iPad enough?

[dhmeissner]

This backs up Mr. KS's experiance.

Do I really need an external GPS? - iPad Pilot News

 

[Jeffrey S]

Aboard a jet flying from Amsterdam to Inverness Scotland, 410 knots.

Did you, by any chance, keep the display on to watch it over a few minutes? My impression is that the built-in GPS can't hold the GPS fix while moving at higher speeds. I've seen other complaints that switching apps while moving at higher speeds causes the fix to be lost too.

I'll be flying on April 17th from the Bahamas to Seattle and I'll have a good opportunity to try it out. I never messed around with GPS much on airlines.

 

[Yahoo 1]

I guess we're good to go running at 8 knots...

 

[Yahoo 1]

Did you, by any chance, keep the display on to watch it over a few minutes? My impression is that the built-in GPS can't hold the GPS fix while moving at higher speeds. I've seen other complaints that switching apps while moving at higher speeds causes the fix to be lost too.

I'll be flying on April 17th from the Bahamas to Seattle and I'll have a good opportunity to try it out. I never messed around with GPS much on airlines.

Interesting question.

I can only speak about things that I have tried, then to answer your question, yes I kept the display over 28 minutes (pics attached), the built-in GPS (iPad mini) did hold the GPS fix during that time.

Also I have had testing my iPad Air 2 with built-in GPS aboard an Airbus 320 - window seat - flying from Nice (France) to Athens with the same outstanding result.

But, in my opinion, this does not prove the liability & accuracy of the position & speed inflight, being a passenger aboard then having no other means to control the displayed informations therefore you can't trust my experience. Having said that, it was not bad at all.

Post #81 from ksceviour based on his own experience about that was great and very professional. I do thank him for his comments.

However what I do know is that many of the helicopter pilots working in the south of France assigned to the commercial airlines between Monaco - Corsica - Nice - Cannes - Saint Tropez - Lyon are using iPad with built-in GPS no external antenna. Of course the speed is low compared with the jetliners' high speed, they fly Eurocopter H125 (AS 350 B3) Ecureuil (Squirrel) single-engine Astar or twin-engine variant, marketed in North America as the TwinStar (~ cruise speed of 125 knots and a VNE or max speed not to exceed of 155 knots), and Robinson Helicopter R22 (cruise speed of 63 knots and a VNE of 94 knots) also Robinson R44 (cruise speed of 110 knots and a VNE of 130 knots).

 

[McGillicuddy]

When I was flying my Cirrus SR22 I would regularly lose my gps position on my iPad at anything over 5,000' agl. I was running the WingX app. With a hockey puck type Bluetooth external antenna I never lost a signal once, at any altitude. Cruise speed on that aircraft was 175 knots.

 

[Yahoo 1]

When I was flying my Cirrus SR22 I would regularly lose my gps position on my iPad at anything over 5,000' agl. I was running the WingX app. With a hockey puck type Bluetooth external antenna I never lost a signal once, at any altitude. Cruise speed on that aircraft was 175 knots.

SR22 is iconic

 

[Ski in NC]

Interesting case in point: I used a speed app on my Galaxy phone. On a commercial flight with phone in "airplane" mode, it apparently got a good enough gps signal to give a reliable speed reading. Mostly was around 520-580mph.

Earlier I posted my dissatisfaction with touch screens: This was specific to using the Ipad for nav in rough stuff. I have not used the touch screens made specific to marine use, so that complaint may not apply there.

 

[Yahoo 1]

Interesting case in point: I used a speed app on my Galaxy phone. On a commercial flight with phone in "airplane" mode, it apparently got a good enough gps signal to give a reliable speed reading. Mostly was around 520-580mph.

Right. Since the built-in GPS chipset is a receiver only, it is not affected by Airplane Mode which switch off Bluetooth, wifi, and disconnect from wireless networks (GSM or CDMA).

