPS became standard on all flights.

The INS systems also made aircraft navigators mostly redundant, which is why no modern aircraft has a navigators seat. The introduction of the inertial navigation system revolutionized flight navigation, allowing pilots to follow set flight paths based on their current positions and take the guesswork out of the calculations.

 

The advent of GPS

GPS, or Global Positioning System, actually came into operation well before it became a mainstay in all cockpits and mobile devices. GPS was initially created for military purposes only, with the project starting in 1973 and the first satellite launching in 1978.

However, in 1983, President Ronald Reagan signed an executive order allowing passenger aircraft to use the system once it was fully operational. The reason to allow GPS for commercial use was due to the recent Korean Air Lines crash in 1983.

KAL007 crashed after it was shot down by Soviet fighter aircraft due to the plane mistakenly entering Soviet airspace on its way to Seoul. In response to the crash, the US authorized the use of GPS for flights to provide for more accurate navigation.

In February 1994, the FAA authorized the use of GPS on aircraft, setting up the next generation of aircraft navigation. Soon after, GPS became available for mobile devices too, which is what makes Google Maps and flight tracking software work.

The Smithsonian National Air & Space Museum highlights the following about the breakthrough:

 

"A significant milestone in American aviation occurred when the Federal Aviation Administration certified the first GPS unit for use in IFR (Instrument Flight Rules) operations. Twenty years later, GPS has become the dominant form of en route navigation as well as the primary technology for guiding aircraft in low-visibility approaches to landing. The unit first certified twenty years ago was the Garmin GPS 155."

Get the latest aviation news straight to your inbox: Sign up for our newsletters today.

 

A long journey

All in all, the Inertial Reference System (IRS) is the primary navigational system in a plane today. The self-sufficient process doesn't need any external input to know where it is across the skies. It doesn't consist of any physical leveling and utilizes mathematical algorithms to make sure that the accelerometers are constantly in line with the horizon.

Aircraft navigation has come a long way from pilots flying with little information to having everything on a screen before them. While older methods of navigation are gone from the cockpit, pilots still learn many older tools. Dead reckoning continues to be taught to pilots, even if they fly aircraft with GPS. This is because technology can fail, forcing pilots to manage the aircraft manually.

Aircraft navigation continues to evolve even today. Companies are already developing the next generation of technology to allow for autonomous flight. There will undoubtedly be major transitions in this field over the next decade.

What do you think about older navigation methods? What will be the next breakthrough in aviation? Let us know what you think in the comment section!

[Kip Powick]

Many decades ago before the advent of all the methods of flying of today with the technology aircraft possess, I flew IFR like many other pilots to get from A to B....(back then  IFR  meant I Fly Railways)

[Seeker]

On 11/6/2022 at 9:34 AM, Kip Powick said:

Many decades ago before the advent of all the methods of flying of today with the technology aircraft possess, I flew IFR like many other pilots to get from A to B....(back then  IFR  meant I Fly Railways)

Railways?  Luxury, pure luxury!

The places I flew didn't even have railways or roads or power lines  - nothing but lakes, rocks and trees.  I used FOTM - finger on the map - as you'd fly along you'd move your finger to track your current position.  Worked pretty well - didn't even use aviation maps, we used forestry maps because they were higher resolution at 2 miles to the inch.

None of those bush planes had any sort of navigation at all.  They were physically equipped with compasses but none had been swung in decades.

One airplane I flew has an ASI, VSI, Altimeter, a clock that didn't work,  a compass that always pointed North and a single VHF radio with a range of about 10 miles.

[Kip Powick]

By the sounds of it , you are pretty lucky to be here 

[Falken]

No problem as long as you were going North.

[Kip Powick]

As a student T-33 jet pilot and on my first instrument ride under the blind flying hood, I was told by my instructor, immediately after T/O, to climb to 6000 feet and level off at 250 kts...

I did as requested but shortly after level-off my instructor told me to watch my altitude.

A quick cross check showed me at 6000 feet

Again my instructor, in a voice of impatience, told me to watch my altitude. My cross check showed me just a smidge above 6000 feet

In frustration my instructor said "I have control" followed by bunting the aircraft and then asking what my altimeter read.

