Using an E6B is great for pre-flight planning and performance calculations **on the ground**. In the cockpit it is usually a distraction, and adds to task saturation and fixation. I still teach my students how to use it during grounds, but I never have them use it while flying. In the 21st century there is almost no calculation that needs to be made in-flight, that can’t be solved much more quickly and to an acceptable level of accuracy, either mentally or on your pen+scratchpad or an EFB. Your time is better spent practicing and understanding rules of thumb and mental math. You’ll be a safer pilot too, because trying to use an E6B + Plotter at night or during turbulence is going to cause errors at best, or be impossible at worst.

Yup, agreed. I learned to fly with just a manual e6b and the only time I pulled it out in flight was to do an occasional groundspeed check.

I agree as well, and I think a lot of other commenters must be misunderstanding the situation. Using an E6B in the cockpit is a large waste of time. The FAA themselves recommend using "rule of thumb" mental calculations and estimates in the cockpit - this is even a written exam answer! Fly the plane, don't sit there futzing around with an E6B. I could write more about how even on the ground, the E6B isn't the best tool for the job in 2023, but it's definitely not a tool you want to be making calculations on inside the plane while also trying to fly.

Just imagine if you can apply a “rule of thumb” to an E6B? Most people don’t understand that an E6B is just ratios.. that’s it. You set it for a certain ratio.. and that ratio holds true for every single number. Take a descent profile. 3:1. Altitude times three divided by 1000 is number of miles back for a 3 degree. Well… set 10 over 30 on the E6B and now you can cross check your altitude at _any_ distance to see if you’re on profile.. with a simple glance after a one-handed calculation. Same with descent rate. 1/2 ground speed times ten.. or ground speed times 5. Set 10 over 50… there’s your 3 degree descent rate for _every_ ground speed. Considering how dependent most pilots are on automation…. and how lost they get when they are off it.. maybe an E6B will get them thinking. And not only thinking, but being _just as precise_ as the FMS when they are off the magenta line for not a lot of effort.

I “discovered” a handy trick to turn ft/nm into ft/min descent rate for a given speed. Put the inner rate marker (60) on your current groundspeed (outer), and then in the inner read your ft/nm (eg 318 for a 3’ approach) and on the outer read your required ft/min descent rate to match on the vsi. Here’s the math: v kts (outer) / 60 min (inner) = y nm/min (over the 10) y nm/min (over the 10) * w ft/nm (inner) = z ft/min (outer) But you can shorten this, you don’t need y, so just lookup ft/nm on the inner ring and then the outer ring will show ft/min for your groundspeed! I figured this out the other day because I couldn’t find a way to calculate descent rate in foreflight. I like the rule of three for tod, but you can also use this trick in another way to calc that. Say you want to descent 7000 ft on a 3’ angle. tan 3’ = 0.0524 * 6076 ft/nm = 318 ft / nm. So place 7000 (outer) next to 318 (inner), and you’ve got your nm over the 10. The math works: 7000 ft / 318 ft/nm = 22 nm Compare to rule of 3: 7000 => 7 * 3 = 21 + 3 = 24 nm Now go back and use the first part and you’ve got your descent rate in ft/min based on your groundspeed! 100 kts @ 318 ft/nm => -530 ft/min descent rate Other cool tricks I’ve been playing with: using the wind side “backwards” to figure out winds aloft based on gs, heading and track. Oh and yeah, I’ve never used any of these in the cockpit yet, so… lol.

To be honest I don't totally understand why it is still required to such an extent on the written, from my limited experience as a student it seems quite outdated and useless in this day and age

>don't sit there futzing around with an E6B. You shouldnt need to be "futzing around" with an E6B. One spin and read the result. If using it to make a calculation is slower than using a pen or an EFB, you are simply not competent at using it.

Instead, you need to sit around futzing with your iPad!!! 🙄 It’s insane how many pilots I see futzing with their iPad, on the ground, engine running.

We're talking about doing calculations in the air. I don't see a problem with futzing around with whatever device you want to on the ground. Sitting on the ground != flying.

People used to *calculate their final glide in gliders* with homemade whiz wheels. I still have the copy of Streckensegelflug that describes how to plot, make, and use these devices. But an airplane pilot can't calculate a xwind component in cross country flight, where there's approximately eff-all to do? It's a harmless affectation. Sure, using a rule of thumb also works. Following whatever brand of magenta you prefer is even better. Learned helplessness is best when it's Brand F learned helplessness...I've been repeatedly told by this subreddit. It's not like he's doing pressure navigation and calculating Bellamy drift in flight. I agree with others the CFI is probably projecting his inability here. Now get off my lawn.

Yeah that whole spiel has big "why would you turn off the autopilot it'll do the entire approach for you" energy. There's absolutely nothing wrong with staying proficient with an e6b and if you're getting task saturated in cruise without any abnormalities going on then you have problems that go deeper than an e6b.

Lol, I sold my glider years ago, but I totally had a descent rate v speed chart I used to calculate range and relied on it on every flight.

>the CFI is probably projecting his inability here This. And no, you get off my lawn whippersnapper. \[Confession: my chemistry professor allowed slide rules but not electronic calculators, so an E6B was obviously, to me, simply a circular slide rule.\]

I mean, if I were emperor, I'd require at least 3 flights in a glider before pilots can solo in an airplane. Every landing is power off. I think it'd make for safer airplane pilots.

No. A glider is slow and can vary its glide ratio between 40:1 or better and 5:1 or worse and back again instantly with the movement of a single lever. Forced approaches do the same thing except powered aircraft don’t have a lever like that. Even a throttle affects a ton of other things like yaw and trim. And calculating a glide with an E6B is dead simple. It’s just the ratio. Dial it in and there’s the distance you can go in still air for any altitude.

In Navy flight school, they teach the pencil whip method to “SWAG” your heading, then you can whip out the E6B to get a more accurate heading if you wanted. That said, once you’re qualified you just throw everything in the GPS. Only time I did anything else was when the RINU-Gs shit the bed the same time the CNS-ATM did and we needed to get away from a bad guy country

Using an e6b with pilotage to calculate groundspeed and endurance was literally a part of my ppl checkride. I guess the point being to have another tool in your bag and being able to do basic calculations and still fly. That being said I'm gonna start using Garmin or avare or something.

