Should we Still Teach Old Tech???

[Buster1]

Is old tech still worth teaching? A brief article that discusses this while looking at the "old school" E6-B.

Thanks for looking.

http://engineout.weebly.com/articles...ave-a-dinosaur

[CraigCantwell]

Wizz wheel never needs batteries and if you don't know how to manually solve the problem, how will you be sure the electronics are giving you valid info?

[DaleB]

For you guys who flew a lot before the advent of smart phones, tablets and even electronic calculators designed specifically to replace the E6B, it can be useful... and maybe a comfort to have along. It's like the decade old Rand McNally road atlas that sits untouched in the back of my truck, "just in case". No one will ever use it again, but it's a last ditch backup we both know how to use. Never mind that anyone under 40 probably wouldnt recognize it.

I learned to fly at 52 years of age. I bought the required E6B and got more or less proficient witn it. I had no choice, since the trainers had no EFIS, no GPS and I didn't own and would not have been allowed to use a tablet. But... I don't think I've touched it since taking my checkride. For the first couple of years I carried it along in my flight bag, but haven't ever needed, wanted or missed it. Not even once, not even a little bit. I don't carry it now for the same reason I don't carry a surgical kit. The odds of needing it are vanishingly small, and I lack the proficiency to use it in a meaningful way anyway. I have never suffered a simultaneous failure of my GPS, phone and tablet, despite the dire predictions of the flying related web boards.

Is it still worth teaching? That's a separate question. I mean, they still teach slide rules in school, and middle school students are still not allowed th use calculators, right? Oh... wait. Never mind.

[lnuss]

Schools these days are debating whether to teach cursive (some have quit). You're asking about E6B. Same principal, in my mind; both are useful skills to have, and sooner or later you'd wish you had the relevant skill.

[CraigCantwell]

The Navy last year, started requiring all midshipman to learn celestial navigation, and is going to be doing the same for NROTC members.

[rwanttaja]

I'm preparing a 20-part Youtube series on care and maintenance of whale-oil lamps.

Generally, there's little reason for retaining outdated technology and the ability to handle it. Vacuum-tube test stands disappeared from stores about 30 years ago, and you don't hear the populace whining about it.

The problem with modern methods is that they don't reinforce an intrinsic knowledge of the subject. Saw that when electronic calculators replaced slide rules. Hard to operate a slide rule without a *feel* as to what the results should be...a person punching numbers on a keypad doesn't have a clue.

The "Doomsday" scenarios are mostly bogus. No, we shouldn't force EE students to take a year of vacuum-tube theory just because a megawar may force them to fall back on making vacuum tubes for stereo amplifiers.

Military, though, is the exception. If there's electronics in a weapon system, it can be exploited, jammed, spoofed, or just die when the batteries go flat. The USN and celestial navigation is a prime example of this. In a wartime situation, you aren't going to be able to depend on GPS being available, nor the bad guys not warping the signal (like Iran got that drone of ours) or even detecting your presence due to emissions from your GPS set. The WWII German radar warning receivers were a classic example of the latter.

Ron Wanttaja

[Bill Berson]

I think knowing that 60mph is one mile per minute and 120mph is two miles per minute is close enough for VFR.

[Frank Giger]

Ron hit on the point I am going to make.

We encountered the same thing in the Artillery, where manual "charts and darts" for computing the charge, quadrant, and deflection of the guns was replaced by computers, and even in land navigation, where paper maps, coordinate scales, and a compass has given way to GPS.

The answer is that one should learn the E6-B, paper charts, and all the fun that entails to take the mystery out of what the magic box is doing. Understanding what manual procedures the box is automating means that if it ever spits out garbage one can recognize it for being garbage. It also teaches the relationships between direct course, heading due to wind, and even kts to mph.

Now when the pilot plugs in the end point to a cross country he can look at it and put in logical waypoints, understanding that yes, he really does need waypoints.

Learn to navigate with a sectional and the habits of comprehending where one is on the magenta line are established.

[edit]

Bill, you've hit on my methods! Since I cruise at about 60 mph, figuring cross country stuff gets a bit easier. I just have to convert wind given in knots to MPH.

[Ivanstein]

This will probably show my level (or lack thereof) of knowledge, but aren't "wind triangles" just graphical vector addition?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[rwanttaja]

This will probably show my level (or lack thereof) of knowledge, but aren't "wind triangles" just graphical vector addition?

Yep. And by using the term "just," you demonstrated that you're probably more intelligent than 95% of the people out there.... :-)

Ron "Thataway" Wanttaja