I went back to my altimeter and it was still reading, in my opinion, about 50 feet high but suddenly realization set in.....

I was so intent on leveling off at 6000 feet that I had inadvertantly mistook the aircraft clock for the altimeter and had leveled off at 6:00 o'clock  (1800Z)

In the meantime I had done a slow climb to 6700 feet...... according to my instructor.

From then on....I really did have an actual cross-check

 

[Seeker]

52 minutes ago, Kip Powick said:

By the sounds of it , you are pretty lucky to be here 

You have no idea.  I have a story I've never told here - "luck" doesn't come close to describing it.

[Guest2]

My father took off on a routine supply flight north from the SNYE one day (some time in the mid 40s) and did not return that day nor did he for a few weeks so he was considered lost. Low and behold one day a float plane was reporting in, it was my dad who had put down on a lake due to engine problems  and after a few weeks did the necessary repairs and headed back home. Not sure what the repair was but it was likely due to gaskets.

Anyway, his aircraft was equipped with a radio but it was only active when airborne and only when the trailing antenna was let out. .... so he was not able to radio home to tell them his was ok, until airborne once again 

He survived for the 2 plus weeks while repairing this engine because he carried a basic survival kit including a 410 shotgun meat gun, matches, basic cookware etc and a sleeping bag. Along of course with some basic tools.   By the by, basic nav aids were magnetic compass (not much use the closer you got to the circle) and follow the rivers. Many trips in and out of the Nahanni (Secrets of the Nahanni: The Valley of Headless Men – The Outdoor Journal) and further north. I still have some film (black and white 16mm ... not sure where he got the camera) that was taken showing narwhales in the Arctic ocean , HBC Factor Houses and trading posts  , skin boats and the high tundra. 

He carried on to perfect his trade and at the end of his career (despite only a grade 6 education) Was Captain on the DC8-63. (first aircraft was a biplane in 1939. Did not get to know him as well as I would have liked as he died from cancer at 56 Years Young.

[Kip Powick]

Sorry to hear of your loss. Sounds like your Dad was a "real" pilot, a breed long gone and a breed that will never return. I'm probably in the minority, but I don't think  your education  has much to do with your personal desire, ambition, and  willingness to put forth your best ability to succeed and be the best, in the aviation Industry.

Seems so many young  adults feel they are "entitled", and with very little effort or desire, will be catapulted to the top..

 

[Kip Powick]

2 hours ago, Seeker said:

you have no idea.  I have a story I've never told here - "luck" doesn't come close to describing it.

Tell the story.......this is an aviation/airline EMPLOYEE forum....spill your guts 

You tell yours and I will tell you mine..I have two, one as a student pilot and one as a Qualified Jet Instructor/Check Pilot....both, milliseconds from death 

[conehead]

Yes! C’mon, let’s hear it!

[J.O.]

18 hours ago, Seeker said:

You have no idea.  I have a story I've never told here - "luck" doesn't come close to describing it.

Most of us have a story we're not proud to tell - all part of building the experience bag, hopefully before the luck bag ran out.

[Vsplat]

1 hour ago, J.O. said:

Most of us have a story we're not proud to tell - all part of building the experience bag, hopefully before the luck bag ran out.

To me, humility was the price paid for surviving a sub-optimal performance.  

Same take as you.  Some of us got lucky enough to grow old doing this work with just some bad memories.  Others had the same things go wrong but just caught a bad break.   The most important part of the experience toolkit was admitting that it was luck on a given day and not some secret superior gift that let me continue aging.

[Guest2]

An example of getting lucky.

Status:	Final
Date:	Friday 29 January 1971
Time:	21:37
Type:	McDonnell Douglas DC-8-63
Operator:	Canadian Pacific Air Lines - CPAL
Registration:	CF-CPQ
MSN:	45928/334
First flight:	1968
Total airframe hrs:	11340
Crew:	Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 12
Passengers:	Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 136
Total:	Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 148
Aircraft damage:	Substantial
Aircraft fate:	Repaired
Location:	Sydney-Kingsford Smith International Airport, NSW (SYD) (   Australia)
Phase:	Taxi (TXI)
Nature:	International Scheduled Passenger
Departure airport:	Vancouver International Airport, BC (YVR/CYVR), Canada
Destination airport:	Sydney-Kingsford Smith International Airport, NSW (SYD/YSSY), Australia
Flightnumber:	301