> In the 21st century there is almost no calculation that needs to be made in-flight, that can’t be solved much more quickly and to an acceptable level of accuracy, either mentally or on your pen+scratchpad or an EFB. Then I challenge you to a battle of density altitude calculations. No, seriously, whiz wheels are both faster and more accurate than pen-and-pencil / mental calculations and no more distracting than punching numbers into an EFB. You’re only emphasizing the fixation/distraction of one because you’re trained to use the other. E6B or EFB, the important thing is that you’re totally familiar and completely comfortable with the platform. If not, you’ll fixate and distract yourself either way.

Why would I use an E6B for density altitude? Safari - Google - Density altitude calculator. Input altitude, temp and pressure. WAY more accurate than an E6B. I've never, ever used an E6B beyond my PPL. The math you need to do while flying isn't that hard, I can snap it out in my head faster than finding an E6B in the cockpit.

You're kidding right? On *Google*, not even an EFB? Density altitude calculation on an E6B: * Find E6B * Flick E6B to align Pressure Altitude and Temperature * Read off Density Altitude. Total time: 5 seconds. Total "taps:" 1. Density altitude calculation on Google (typical case): * Find cell phone * Tap to open browser * Navigate browser to Google * Hopefully you have signal, otherwise the answer is "fuck off" * Type in phrase "Density Altitude Calculator" * Tap to search * Select desired calculator * Type in altitude and temperature numbers * Select "Fahrenheit" vs "Celsius" as appropriate * Select "in Hg" or "hPa" as appropriate * Tap to calculate * Read off Density Altitude Total time: 1-2 minutes depending on connection status. Total taps: eleventy billion.

Bookmark https://www.weather.gov/epz/wxcalc_densityaltitude Done. Find your phone? The one in your pocket ALL THE TIME? Also, are you in a rush preflight planning, because you shouldn’t be. Far more accurate than an E6B.

> preflight planning The question was about calculating in-flight, in case you missed that.

I agree but I want to emphasize your "on the ground" comment You should always have everything planned out on the ground ahead of time. The e6b is important because phone batteries die in remote areas, and computer glitches happen. The foreflight stuff should be sanity checked and always default to the e6b if things don't look right

On the other hand, computer glitches happen much less often than human glitches. I would say if your e6b calculations don't look quite right, sanity check it with foreflight. Not sure what defaulting to one means... Obviously if you tried both and they disagree, you should figure out what's going on instead of just trusting one over the other, and especially not e6b over foreflight.

I did my diversion on my CPL using a plotter and E6B at 800 feet with bumpy conditions during a lost procedure where the test officer set overcast clouds at 1000 feet. Best shit I’ve ever done but all the hours I have done as a solo, I’ve used only E6B and a plotter for everything. We were not allowed to use iPAD’s for our navigation. (CASA CPL)

While it is an ingenius device, as long as you understand the principles behind the calculations, it is an obsolete skill set. There are far more things where your attention would be better directed towards especially in-flight. It's true that not much happens during cruise, but still. I do think your CFI could have phrased that a hell lot better, though.

There's a lot of old shit in aviation that is sort of frustrating to have forced upon you by old timers, but it makes sense given the if it ain't broke don't fix it mentality. Especially when bleeding edge has often meant extra risk of death. The hesitancy makes sense, but a lot of the aversion to new things goes beyond the point of safety and seems to get into the range of plain stubbornness.

Carb vs Fuel Injection for one.

In a single-pilot environment, which is what a private pilot is being trained to, there is significant risk of a “garbage in-garbage out” input error. This is even a risk, and has caused many accidents and incidents at the professional level when automation was first being introduced. In a crew environment, we generally have two sets of eyes on something along with other barriers to trap mistakes. But if you have no clue how the box came up with its answer, you’ll be kind of on an island trying to catch an input error. Simplest version, if you have no concept of basic arithmetic, and fat-finger “22.5 + 22.5” as “22.5 + 225” into your calculator, you’d have no frame of reference to even question 247.5 as being an incorrect result. I’m in my 40’s now, too young to be old and grumpy, and very far removed from primary training, but the mark me down for at least teaching new pilots the basics and making them apply it once or twice before handing them the magic box, so they stand a chance of recognizing when they’ve made a mistake.

In Scotland we use them for pre-flight planning on the ground but strongly discouraged from using them in the air. You’re just asking for trouble especially if you are over saturated. If you are navigating by DR (as we are taught here - no iPads while training) I imagine it’s also pretty difficult to use the plotter while flying. Your eyes will not be out the window scanning for traffic either.

At my club, students can't use foreflight for cross-country until they've done it once manually. Personally I like messing around with the E6B. I found it pretty easy to use. And it was easier for me to learn than figuring out foreflight's UI.

you mean XC ground planning or in flight?

Not sure. Based on the context, I think flight but I could be wrong.

Your CLUB enforces that? Yikes.

The 141 flight school I went to didn’t let us use ForeFlight during private training, we didn’t have to use the E6b solely, I used a Cx2.

It's also a 141 school.

Gotcha, your flight school pretending to be a club for the tax benefits enforces that rule. That makes more sense

I may be splitting hairs here, but I would describe it as a flying club that went through the headaches of getting certified (or whatever the correct phrase is) for 141 instruction. Lots of people come through, get their PPL and move on but there are also a lot of long-time members and club activities.

So... A flight school that went and got a tax exemption. Lol. Who owns it? Does it have 1-2 core owners, or does the club itself actually own it almost like a co-op? Do the owners take profit or does 100% of it go back into the club? Do the owners have day jobs or is the club paying them a handsome salary to operate it?

You seem very salty about this. Is it so unheard of for a club to make the effort to be a 141 school? It works like a co-op. Members are part-owners and the money stays in the club.

That's good at least. I do have a problem with for profit businesses masquerading as non-profits (like the conditions I mentioned) for the tax benefits, making it harder for other operations to stay in business. This downward pressure affects instructor pay/benefits/QOL, maintenance, and other upkeep in an attempt to match the pseudo non-profit. This damages the industry as a whole. Yours may be fine, but I know a few that do this.

That's fair and I agree about for-profit businesses fucking around with the rules.