 

[Northern Spy]

Right. Since the built-in GPS chipset is a receiver only, it is not affected by Airplane Mode which switch off Bluetooth, wifi, and disconnect from wireless networks (GSM or CDMA).

The FAA has allowed Bluetooth and Wifi in airplane mode since late 2013. Transport Canada since mid 2014. Place your device into airplane mode and then turn on Bluetooth and Wifi as required.

 

[Yahoo 1]

The FAA has allowed...Wifi in airplane mode since late 2013....

Only If the plane has an installed WiFi system and the airline allows its use.

 

[JDCAVE]

Did you, by any chance, keep the display on to watch it over a few minutes? My impression is that the built-in GPS can't hold the GPS fix while moving at higher speeds.

I found that the airline I was on had some sort of shield they turned on that disabled the GPS on my iPad. Also they informed us to turn it to airplane mode.

We use a Bluetooth connection with our Inreach. We fine that this connection interferes with the internal gps of the iPad. It must default somehow to the gps on the Inreach. We found that the IPad located us on land on the charting software. This was corrected when we disabled the Bluetooth connection.

Jim

 

[ksceviour]

This has been a very interesting discussion and consequentially during my latest trip I paid particular attention to the GPS reception of the two flight deck mounted iPads. Our track from eastern North America to Shanghai China took us slightly west of the north pole and over Siberia which exposed the port flight deck window to the southern sky. It was interesting to note that the southern exposed iPad had an accurate GPS position the entire trip of 6900 nautical miles while the other, with fewer available satellites, rarely showed a position at all.

As for speed being an issue with GPS reliability again the specter of antenna sensitivity comes into question. A device that loses reception as speed increases may be suffering form the inability to acquire signals quickly enough before the combination of aircraft trajectory and orbits make solutions unavailable. The calculations are based on time and it's just math at that point so provided you have enough signal sources (satellites) and the physical digit's available on the display the calculated speed will be accurate no matter what it is. The speed of the GPS unit itself should be inconsequential.

For a final comment on this subject I would like to say that boating (like aviation) is all about risk management so I suggest "if in doubt there is no doubt". In other words, if there exists doubt at all about the reliability of any safety related system then that risk must be mitigated. My own solution to this particular personal doubt was an external antenna.

 

[Yahoo 1]

This has been a very interesting discussion and consequentially during my latest trip I paid particular attention to the GPS reception of the two flight deck mounted iPads. Our track from eastern North America to Shanghai China took us slightly west of the north pole and over Siberia which exposed the port flight deck window to the southern sky. It was interesting to note that the southern exposed iPad had an accurate GPS position the entire trip of 6900 nautical miles while the other, with fewer available satellites, rarely showed a position at all.

As for speed being an issue with GPS reliability again the specter of antenna sensitivity comes into question. A device that loses reception as speed increases may be suffering form the inability to acquire signals quickly enough before the combination of aircraft trajectory and orbits make solutions unavailable. The calculations are based on time and it's just math at that point so provided you have enough signal sources (satellites) and the physical digit's available on the display the calculated speed will be accurate no matter what it is. The speed of the GPS unit itself should be inconsequential.

For a final comment on this subject I would like to say that boating (like aviation) is all about risk management so I suggest "if in doubt there is no doubt". In other words, if there exists doubt at all about the reliability of any safety related system then that risk must be mitigated. My own solution to this particular personal doubt was an external antenna.

Very interesting statement and informations. Thank you !

 

[psneeld]

I believe the geostationary differential satellites are equatorial and usually not available in high latitudes unless you have altitude.

Today in Miami I was using 122 as the differential satellite.

 

[Rebel112r]

They work just fine at 75* N at sea level. Old Transit Satellite system did not work so well, a couple of fixes an hour, but that was in the early 80's.

 

[djones44]

A picture of my Volvo dash, then with a prototype Poort iPad fitting nicely over the panel:

Works even better on the bridge, over my Furuno sounder, and also on the table top. Hangs from any side, or overhead. In production in late March.

