Navagating across the pond before GPS

[Thedude]

You can still do it without UHF as well. Did it last year.

I hope you meant HF and not UHF, that is unless you are talking to military traffic only

 

[JimNtexas]

I was a student on the very last T-29 nav training mission, followed by a few missions in the mighty T-43. We learned how to navigate with sextant (HoMoTo), driftmeter, pressure pattern, consolan, manual Loran (used an oscilloscope to measure time difference, then plot the TD on a Loran chart), and of course, dead reckoning.

We even had a class on A-N ranges!

 

[cheyflyer]

Ahhh..yes

Enough of this LRN mumblejumble....I want to know more about freightdogfreds avatar!! Well...Fred.....

 

[Phaedrus]

Navigating was a fun job back when you actually had to navigate. I'm very fortunate to have exited the nav world when I did, but I have fond memories especially of bouncing around the Pacific through places like Wake, Kwajelein, Midway, Yap, Palau, and getting to see places like Enewetok, Iwo Jima (actually got to do touch-n-gos there), Bikini.
Keep talking, this is good stuff!

 

[Spooky 2]

Don't ever recall Ocean Station Papa in the Atlantic but Ocean Stations Charlie and Juliet were in the Atlantic with NDB's for obtaining a fix. Never heard of them providing radar fixes??

It was pretty simple, and crude but they established their position within a 10 mile square block within the 100 mile square grid. Then you called them up and gave them your estimated position. They then attempted a radar ID on your aircraft and gave your position as a bearing and distance from the ship in the designated 10 mile square grid.

Less than perfection but still a warm and fuzzy.

 

[Spooky 2]

Spooky 2,

I think we may be talking about two different grids. When I was in SAC we used grid charts to help navigate up north because of the rapid convergence of longitude lines, thus affecting MH and TH rather quickly. Grid navigation eliminated the need for the compass to be "slaved" and allowed navigation in the DG mode. Hope this is right - I'm going back 25 years.

No, we are talking about the exact same grid nav. This is why you need to be in True at all times while transitting the NCA, just for the reason you have mentioned above. Pan Am did not have authority for Doppler in the NCA, hence the Navigator and grid nave requirement, while most other areas of the world had Doppler and Loran approvals without benefit of the Navigator, This was in the dying days of Navigators on the Boeings and DC8's

PS, what were you doing in a P3 whilst in SAC? Does Curtiss Le May know about this deviant behavior on your part?

 

[seagle]

Spooky 2,

P3s came after SAC and after the USAF. While in SAC it was the B-52G.

 

[pilotyip]

Nav's Bermuda Triangle Story

In 1969 I flew a P-3A, it had an inertial Nav system, the ASN-42. It was build by the Singer Sewing Machine Company, they were the low bidder on their first adventure in to defense dept bidding, Needless to say it had some bad habits, like all of sudden taking off for one of the poles at Mach 2. We were on 12 hour EmCon (no electronic emissions from the aircraft) daytime mission out of the Azores, to recover in Bermuda. The 3P was listed as the primary Nav, I flew as 2P and agreed after we got off station, I would take the Nav into Bermuda to give the 3P some cockpit time. About 8 hours in to our mission I go back to take over the Nav, I notice he gives me a turnover fix, and he used the ASN-42 as his turnover point. I asked when was the last time he checked on the inertial position, he responded that he did not need to, it was working perfectly. I said I wanted to confirm our position before I accepted the Nav, so I tuned up the Loran A, not a line on the scope, all dead flat. So I took and assumed latitude of his position and computed a sun shot. The sun was not even in my field of view looking through the sextant. Holy Crap, we are lost somewhere a 1000 miles south of Bermuda. I told the PPC what was going on and said take a heading of 315, we should hit the east coast somewhere between Jacksonville and Norfolk. The sun was out, so of I took a sighting and backed into an assumed position. After sun shots every 20 minutes, we discovered we were 400 miles south of track. If you understood Cel Nav it was something you could trust. I had to reconstruct everything on that flight during the inbound to Bermuda so the being lost would not be discovered. I always think about if the 3P had continued to Nav on the ASN-42 that last calls coming from the airplane would have been "We are lost, our compasses are all screwed up and we can not find the sun" It would be the lead charter in the next edition of the Bermuda Triangle Story.

 

[Benhuntn]

Follow the contrails of the guy heading to your destination.

 

[Spooky 2]

Follow the contrails of the guy heading to your destination.

I'm sure that't the way you did it in the 89th? If you can't contribute to the disussion better than that.....why waste our time?