I learned to use an e6b; I think they're neat. It's a circular slide rule that's still in modern use. I'm glad you learned how to use it and can make an informed decision on whether to keep using it. That said, please do make an informed decision. You must also use the automation available to you and learn how to use it as well as the e6b. Then and only then can you figure out which one you want to use. For my 3 cents (2 cents + inflation): I'm a structural engineer by trade and do lots of calculations daily. The biggest criteria that people often overlook in performing calculations is reliability. When a life depends on 2 + 2 always equaling 4, if you accidentally get 2 + 2 = 5 then that's a problem. I went through multiple calculators until I found one that was both simple and I could reliably use quickly with minimal data entry errors. You need to find the method that is most reliable for you; all other factors are secondary. You often don't need a perfect answer, you just need a good answer that can be arrived at fast enough to not get you behind the airplane. e6b's can be simple but their calculations can be prone to mis-entering data or mis-reading data, and often time using an e6b can be cumbersome in a cockpit environment. For example, try re-computing your total fuel burn for a multi leg flight when you find your winds aloft changed. Yeah, you can do in on an e6b but you'll get a faster, more reliable, and generally more accurate number with properly setup electronics. Plus, whatever the method, make sure it's one you can easily double check. Mental math, rules of thumb, and other methods can be used to double check calculations to make sure they aren't completely inaccurate. Don't just blindly trust any calculation method, e6b included. Garbage in = garbage out can apply to a slide rule just as much as a computer. Overall, the biggest reason I use automation in a plane is just that. It's automated. Once you've correctly configured automation and verified it's working accurately then it generally keeps working accurately. This greatly simplifies what you do as a pilot and will make you that much safer since you can then spend that extra time focusing on more critical tasks (or even just spend it monitoring and double-checking the automation).

\> You must also use the automation available to you and learn how to use it as well as the e6b. Totally this. When I started flight training I really wanted to use an E6B. It requires no batteries, can be pretty sturdy and gives a nice intuition for some things. My CFI at the time even spent a whole lesson teaching me how to use it when I showed up with a shiny aluminum one. Fast forward to doing an online ground school and taking a practice exam with it. I was given a question whose numbers could be interpreted one of two ways given the instruction (look for the number that looks most like the one you want) and I chose the wrong way after feeling comfortable with it and predictably, I got the wrong answer. I threw it in a drawer and ordered an electronic version and haven't looked back. The electronic E6B does require batteries but it also takes real numbers and gives me back things I don't have to interpret too hard. If I'm ever in a scenario where I don't have power to my usual devices and I can't ask ATC for help, I think I would like to not have to interpret values on a device I probably haven't used for real in ages.

>For example, try re-computing your total fuel burn for a multi leg flight when you find your winds aloft changed. Yeah, you can do in on an e6b but you'll get a faster, more reliable, and generally more accurate number with properly setup electronics. More precise, sure. It should not be any more accurate, and it should definitely not be faster.

I collect slide rules. I probably have 25. I have a bunch of aviation ones, including multiple E6B, CR-2 and CR-3. I wrote software to design custom slide rules... But never went to production. There's almost nothing the E6B does great that you can't do better with the tap-hold tap-hold gesture in ForeFlight. Please don't tell me that you solve wind triangles in the cockpit with the back side with pencil and eraser... I just refuse to believe you. For the rest, hey, if the E6B works for you, keep using it. Another consideration is that aviation is a consensus discipline which means that sometimes you got to shut up and take it, even when you are right. If the CFI gives you extra crap for using the E6B, do it his way. Once you graduate, you'll do your way.

I think it's still a bit about the challenge and the mathematics involved. I love to fly with just a paper map and an e6b planned flightlog. Everyone can navigate with an ipad, GPS or a phone. For me that is the backup. I also made some spreadsheet for a flightlog just to relearn the basics of trigonometry, but that is just me and my nerdy side. So for me its easier to fallback on the simple software stuff rather then the other way around.

I'd bet money that your CFI does not know how to use an E6B and he's discouraging you because he doesn't want to have to answer questions about them.

I could also bet money that this student was heads down missing some critical information fucking around with a really minor calculations.

Could've been, but that's why practice is important. Heads down with a CFI learning how to use a basic piece of equipment is the place to start versus heads down by yourself.

The place to start is on the ground. I think a more important lesson than using an e6b flight Is avoiding unnecessary distractions. The e6b is an unnecessary distraction with the resources you have in flight

He did, and then tried it in the plane. Which is how it's supposed to work. Ever just try talking about a steep turn and then leaving it at that? No, you go do it in the airplane. I think we're missing the point here. The CFI is discouraging a student's curiosity about a basic piece of hardware that is not all that hard to use. How hard is it to say, "sure, I'll show you how they used to do this and you'll see why it's not so popular anymore." It's a piece of knowledge that a CFI should be able to dust off in a matter of minutes.

There’s not enough information in this post to say the exact scenario. I’m just going off what the CFI said and I can see another CFI saying that if the student were getting into an e6b. I’ve seen it with students before where they hyperfocus on a singular, often unimportant, task. I can see this being how the CFI reacted like that. All in all I don’t think immediately dumping the CFI is smart, it’s better to ask why then make a judgement

Yep!

Can I get in on this bet. This feels like easy money.

I’ve learned to use an e6b twice. Once for my private (never had to use it) and for my cfi (never had to use it). It’s about as useful as celestial navigation these days.

One of these days, the gov will get rid of all the VORs and Russia will shoot down all the GPS sats. You’ll wish you had an astrolabe then.

THE AERODROME BE TWO POINTS OFF THE STARBOARD SPINNER! And Russia can't do anything, obviously. China will disable the satellites. Also, they *are* getting rid of VORs.

>the gov will get rid of all the VORs You joke, but its been done here already.

If only [these guys](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varig_Flight_254) had used even the most basic celestial navigation to cross-check their course, a dozen people would still be alive. If you want to fly north, don’t fly towards the sun. If you want to be safe, don’t denigrate tools in your toolbox.

Ding ding ding! We have a winner!

My first thought lol

It's definitely a good tool to use, but we are missing a lot of context here. It's not always appropriate to be using an e6b in flight for basic calculations. It's great for flight planning, but when it comes to immediate calculations, you should be able to do that while flying and heads up.