 

[Yahoo 1]

A picture of my Volvo dash, then with a prototype Poort iPad fitting nicely over the panel:

Works even better on the bridge, over my Furuno sounder, and also on the table top. Hangs from any side, or overhead. In production in late March.

It looks nice !

 

[Yahoo 1]

As you already know, GPS satellites are not geostationary, the system is composed of 24 satellites Navstar placed in an orbit inclined ~ 55°at the altitude of 20,184 km (12,540 miles).

Because GPS satellites are not geostationary then always moving, our GPS receivers store in memory the information from the last locations that it was on satellite signal, which explains why satellite acquisition may take longer if you have not used your GPS receiver since more than 1 week.

Also Monitor Stations upload new, corrected data to each satellite every four hours. This data includes a corrections on the exact time and position of that and other GPS satellites in orbit. An update of the satellite’s position can be determined by performing a GPS measurement to a ground antenna of which the exact location is known. The Monitor Stations are located near the equator to reduce the ionospheric effects.

The geostationary orbit (also called Geosynchronous) is very different, it is circular orbit roughly 36,000 km (22,369 milles) above the equator. The satellites positioned in a geostationary orbit provides capacity for Video (TV channels), Radios, Data and Multi-Usage Services, to speak only of civilian satellites.

Only China is going to have 5 geostationary satellites to provide positioning system with its Compass system that will also include 30 non-geostationary satellites.

Thank you for posting about the "Old Transit Sat System", this remind me my preparation for the boating license exam in the 90'! Transit was the first satellite system, launched by the USA in the 60' for the US Navy. The system, based on the principle of the Doppler effect, was revolutionary. (Radar guns, for example use the Doppler effect to measure the speed of vehicles or other objects such as baseballs).

Transit was six satellites on six polar orbits, altitude: 960 km (596) miles, orbiting the earth allowed ships to fix their position on the seas once every hour. Transit could guarantee a successful measurement within 110 minutes at the equator, as long as a satellite was in range of the receiver. The greater the latitude, the more satellites became visible. For example, at 80° latitude N, the average fix time was only 30 minutes. (If my memory serves me well, correct me if I'm wrong here).

It was mostly when the USSR shot down a Korean passenger jet - flight 007 - in 1983 that the Reagan Administration had the incentive to open up GPS for civilian applications which was done on May 2, 2000, by the Clinton Administration.

After 17 years and numerous setbacks and budget boosts, Europe's Galileo satellite navigation system has gone live. At this point, 18 of the planned 30 satellites are already in orbit. European Union launched Galileo, a planned satellite navigation system, intended as a European alternative to the US GPS. It is currently under consideration by the European Union and the European Space Agency. The system is intended to be primarily for civil use, unlike the US system then Galileo will increase geo-localization precision tenfold. Besides the European Space Agency member states, numerous other countries are involved in Galileo in one way or another. Among them are India, Israel, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, South Korea and Ukraine.

A modernization program of the US GPS system would also contain standardized features that will allow GPS III and Galileo systems to inter-operate, allowing receivers to be developed to utilize GPS and Galileo together to create an even more precise positioning.

 

[psneeld]

I was thinking the WAAS system which I reviewed when in the USCG. This is from wikipedia....

WAAS uses a network of ground-based reference stations, in North America and Hawaii, to measure small variations in the GPS satellites' signals in the western hemisphere. Measurements from the reference stations are routed to master stations, which queue the received Deviation Correction (DC) and send the correction messages to geostationary WAAS satellites in a timely manner (every 5 seconds or better). Those satellites broadcast the correction messages back to Earth, where WAAS-enabled GPS receivers use the corrections while computing their positions to improve accuracy.

 

[Yahoo 1]

Very interesting.