Narrative:
A Boeing 727, operated by Trans Australia Airlines, and a Douglas DC-8, operated by CP Air, both sustained substantial damage in a runway collision at Sydney-Kingsford Smith International Airport, NSW (SYD), Australia. There were no injuries.
At 21:29 hours local time on 29 January 1971, the flight crew of the Boeing 727 aircraft, registered VH-TJA, called the surface movement controller in Sydney Tower, informed him that they were Flight 592 and requested a clearance to taxi from the loading apron. It was cleared to taxy to the holding point for runway 16.
At 21:30:20 hours the crew of the DC-8-63 aircraft, registered CF-CPQ, first called the aerodrome controller in Sydney Tower, having just left 3,000 feet at the West Pymble locator on an Instrument Landing System (ILS) approach to runway 16. The crew were instructed to report again at the outer marker.
Whilst CF-CPQ was on short finals, the crew of VH-TJA informed the aerodrome controller at 21:33:47 hours, that they were ready to take off. The DC-8 had been cleared to land and VH-TJA was instructed to line-up on the runway behind that aircraft.
After CF-CPQ was observed to pass the threshold of the runway, the crew of VH-TJA proceeded to line-up and await their clearance for takeoff.
As the landing DC8-63 aircraft neared the end of its landing run, the aerodrome controller instructed it to "...take taxiway right-call on 121.7" and this instruction was acknowledged. The crew of the Canadian aircraft, however, later stated that they read this instruction as "-backtrack if you like-change to 121.7" and they proceeded to turn the aircraft right about on the runway and to taxy back directly towards the Boeing 727. The landing run of CF-CPQ finished directly opposite the entrance to Taxiway I, which leads off to the right from runway 16.
The turn was carried out opposite the entrance to Taxiway T. The aerodrome controller saw the landing run of CF-CPQ finish opposite the taxiway and saw the aircraft turn towards the taxiway.
When he believed that, in conformity with his instructions, the aircraft had entered the taxiway and was clear of the runway, he cleared VH-TJA for takeoff. This clearance was given at 21:35:38 hours.
By then the flight crew of CF-CPQ had changed to the surface movement control radio frequency, 121.7 so were not able to hear the clearance for takeoff issued to VH-TJA.
Soon after the DC-8 captain commenced to backtrack down the centre of the runway he noticed that the aircraft, whose landing lights he had already seen near the threshold of runway 16 was, in fact, coming towards him. He immediately increased power and commenced to steer his aircraft off the runway towards its eastern side. Before he could vacate the runway, however, but at about the time that the nose of his aircraft reached the eastern edge, the approaching aircraft, which he watched rotate and lift off, flew over the top of CF-CPQ. He felt a jolt which he interpreted as his nosewheel entering a depression off the edge of the runway or, alternatively, over-running an elevated runway light but, the immediate danger having passed, he then steered his aircraft back towards the centreline of the runway.
The flight crew of VH-TJA did not see the DC-8 until they had commenced the rotation action for which the nominated speed was 131 knots. The captain judged it too close to be avoided by abandoning
the takeoff and so continued a normal takeoff technique, guarding particularly against any over-rotation, in the belief that this would be the best means of clearing the obstructing aircraft.
As CF-CPQ taxied towards the eastern edge of the runway in order to avoid the on-coming aircraft, the sweep of his landing lights was observed in the control tower and the surface movement controller, believing that the aircraft was commencing a turn from Taxiway V into Taxiway A, which leads back onto the runway, instructed the aircraft, first of all, to "hold position" and then "...continue straight ahead along the taxiway and cross runway 07". By this time, however, the crew of CF-CPQ had observed the landing lights of a DC-9 aircraft, VH-TJN, which was approaching to land on runway 16. They pointed this out to the surface movement controller who then asked them to confirm that they were on the taxiway and the answer given from CF-CPQ was "Negative sir, we're on the runway, we were cleared to backtrack on the runway". The approaching DC-9 aircraft was instructed immediately to go around and the crew of CF-CPQ were given fresh instructions to vacate the runway at the next taxiway on their left.
It was at about this time that the crew of VH-TJA informed the aerodrome controller that they had struck the DC-8 during their takeoff and that they had lost hydraulic pressure in their "A" system, which is one of the primary hydraulic systems of the aircraft. This aircraft then proceeded to an off-shore position to dump fuel and returned for a successful landing on runway 16 at 22:16:30 hours.
The crew of CF-CPQ was informed of the report that the departing aircraft had struck them but, since there was no indication in the cockpit of abnormal operation, they continued to their parking position. Here it was observed that substantial portions of the upper fin and rudder were missing from the aircraft.