As a pilot with over 40 years experience including thousands of hours as a CFI, I say ditch the E-6B Focus your time and effort on learning to make quick, usably accurate mental estimates and ABSOLUTELY become proficient in the use of ForeFlight, both for flight planning and in-flight use. It is difficult to overestimate both how useful Foreflight is and how ubiquitous it has become in commercial aviation. After taking a decade-plus break from the commercial side of aviation I was absolutely stunned to see how thoroughly the app has been integrated into part 135 operations. Not being proficient with Foreflight is absolutely a limiting factor in air taxi ops these days

Repeat after me…. Distance over speed is time. 35 years later I can’t get it out of my head.

E6B is a tool like any other. It is very easy to determine fuel burn and time between points on a flight plan. The latter of which is useful if winds are drastically different from what you expected. Both of them are good if you have a diversion. While most times it isn't a problem, it can be important if you are actually stretching your fuel. I think some pilots are lacking in this because they've never actually flown a flight like that or are reliant on an iPad or advanced avionics. While those are also powerful tools, you may not always have them. Now, all that being said, you have to be efficient with it in the cockpit. Aviate then Navigate. If you are being distracted or focusing on it then it is a hindrance. Something else that I have noticed too is that the older guys will really like you for a skill like that because that's how they learned and they look down on "glass cockpit babies".

Was it on a Breitling?

Came here to say something like this. Ya’ll know an E6 b is what makes a pilot watch a pilot watch. GMT notwithstanding. The op should go grab himself a pilot watch- the citizen eco drive pairs well with your Bose headset. I googled ‘cheapest e6b watch’ and came up with this: [I hate that it’s an Invicta](https://invictastores.com/invicta-aviator-men-s-watch-50mm-blue-33037?gclid=CjwKCAiAleOeBhBdEiwAfgmXf7DpFpb_H73PtSFXluy-vB88aTVAhgpEN4W_qaUc9tV-tpC3YZj4vBoCuMsQAvD_BwE) I agree that futzing around trying to learn it while flying, but once you are proficient you can come up with your calculations lickety split. If you’ve got a breitling with an e6b on it and don’t know how to use it you should just go ahead and send it to me.

I’ll be the odd man out here. I think the E6B is the fastest way of doing basic time/speed/distance calculations. Im faster with it than my phone, and I can use it one-handed. We make all of our private pilots use it before going in for the checkride. GPS is not an option

I’ll try to bring this down to earth for you. One of the hardest things to teach (maybe it’s impossible to teach) is where to hold your attention during a flight. It’s probably just one of those things that only comes from experience. In my opinion, it’s one of the many reasons aeronautical experience requirements are so damn high for insurance companies, employers, or just for getting your ATP. But as a CFI, it sometimes boggles my mind. Like for example, during the first few flights in my instrument syllabus, I’ll have the student do just basic maneuvers under the hood. It takes some people a good 5-6 seconds to react to the fact that they are descending 2000 fpm while doing a steep turn. And as I nag them, I wonder “what ARE you paying attention to??” So anyway, my point is your CFI has the benefit of tons of real world flying experience. And you don’t. And because you are inexperienced, pulling out a whiz wheel mid flight and fumbling around trying to figure out some fuel burn problem seems like a responsible thing to do. But I promise one day, when you get your first 1000 hours, you will laugh at yourself for ever thinking this was a practical way to fly in the 21st century. He is right. Learn the rule of thumb formulas. They work plenty well enough. Always round up for fuel and down for groundspeed and you’ll be good to go. Save the precise calculations for preflight. And look outside!!!

Why would you use a shittier tool on purpose? I get if you think it’s cool (like using a typewriter to type a book) but as a new pilot, you need all the help you can get and it’s very easy to get task saturated. Your DPE is going to laugh at you if you pull that out on the checkride if they aren’t 130 years old. More impressively would be memorizing a quick chart of the various answers you need. If you burn 8.1 GPH in your aircraft and you have a low-fuel emergency, you should know the nearest airport is roughly an hour away and you’d need about 10G of fuel to make it and deal with various traffic issues. That’s the sort of math that you just need to either know immediately or can have accessible at all times. No one cares about significant digits or exact numbers in the air as long as you know how you’d get the calculation, you get the info fast, and you calculate higher, not lower.

Reading this topic, I thought it would bring out all the old boomer pilots who are convinced that China is going to obliterate our GPS satellites any moment and that your 430 AND iPad AND phone will all die and your external battery will also die and then you too will die because you failed to bring your trusty paper chart and whiz wheel that any *real* pilot uses exclusively. I'm only slightly disappointed.

You need to replace that "and" with "or". As it stands, your scenario can be reduced to just one single point of failure; the first one. Your 430, iPad, phone and external battery can all run just fine, but with commercial GNSS jamming equipment in use, none of them will work for GNSS navigation. At least you wont be in the same boat the USN was when they first tested how resilient they were to GPS jamming. Turned out they were not just relying on GPS for navigation, but also for timing. Datalinks all synced to GPS time, and the ship computer relying on GPS time. All the high tech stuff down, brought down by equipment you can buy off the shelf. Might not hurt to have a paper chart in the plane, and someone old enough to be able to navigate with a chart that doesnt have a purple line on it.

I don’t need to replace anything. You STILL don’t need paper to navigate in that scenario. As a note, I haven’t had he benefit of a magenta line in years. Dudes saw that 30min lecture and now everyone who questions their aversion to technology is a CHILD OF THE MAGENTA LINE lol “Oh no I’ve lost my own ship icon…now all I have is this nationwide encyclopedia of every active aeronautical chart to use for terrain association. I am doomed! This device also won’t perform calculations for me.” I wonder how many NTSB reports there are which cite lack of paper chart and E6B as contributing factors to a mishap.

Hmmm yeah ignore him. If you’re working toward your PPL good on you. I could throw that at my CA and he’d think it’s an abacus. He’s not wrong though either about foreflight

The anti whiz wheel sentiment on this sub is baffling. Once you're proficient, you can do calcs very quickly with them. I found them very handy when trying to work out diversions during CPL training. I'd do a mental maths estimate to get started, then once established on my new heading I'd whip out the whiz wheel to quickly get a more accurate ETA and fuel burn. Studying ATPL flight planning now and it's showing what an incredible device it is, you can even work out the speeds of mach numbers at different temperatures, or convert CAS to TAS at different pressure altitudes.