 

[Benhuntn]

Spooky, well son if you look you will see I have flown aircraft that were before my time in the 89th. And yes we would monitor the HF and find aircraft going to our destination...ie, Hickam, Guam, Lajes etc and we would use their contrails to verify what the Nav thought his position was. I had a nav that flew out of Grissom for yrs that always used 0degrees variation when planning nav legs and when he made his first Atlantic crossing he was heading well off course. The reason was we had an ave variation of 20 degress. So contrails were always a good backup. Now stay out of these adult forums and go back to how to become a CFI or VFR pilot

 

[Spooky 2]

Spooky, well son if you look you will see I have flown aircraft that were before my time in the 89th. And yes we would monitor the HF and find aircraft going to our destination...ie, Hickam, Guam, Lajes etc and we would use their contrails to verify what the Nav thought his position was. I had a nav that flew out of Grissom for yrs that always used 0degrees variation when planning nav legs and when he made his first Atlantic crossing he was heading well off course. The reason was we had an ave variation of 20 degress. So contrails were always a good backup. Now stay out of these adult forums and go back to how to become a CFI or VFR pilot

"Well son", I love it! Throttle back a little and you will see that comments were not meant to diss you. I have any number of friends that flew in the 89th and a couple of them are on this web site. I value their opions above many other that might post here. I was just looking for some more insight to the early nav days from the 50's through the the early 70's...something that you are not very familair with apparently. The fact that I was a Nav in the 60's should show that I'm not some Johny come lately to this game. As a matter of fact your insults only confirm my worst fears about your upbringing in this business. I bet your a real piece of work to fly with for a whole month!

Lets bury the hatchet....nothing to be gained here for sure!

 

[GuardGuy]

Navigating was a fun job back when you actually had to navigate. I'm very fortunate to have exited the nav world when I did, but I have fond memories especially of bouncing around the Pacific through places like Wake, Kwajelein, Midway, Yap, Palau, and getting to see places like Enewetok, Iwo Jima (actually got to do touch-n-gos there), Bikini.
Keep talking, this is good stuff!

This is really good stuff. Mr Seagle I am currently at Little Rock for Nav FTU and our instructors are always giving us a hard time about how easy we have it with SCNS, and a laptop displaying our GPS position on Falcon View. They hardly mention Cell and pressure anymore, which is a shame. It would be nice to get an overview of it.

The syllabus is getting ready to change again when UNT heads back to PNS. 10 months total training; 5 months learning navigation, and the last 5 becoming an EWO, everyone.

 

[Benhuntn]

Spookly if I am a piece of work, you are a tool and probably a retired 06.

 

[seagle]

Cel Nav

Guard Guy,

I was an IN back at Mather AFB before they changed the syllabus to a track system. All Navs went through Day and Night Cel including keeping the "log". Advanced Nav for non-fighter types included Loran and Pressure Nav along with Grid Navigation procedures. I have always felt that Cel Nav, Radar Nav, and the log we carried were the corner stone to having a fundamental understanding of Air Navigation. Is there no more instruction in Cel anymore at Nav School?

 

[Deli Guy]

I was a student on the very last T-29 nav training mission, followed by a few missions in the mighty T-43. We learned how to navigate with sextant (HoMoTo), driftmeter, pressure pattern, consolan, manual Loran (used an oscilloscope to measure time difference, then plot the TD on a Loran chart), and of course, dead reckoning.

We even had a class on A-N ranges!

So you remember putting shoe polish in the eyepiece of the sextant, so when the nav looks into it he comes away with a hysterical "black eye" he does not know about until he looks in the mirror. Anyone remember the PLZT?

 

[seagle]

Sextants

How about setting in the filters on the sextant for night cel or watching students playing U-Boat commander because they forgot to extend the sextant? Night cel training made for some memorable flights!

 

[GuardGuy]

No, they took Cell nav out of the syllabus several years ago. The only insight we get to it at Randolph is a glass case with some of the equipment in it and a few paragraphs talking about it.

Also, they no longer teach Grid Nav to at UNT. It is now a certification for those units that go to the Poles.

 

[seagle]

Sad to hear that about the Cel Nav. It did more than just teach you about celestial navigation - it demanded that you understand and use dead reckoning and taught you how to navigate under pressure. I guess HOMOTO had his last flight several years back.

 

[Candlerman]

This is probably the best thread FlightInfo has had in years (what this board should be)... Keep the posts coming!