 

Probable Cause:

CAUSE: "The cause of this accident was that the taxying clearance given after landing was misread by the flight crew of CF-CPQ and this error was not detected by the aerodrome controller, who cleared VH-TJA for take-off. The flight crew of VH-TJA, on detecting the obstructing aircraft, did not then adopt the most effective means of avoiding a collision."

Close Call In Sydney: The Near Miss That Broke A CP Air DC-8's Tailfin In 1971 (simpleflying.com)

[conehead]

"The crew of CF-CPQ was informed of the report that the departing aircraft had struck them but, since there was no indication in the cockpit of abnormal operation, they continued to their parking position."

Wild!!

[J.O.]

An innocent enough beginning which became a very scary but still fortunate outcome.

[Guest2]

From the NetLetter.  The NetLetter

Maybe some of our more seasoned members used this simulator.

Pierre Gillard of the Quebec Aerospace Museum tells us that their recently acquired 1958 CAE "Twin Engine" Flight Simulator is currently at CAE's as part of their 75th anniversary commemoration, but it should soon be moved to downtown Montreal where it will be displayed fully functional!  This was used by numerous RCAF transport pilots for procedure training. A lot of them were later hired by airlines. Probably some of your readers flew that simulator! Editors' Note: If any of our readers flew this simulator, perhaps you might care to share their experience. More from Pierre Gillard below.

[Guest2]

Pierre Gillard, of the Quebec Aerospace Museum, published a story about 'Buffalo Airways Curtiss C-46 Commando' on their web site. The story describes the indispensable freight planes supplying remote communities in the Northwest Territories of Canada. The article was produced for the benefit of the Quebec Aerospace Museum, and made available to our readers with the kind permission of Pierre Gillard. 2020-c46_EN.pdf (pierregillard.com)

[Malcolm]

The flight deck of the B-36 Peacemaker. The Peacemaker had six piston engines, four jet engines, and the longest wingspan of any combat aircraft. It was only in service for 11 years. Here's a closer look at this nearly forgotten Cold War deterrent.

 

[Malcolm]

 

Fokker D.VII Cockpit. The aircraft first appeared on the Western front April, 1918.

[Malcolm]

I wonder if anyone on this forum flew the aircraft or was involved in it' mtce?

 

story link, lots of pictures etc. De Havilland Mosquito: The Wooden wonder - Jets ’n’ Props (jetsprops.com)

 

 

[Falken]

I know someone who worked on them when they were being built. He told me that the window frames were made out of birch. Later he made his own boats, however, everyone wanted to buy them and he finally started a boat building business. Very nice German man who has now passed on. Wilker (sp) boats if you haver seen one. 

 

[W5]

2 hours ago, Malcolm said:

I wonder if anyone on this forum flew the aircraft or was involved in it' mtce?

 

story link, lots of pictures etc. De Havilland Mosquito: The Wooden wonder - Jets ’n’ Props (jetsprops.com)

 

 

There is one being restored, with a lot of expertise, close to you in Nanton.

https://calgarymosquitosociety.com/home.htm

[Malcolm]

Thanks, I did know about that one but was curious if anyone on this forum either flew one or did mtce  on one.  

For those not familiar with Nanton etc. here is a link to an article regarding the restoration:

The Calgary Mosquito project: Resurrecting a WW II legend in Nanton, Alta. - Legion Magazine

and another link with more information:

Calgary Mosquito Aircraft Society | Community Knowledge Centre (calgaryfoundation.org)

[Malcolm]

RAF Lancaster & RAF Mosquito