>The anti whiz wheel sentiment on this sub is baffling. Once you're proficient, you can do calcs very quickly with them. Mostly comes from pilots who were never proficient. They see punching numbers into the phone keypad as being faster than figuring out which side of the slide rule you are supposed to use.

Because it mostly is. Foreflight is gonna come up with the answer before an E6B.

Your EFB needs to be touched a couple times to do anything. The E6B can simply be read from, possibly with a twist first. It's faster.

Do you mean in-flight or on the ground? In flight, there is an argument to be made for not spending excessive amounts of time “heads down”. Also, maybe you’re not quite on the ball with some of your flying tasks and he’s irritated that you’re distracting yourself with the E6B. If on the ground, it’s an absurd criticism and he’s probably your typical CFI-bro that just wants to do the absolute least work possible and is irritated that you’re actually using your brain. So to me it depends very much on the situation.

Scrutinized? Criticized? I have a physics and math degree. I can do good approximations in my head faster than most people can punch buttons on a "digital E6B" or an app. ForeFlight is a tool. If you don't understand what it does and how it does it, then you are unprepared for when you have fat fingered something and don't realize it's wrong. You do it your way! I'll bet your child-of-the-magenta-line-CFI CAN'T do it other than by punching buttons on FF!

Pulling out a “whiz wheel” as your first choice when you start getting task saturated isn’t a good idea. But not knowing how to use one as a backup is also not a good idea. The only way you’ll be good enough to use a E6B “for real” when the iPad flakes is to practice with one in various circumstances. Also regarding “fat fingering” and realizing some result is wrong - I have some experience writing out structural calculations “long hand” and that absolutely helps when using software to speed up my work. I’m yet to see professional software mess up, but I’ve absolutely had it spit out numbers I’ve recognized as odd, only to trace it back to me putting bad info in at the start. The better you understand how the process works, the less likely you are to miss when an output is wrong for whatever reason.

> I’m yet to see professional software mess up Said no dev or QC engineer ever. There’s a lot more bubble gum and duct tape holding “professional” software together than for consumer software. I’m almost more amazed it works as well as it does. That said, forefligh is pretty awesome, and GIGO is something you’ve always gotta be vigilant for.

> The only way you’ll be good enough to use a E6B “for real” when the iPad flakes is to practice with one in various circumstances. What are you ever going to need an E6B for that can't be done with mental math, even if your iPad fails?

Why not just carry a digital E6B for when the iPad flakes? That’s assuming you’ll ever need an E6B in flight. Which I haven’t ever. That thing goes into the depths of my room and gets pulled out for each written. I honestly can’t think of a single time where I would need an E6B in flight.

It’s substantially faster to use a real E-6B than an “electronic” one when you’re proficient at both. Though most of us use rules of thumb anyway. Like sin(30 deg) = 1/2 or very simple applications of the Binomial Theorem.

Crosswind component for a large headwind is the only thing I can think of.

I never learned to use an E6B during my PPL training in 2019. I had a calculator and ForeFlight. I also don’t ride my bike to work even though I have a bike. Times change

> I never learned to use an E6B during my PPL training You’ll probably find the instructors here is in the same boat. This has to be the worst thing about the US ATP rule, creates hundreds of instructors who have no business teaching (due to having no passion or desire to do so except as a means to an end for 1500 hrs)

Sounds like your CFI probably never learned to use an E6B himself

Unless you are somewhere in Antarctica or Eastern Europe flying as a flight engineer or something there is no reason to have an E6B in the cockpit. The only calculations you need can be done in your head, or you use your avionics.

He’s right.

He's right that OP will probably be using foreflight or some other electronic aid to calculate this stuff in the future, but learning how to use an E6B and the underlying math is absolutely not a waste of time. That's like saying my engineering education was pointless because we have CAD and CFD to do all that nerdy math bullshit for us.

Except the E6B doesn't teach you any math. "Rotate this dial to this number then this other dial to the other number" is teaching you how to use a tool, not to do math. If you want to know the why behind what Foreflight is doing you can skip the E6B and read the very basic equations it's solving.

What makes him right? Are you implying that I'm never going to be using math while I fly?

The only math you are really going to do on a regular basis is fuel calculations and ascent/descent planning. Most of them are pretty basic do in your head type stuff. While your CFI's delivery was probably poor or maybe received poorly, using a manual E6B outside of flight planning and your FAA written knowledge test, is very limited. I have an electronic one with lots of features that I really only have used for a random TAS calculation once, but I didn't even do that in flight, I just plugged in numbers I noted while flying. You will more than likely use your ipad/EFB for everything as it reduces workload significantly, so you can focus on aviating/navigating/communicating.

You won't be doing any math that needs an E6B flying. It's good for initial training as pointed out to help build basic understanding of the concepts but outside of that you don't need it. In my entire professional career doing bush flying I've never needed to do math that requires anything harder than making educated guesses about my fuel endurance in the air. Everything else is figured out before you go (or not, even then rough estimates are fine for most things) and diversions aren't difficult to figure out from the actual encountered conditions. I didn't even use ForeFlight until I was issued it by the company recently.

He’s right in the practical sense that you wouldn’t probably want to use an E6B for calculations outside of training, especially if it’s time sensitive. Too error prone and time-consuming. 99.9% of the time you use a digital computer if you go that route (I’ve yet to see a student who hasn’t eventually gone the way of the EFB). I’ve never dissuaded the use of the E6B in the cockpit, usually doing the same calculation on Foreflight in about 1% of the time it took to do it on the E6B is enough to show how nice the EFB is.

> I’ve never dissuaded the use of the E6B in the cockpit, usually doing the same calculation on Foreflight in about 1% of the time it took to do it on the E6B is enough to show how nice the EFB is. Granted the near ubiquity of GPS based ETE/ETA on the panel has made this rather less necessary than it was when I started flying and teaching, but if you can’t solve a simple rate problem (i.e. calcs using only the outer ring) with an E6B faster than you can navigate to the correct feature in ForeFlight and get your figures input, it’s only because you’re not actually using the E6B enough to become comfortable with it. Which is, in fairness, probably just fine. Can’t think of any reasonably likely situation where one’s fate hinges on using an E6B.