My Garmin GPS auto navigator works with GPS and Federal Aviation Administration WAAS (if enabled in the Settings Menu) which seems to add more precise positioning when driving in the US also it seems to fix the position faster (compared to TomTom).

Still about satellite positioning & devices, I know that iPhone 4S & Samsung Galaxy III could use GPS and GLONASS (Global Navigation Satellite System of the Russian Federal Space Agency). The main advantage of using GLONASS together with GPS is in situations with bad view to the sky, e.g., in urban canyons. In that case, the additional GLONASS satellites may help. In open sky situations, a combined GPS/GLONASS has no accuracy benefit to a GPS chip alone.

I have no idea if the latest Apple devices iPhone/iPad still use GLONASS today.

 

[Group9]

I take it no radar? if you are comfortable with fair weather boating only sure, an I pad is just fine. How about paper charts, have those?

Furuno makes a wireless radar that displays on your Ipad or Iphone. $1000 at Defender Marine right now.

 

[bayview]

Is i pad enough was the question.
It intrigued me as how much is enough?

I spent years sailing from NY area to Cape Cod and the islands using DR and occasionally RDF. Later A bare boat charter in new to me area of FL was really bare so it was back to DR. That went fine.
My last boat had radar and chartplotter. IMO today I would not be without a chartplotter but clearly it is not absolutely necessary depending on your skills and level of piloting experience.

Heck this is boating little or nothing is really necessary except for a functioning space between the ears..

 

[psneeld]

Now that of have openCPN and all US charts on my Samsung tablet...doubt I would ever buy a real chart plotter for my trawler. Skiff yes, trawler no.

 

[Landshark]

A boat yard manager told me last year that over half his work is rock collisions. Of those he said most are because the captain was using and iPad with Navionics. The problem is not that the iPad, but rather helmsmen frequently fail to adjust for the proper detail (ie, zoom in).

 

[Baker]

A boat yard manager told me last year that over half his work is rock collisions. Of those he said most are because the captain was using and iPad with Navionics. The problem is not that the iPad, but rather helmsmen frequently fail to adjust for the proper detail (ie, zoom in).

That is a problem on chartplotters as well.

 

[Landshark]

Not the same kind of problem. Every time one moves the location of the vessel relative to the iPad screen the degree of detail changes. it happens often without the user being aware.

 

[djones44]

That is a problem on chartplotters as well.

It's a danger with paper charts as well.

Once while coming down from Campbell River, I changed charts before Comox and was reassured by the indication of at least a quarter mile of open water continuing off Kye Bay.

Unfortunately, the scale had changed, I was doing 20kn in 2 feet of water, and soon loudly thundered to an abrupt halt. The tide came up, I kedged off, and had to limp all day to Gibson's with a bent shaft. Nearly did the same along the Sandheads off UBC. No depth alarms in the 70's - that time I noticed the sea grass under the hull, so stopped, jumped overboard and pushed the boat along like a car out to deeper water.

Had the tide been going out, and then came back in with a steep chop, i could have lost either boat. Things happen very quickly on the water, and you learn to become wary of what is lurking out there, even (especially?) on sunny afternoons.

 

[foggysail]

I use my Garmin chart plotter, IP with Navonics and paper charts and never have had any problem. My main navigational tools are a paper chart along with and old Power Squadron plastic charting tool. The Garmin & IPad are there only to confirm my location.

I don't know how anybody can plot a route with a GPS.

 

[FlyWright]

That's why I think redundancy with different charts is helpful. One up close for detail and the others in a longer range display. Different source charts display differently...some highlighting dangers others might appear to gloss over.

 

[ranger58sb]

Not the same kind of problem. Every time one moves the location of the vessel relative to the iPad screen the degree of detail changes. it happens often without the user being aware.

??

Can you elaborate on that?

If I understand what you're saying (maybe not), we're not seeing that kind of symptom on our Android nav apps... chart scale (and detail) only changes when the user zooms in or out...

-Chris