 

[brainhurts]

I remember navs doing Airborne Radar Directed Approaches (ARDA'S) where he used the radar in map mode and fooled with the sector scan to "burn out" the airfield. It was set up like a non precision approach. The nav would get real serious and put a tapered "hood" (kind of looked like a black soccer cone, only with 2 eyeholes on the radar scope and give headings and descents based on this approach that was contrived under very stringent terrain rules, and the pilots would comply. It was a lot of pressure because the nav could come off looking really bad if he was "burning out" the local K Mart parking lot. The idea was for the nav not to "peek" and it was considered very bad form. Some navs could really do it but it seemed most of them faked it and the pilots would many times have to break off the training for safety reasons. I remember our squadron commander had decided to fly with a crew one time and since he did not get a chance to fly very often, he decided to hand fly an ARDA. The squadron commander was so busy with his cross check and flying a smooth airplane, he was actually breaking out in a sweat. The navs headings and descents were perfect! As he flew, the squadron commander would look at the copilot and shake his head knowingly about how sh1t hot this nav was doing. When they got to the "MDA" the squadron commander says "hey nav, take alook at this! nice approach" it was then that the squadron commander finally had a chance to look back at the nav, who had left his sideways chair was sitting in the jump seat with his hood to his eyes looking straight out the front windscreen! Priceless.

 

[seagle]

Guard Guy,

Are they still training Navs with the use of radar navigation - taking a radar fix and plotting it, then determining an alterheading (A/H) with ETAs and so forth? RSI (radar scope interpretation) was an art in itself - nothing like directing a SID or an ARDA (airborne radar directed approach) with just the use of your onboard radar and a TPC chart. I fly with guys today that don't have much insight into the use of radar for wx avoidance let alone as back up for navigation (use of gain, tilt and so on). Not throwing any stones - just an unfortunate consequence of technology (load the box with waypoints and go) and lack of radar training.

 

[Phaedrus]

seagel: Perhaps you gave me instruction? 86-14

 

[brainhurts]

85-05

 

[PhatAJ2008]

Amazing what I have learned from just one question...

 

[pilotyip]

Another NavTail

In Sept of 1968, I was going to make my first flight across the ocean as one of three Nav's in VP-30 under instruction of a qualifed navigator. We took about four hours the day before, plotting the great circle from St Johns to Strvanger, Norway (sp.?) on GLC charts, transferring to VL-30's, 5 degree Nav points, filled out Nav logs. Then the day we were going to leave we got forecast winds and temps then computed time, distance, fuel burn, drafted the Howgoesit; mind you all by hand and E6-B. We put his in a Nav bag. Off we go on our great adventure, over St Johns we open the Nav bag to start Navigating, Oh my Gad, it is the wrong bag, mind you this was the standard brown leather Nav bag carried in AOCS they all looked alike. It is US FLIP chart bag; all of our work is still in the Nav office at Pax River. We find one GLC chart on the airplane; this is about 24" of chart covering the whole distance across the Atlantic. A degree of latitude is about 1/16" on this chart. There is no tuning back we are on a great liberty run. Our pencil marks are about 20 miles thick; the star shots all make perfect triangles, and we make our inbound clearance point off of Norway within 20 miles and three minutes. So much for 8 hours of Nav planning. In 1969 Lockheed came out with the Jet plan for the P-3, you could take the computer print out and just fly the heading and time hitting your Nav points without any problem.

 

[seagle]

451st Instructor from 83-85 and Wing/Stan Eval from 85-87. Remember where you bought the coffee and doughnuts in the academic building (across from the O'Club) - that was Wing/Stan Eval.

 

[JimNtexas]

I remember navs doing Airborne Radar Directed Approaches (ARDA'S) where he used the radar in map mode and fooled with the sector scan to "burn out" the airfield. It was set up like a non precision approach.

The F-111 nav could drive the ILS needles with the radar for ARAs.

 

[mannyaplus11]

There I was:
1986, B-52G, senior navigator with a new Aircraft Commander (former T-38 FAIP) on his first trip out of CONUS. Middle of the Atlantic on our way to just off the coast of England to do a Harpoon Missle Run.
Both INS's decide to crap out, celestial fixes are showing 20 miles north of the INS's. Radar Nav and I are arguing about who is right, me or the INS's.
Finally, the AC decides he can't take it anymore, and says, "NAV!!!! Where the Hell are we?". I tell him, "I'm not exactly sure, but, keep heading east, we're making good time.".

Turns out, I was right, the INS's were wrong. Mission accomplished.

Ah, the good old days.

 

[fr8doggie]

A Classic

How did aircraft navigate across the vast oceans before GPS? Obviously they could not get a signal from a VOR... Just curious..
-AJ

Read "Song of the Sky" by Guy Murchie. Published in 1954. It is a great read and covers in great and easy to understand detail how long range nav was done before the days of INS, GPS, and VLF/OMEGA. It is not in print any more but you can find a copy in most large used bookstores. It is also available on Amazon.com. Make sure to get the hard back copy. It has many fine (whimsical) pen and ink drawings scattered throughout. Ballantine Books published an abbreviated version titled "The World Aloft".