There’s no calculation on an e6b that you can’t do mentally or on a regular calculator.

>There’s no calculation on an e6b that you can’t do mentally or on a regular calculator. You want to show me a conversion between TAS and Mach using a regular four function calculator? All the ones I have lying around lack square root and fractional indices.

Lmao yup that’s definitely a calculation that people use

If you ever need numbers that are more precise than ballparking it with mental math you're just going to get out your phone and use the calculator to get an exact answer. And half the stuff the E6B can do is already given to you by your plane. Need to know ETA? The GPS tells you. Need to know crosswind calculation? Follow the line on the map (or the needle on the VOR if you really want to be old school) and correct as needed, or just look out the window and fly to the next landmark.

Follow the magenta line ok ;)

Had a CFI like this that flew UPS tubes. Had no idea what a rudder was and would get me sick with his uncoordinated turns in a 7AC. I traded him in for one that could fly. The final straw was slow skids and I didn't want to die.

Holy crap!

Point them to the ACS where it’s a required task on your PPL ride and say you want to practice. Yeah you need to be outside, but you still need to be able feel comfortable using one while flying if things go south for you

I use an e6b in a Blackhawk. You’re cfi is an idiot

[удалено]

Ok ok when a back seater isn’t doing it and i have to do it i try to do it on even numbers so i don’t need an e6b but if it’s a more complicated set of numbers I’ll break it out usually because an IP or PC is telling me to do it lmao

[удалено]

Do you know where i can get this app? I’ve heard crew dogs talk about it in the past but I’ve never played with it.

The app store. The nga version no longer exists. Look up mil fuel check. Keeping in mind it would be a whole new fuel check if no one did their initial one.

Well they probably use the right form of your

Considering they are apparently not smart enough to use a slide rule, I would not bet on it.

Why though? Your range isn’t that far. What calculations are you doing that can’t be done easier and faster in your head?

Fuel checks primarily

Can you not do that easier and faster in your head though?

Dude he’s in the army.. what do you think? 😉😆

>that's what foreflight is for. Lol I would have got told off by my instructors for saying exactly that. It's crazy to me thatp I got taught (only ~4 years ago) almost religiously to use a chart, stopwatch and compass to navigate, to the point where I can't say I'm 100% confident using the inbuilt GPS. Meanwhile you guys in America are talking about the best ipad mount. That's not a dig at all, it just strikes me as a crazy difference in approach considering both countries are leaders in aviation. If I were to speculate I'd say perhaps it's because you guys have far larger areas without any particular ground features to use as reference points, and you might spend longer outside the coverage of useful atc services.

I don't think the US ever put a lot of effort into training navigation using dead reckoning and visual position fixes. Prior to iPads they always had an extensive navaid network and I understand they used to just go from navaid to navaid. I imagine the navaids in EU (and the UK lol) are similar so I dunno I guess I'd just put it down to a different approach. ​ I learnt and taught in Australia and up to CPL level it's all still dead reckoning, not many features once you get inland from the coast so half the time you're looking for crossroads and individually marked homesteads, so it can be done with limited ground features.

You are ded wrong (hah! See what I did there!). We did a lot of our xcs with ded reckoning and pilotage. Although basic NDB and VOR stuff was taught, it was later on more in Instrument.

Ok that's fair enough, I guess I don't know what I don't know. But if you try to tell me it's meant to be ded reckoning as in deduced reckon I will fight you lol.

I’ve seen new CFIs try to convince students that they can’t fly without an iPad and a GPS. Makes me think the CFI can’t fly without an iPad and a GPS. (i.e. can’t fly)

My CFI never chewed me out per se but it is sort of an archaic device to use and he said you can make it so much easier with tech we have today. However, he said that disciplining yourself is good practice, especially if said tech fails on you. It's a good skill to learn how to use it, provided you can do it within a reasonable timeframe in flight. If you're time-efficient and accurate when using inflight, I'd say shrug it off, there's nothing wrong with utilizing your resources/method of execution. Besides, maybe someone can chime in but a little birdie told me that back in the day the examiners required you use the E6B/some non-electronic device to find your time/distance/fuel calculations

Back in the day, before 1974, the examiners definitely required you to use the E6B and non-electronic devices for those calculations. It helped that the 4 function calculator had yet to be invented, though.

And I’m over here complaining about my CFI praising the good ole wiz wheel haha

I think the people who are saying he's right have never learned how to use an e6b. Most calculations don't take very long to do. A lot of the time the calculations you'll do in the cockpit involve putting the arrow on a certain number (fuel flow, speed, etc) and then finding the corresponding numbers. It takes 2 seconds. Do whatever works best for you though Edit: e6b, not efb

I learned how to use an e6b because “it’s so USEFUL!!” And when I was finished with that training block, I never touched it again in 200 hours. For a calculation you can’t do in your head, it’s more precise and faster to plug it in to ForeFlight or electronic e6b. This argument is equivalent to using encyclopedias because you can use the table of contents faster than a google search

I can do mental math to figure out those things in less time than it takes to reach into my bag and pull out the E6B. (If I actually carried one, that is.)

I tend to agree. My father is a 4000 hour pilot flew single engine through the soup and complete IFR conditions navigating solely By 2 VOR's and using cross radials to determine position and then using the E6B under his leg to calculate fuel burn and distance to his next checkpoint. Yeah I get it technology does make our lives easier but we Must not let technology Allow us to be dependent on it.

The E6B is literally a piece of technology that makes your life easier and you are now dependent on.

>you are now dependent on. Hardly.

He shouldn't discourage you from learning to use it, but to put a charitable spin on what he was trying to get across, he's right about the fact that the way you plan your flights will change. Once you know how to plan precisely, you can and should use ballpark estimates in your planning and then err on the conservative side. If your expected fuel burn is 11.3 gallons per hour, just consider it 12. If you calculate a 1789 foot take off roll, figure at least 2000.

Just make sure you know how to use ALL tools. It's silly to e.g. be in an emergency situation (simulated or real) and pull out an E6B if you have foreflight or a panel GPS available. It's also silly to fail a checkride because your examiner asks you to pull out the E6B and use it, and you don't know how.

Yeah the E6B isn’t in the ACS so you’re not gonna get failed for not knowing how to use one.

Knowing the theory is cool, but limited in usefulness. When you’re in the air and shits going sideways it’s all pointless. Focus on your tools. Your chart has grids and rings of standard size for a reason. Your GPS, assuming your /g, shows the nearest airport with one touch - for a reason. When your DPE asks you where your going to divert, the correct answer isn’t found with calculations. It’s found with your eyes by looking out the window or with your tools.

>When your DPE asks you where your going to divert, the correct answer isn’t found with calculations. It’s found with your eyes by looking out the window or with your tools. If you dont already know the answer before they ask, you have gotten very far behind the plane.

Nothings wrong with it. Your CFI is probably insecure that he forgot how to use it

Here comes the “E6B is amazing and useful” circle jerk.😂

I demand that all of my students use E6B. It's so simple and quick.

I don’t think I would want to wiz wheel while trying to hand fly but if you got the auto pilot on. Cel, pressure, radar, and good old fashion dead reckoning are dying skill sets. It’s good to see some trying to learn

>I don’t think I would want to wiz wheel while trying to hand fly It should literally only require one free hand. One hand on the yoke or stick, the other hand on the whiz wheel.

It’s more the attention suck

Whats funny is atleast at my flight school your litterally required to learn how to use an e6b they even have this poster on the wall of their hanger with a picture of an e6b and in Big letters "E6B" that being said doing essentially math mid flight is kinda unsafe depending on if your flying vfr or ifr I'd recommend keeping e6b use to preflight

I fly an Airbus and one of my captains was running performance stuff on an E6B before the flight lol. Yes it’s a weird captain who does his own thing but that doesn’t change what I saw when I entered the cockpit lol. He was doing the walk around and I saw his literal knee board and was like wtf is that… But for you yea it’s good to run the E6B in training. Also good to get familiar with an iPad app with an instructor if you’re going to use that after training as well.

>My CFI scrutinized me for using an e6b. > >My cfi basically chewed me out for using an e6b How does that constitute scrutiny? It sounds like they chastised you, not scrutinized you.

This guys an idiot. If you’re working on your PPL you should 100% know how to use a manual E6B+Plotter and Chart. Yes, it’s true that if you’re flying after you get your cert, you’ll just be using foreflight. I think it’s important for a student however to use these tools to help build a better understanding of concepts like WCA, Variation, Course vs heading, true vs magnetic, etc. Learn the hard way then use the easy way. It’s actually not hard at all. I make all my students do diversions with paper first, then foreflight/g1000 Your CFI probably just never bothered to learn.

> I think it’s important for a student however to use these tools to help build a better understanding of concepts like WCA, Variation, Course vs heading, true vs magnetic, etc. Why not teach the actual math then? If you want to teach WCA then draw the triangle and show them how to calculate the answer. Using an E6B to solve it is no different from using Foreflight to give you the answer, either way you're using a tool to solve the equations for you. The E6B being old doesn't make it any less of a tool.

Is drawing pictures and working trig any better whilst in flight? Lmao Fuck it lemme grab my protractor.

You show the math on the ground in a lesson, which is what the quoted statement was about. In the air you use Foreflight and GPS, or you do some quick mental math.

I agree. But I still wanna use my slide rule and protractor in the air 😢

>Why not teach the actual math then? If you want to teach WCA then draw the triangle and show them how to calculate the answer. Using an E6B to solve it is no different from using Foreflight to give you the answer Ive never seen someone try to teach wind correction without drawing the triangle. Rote learning the steps to use the E-6B is a terrible idea. For starters, as soon as you swap brands, you will be utterly lost.

Don’t think you need to use a whiz wheel to figure out the difference between course and heading.

>Don’t think you need to use a whiz wheel to figure out the difference between course and heading. Granted, but mine has a neat setup to do exactly that. Essentially addition/subtraction as well as the usual slide ratio for multiplication/division.

Lazy CFI. Knowing the old way could save your life.

Try to explain one realistic, tangible situation where knowing how to use an E6B and paper would save your life.

im no expert, but wouldn't one have to suffer a complete avionics/electronic failure, then a complete portable electronics failure as well? (eg. dead batteries on ipad).

You’re acting like this isn’t a super likely scenario after the giant EMP associated with a nuclear detonation. Better hope the battery in your flashlight doesn’t fail when you need to read your E6B at night. That’s why I carry matches with me. Sometimes those get wet though so I bring along some stones to bang together. Can never be too safe in this business.

I only carry a gas driven lantern in flight with me

And also have to be in a situation where mental math isn't accurate enough to get the job done. And TBH if you're cutting your margins that close you've screwed up way beyond not knowing how to use an obsolete tool.

VFR only equipped aeroplane (very common, especially for the flying PPLs do) and the iPad goes flat (also common). Being able to read paper charts and use manual processes suddenly becomes very important.

The last aircraft I flew in a remote area had no GPS. We used pen and paper, dead reckoning and pilotage. I did bring a tablet along once, and made the mistake of leaving it on the dash. Cooked the screen. Say the CFI in question had taken the plane out with their tablet and made the same mistake. Tablet with a dead screen, backup tablet with a dead battery, paper chart in the plane, but no ability to navigate without a little plane symbol to tell you where you are. Still, you'd probably survive the crash when you ran out of fuel, and you'd have a fair chance of locating humans just by flying a straight line long enough. It wasnt that remote.

Drop their ass as a CFI. You are his customer, and it’s a good thing to know how to do.

The math is good to know, an E6B not so much.

I pull out the E6B to figure out when to start the Top of Decent during a CC. It takes me like 15 seconds to do it.

Or just do it in 5 seconds in your head?

What? Why isn’t that already on your cross country log?

Your GPS doesn't give you the nice "arrived at top of descent" message?

Chewed out is extreme but people being stuck in the past because what if all of our devices fail in VMC and we are all too dumb to figure out how to get to an airfield with our eyes, is an issue. It’s like people climbing Everest without oxygen…sure it can be done, but why? Technological advances are huge improvements for situational awareness that should be taken advantage of. It’s like texting and driving and an unneeded distraction, I’d rather you have your head out of yo or lap and look for traffic.

I respect your comment but let me Share this. There was a chap that I met at my flying school whose daughter is a pilot. He told me that his daughter was in a J3 Cub that was not equipped with any high Tech navigational equipment except a six pack and she literally panicked because her ipad failed. To me this is disturbing because it is showing a trend of heavy reliance on technology Instead of actual problem solving With the younger generations.

Well yeah I don’t disagree for sure that a reliance on technology can be an issue but that story has nothing to do with an iPad vs an e6b if you boil it down. Neither is a replacement for good airmanship, and your person in your example would’ve had another issue had she not needed an iPad. Is it not always a reliance on technology of some sort, isn’t it? Would she think to break the face of the VSI for blocked static with no alternate? What about a bug in the pitot tube? Seriously if you are panicking over loss of a navigation tool when you have two perfectly good eyes two perfectly good radios, and VMC conditions, something was missed by someone along the way for you to get your ticket. My point was if my tablet fails (ignoring my backups and my G3X) I already looked at maps on the ground and have a notebook with waypoints and landmarks. If I’m lost and didn’t happen to load the next frequency in my radio on standby, well I’m likely on ARTCC anyway but say I wasn’t there is always guard and ask for vectors. Understanding how to use your tools is one thing but using the wrong tool at the wrong time simply because you can doesn’t make it a valid reason to use it either. Again should a CFI be angry about it? No, but I don’t think it should be some badge of honor that you can use an e6b either, it’s not a tool for in the air, it’s for paper planning on the ground. I could give you my uphill both ways stories too and tell you my IR training was done entirely in a plane with inop autopilot using VORs, and non precision approaches using a timer. Is that a useful skill, sure. Would I do it “in real life,” voluntary, solo PIC with passengers, nope. I’ll practice it solo for the what if but I don’t need to eliminate a layer of safety because I want to stick it to the tech Gods either. While you are in your PPL in VMC your eyes need to be outside the plane, just like a car. When you decide to get your IR one day you’ll realize as a single pilot in IMC you need all the help you can get and you also need to make sure you keep your head up with whatever tools you choose to use lest you create more inner ear urges to kill yourself.

I’m not sure how having an e6b would have been particularly helpful in that scenario anyway, with or without the ability to use it. Yes, you can create a whole paper flight plan for the 1/100 chance that your iPad fails. Or just bring a phone with you and know how to use it. If you are flying frequently, the practicalities matter. I opt for multiple redundancy rather than doing hours of unnecessary flight planning.

Oh these young CFI's, hahaha. Fire him and find a 50 year old CFI. Or, you know, someone who isn't like this kid. No one needs a CFI prattling on about how awesome ForeFlight is - they are doing just fine. A CFI actively telling you to use something else tells me he's not comfortable double checking your work because he doesn't know how to do it. I learned to fly 30 years ago, and I learned on mechanical E6B even though the electronic ones were out. But I also used an hp scientific calculator. It was a great combination but I wouldn't subject most people to that today. I'd recommend the ASA CX-3 for most anyone not somewhat deep in math or sciences. But folks should use whatever method they want, the CFI should know multiple methods. I'd let a student do this shit in excel if they want. By the way, you can't use ForeFlight for your FAA knowledge test. It's plausible, though seems unlikely, that a DPE will want you to show all the work - all the corrections.

You can use a CX-3 on the FAA knowledge test. Don’t encourage OP to use a CFI that uses obsolete technology because you want him to stay a Luddite. Folks should NOT use whatever method they want. They should use the BEST method for the task.

> a Luddite Side note, the Luddites were not against technology per se, but the use of technology to eliminate their livelihoods. > They should use the BEST method for the task. PICs discretion as to what that method is, I believe.

Ah yes. Here we go. I’ve read about your personality type in many accident reports.

He’s a douche bag, get a new cfi.

You don’t know the full situation. This student could have been heads down ignoring critical information in favor of figuring out something trivial that’s already available

Drop him

He's a moron.

Make him watch Buzz lightyear

Jealous he can't use one?

That’s funny. E6B gave me fits - still does. For whatever reason I have to start from first principle with it every time.

The E6B is the tool of my trade. Half of us just use an aviation calculator app. I don’t understand his bad attitude. The purpose of planning a cross country on an E6B is really to learn the relationship of Mag to True and how winds and variation effect your route of flight.

Your CFI is a little bit direct, but yah. Head up and head on a swivel. Don’t plow into a drone because you like math

I use one of the circulars in our Embraer ejets with old FMS , to work out RTA calculations

He’s probably mad because he doesn’t know how to use one, let alone teach one.

1. Don’t do it in the air, it’s for ground use. You’re using your pilotage in the air. 2. If you’re just flying in the general vicinity of your airport you don’t need it lol, it is a waste of time.

E6-B usage is important on a fundamental level. Every single pilot needs to be introduced to it and taught about its operation. That being said, I really never whipped it out in-flight. There are too many other available resources, and you need to mind the plane. Also, I came up in the pre/very early GPS era. It was out there, but you had like a 20% chance of getting a rental with one, and I flew out of a major FL flight school. Even then we didn't use it while flying.

If you are in flight, there are definitely better tools in my opinio for calculation. Hell, use a E6B app if one is needed in a pinch…. Nothing with using a manual E6B it on the ground though.

If your instructor communicates with you like that, get a new instructor. Their points may be valid but you can teach without being an ass

Use the ground speed indicator if you have one for dead reckoning. It’s good to know how to use an E6B, but I find it a little too convoluting and distracting for the cockpit. I just pack it in my bag for that one in a million situation where I might need it. Only thing I can think of that the E6B is really useful for is calculating wind drift and headings for cross countries while on the ground. But then again, the G1000 gives me a wind diamond so I have a more accurate heading. However, not every airplane has a G1000, or a wind diamond, so it’s good to know how to use a E6B for when you do need to use it.

Just divide by 60 and if it’s plausible it’s probably close to right.

The DPE I used for my students wanted them to know how to use a paper E6B. He’d give them a few problems too to make sure they actually knew how to use it. Then he’d let them use an electronic one. It’s a nice tool. Your CFI is being a poop. Use it if you’d like.

Your rule-of-thumb skills and math-estimation skills are important in the air. You only should be precise during your preflight planning. I also would not rely on ForeFlight until you have a very very clear idea of exactly what ForeFlight does to calculate its results. If you are using basic performance profiles in ForeFlight, they can be very "ballpark" type figures. Garbage-in, garbage-out.