I definitely needed to hear that 😂 it becomes more difficult here in Europe because they shut more and more VORs down. I have to fly about 45 min to get any reception when practicing with my FI
@@JohannesVogl Really? Plenty of them still operating in Europe, but many of them are low-power for terminal areas. The high-power ones are on airways and have a range of 200 nm.
Thanks. Excellent graphics, even the simple task (but often omitted) of explaining the acronym VOR. You’ve got the perfect voice for an instructor. Calm, clear and just the right amount of inflection. Many thanks.
This is an extremely helpful video, however, at roughly 8:30 when you're talking about the "cone of confusion" being 90 degrees off our selected heading this is actually known as the zone of ambiguity. The cone of confusion is when you are directly above the station. When you are directly above the station the reference signal and the sweeping signal are too close together to get an accurate to/from indication because it's constantly changing (FAA-H-8083-15B pg 257 of 371).
I rejoined the avionics trade in the air force and its a second occupation for me, I did the training enough to pass to earn journeyman status but I've forgotten a lot about the systems that I work on. I just read the maintenance manual, and follow it to replace the box if required and carry out a functional as outlined in the maintenance procedure. This video is helping me brush up on the avionics systems in a huge way. Thank you!
Your explanation is the one that's usually given. It has the advantages of being simple, intuitive, and easily understood. Unfortunately it's not the way VORs actually work. The real explanation is enough to warm the cockles of the hearts of all dyed-in-the-wool electronics geeks, especially RF geeks. Stripped to its essence, the reference signal is not pulsed, but is radiated continuously. The radial signal is not swept, but is also radiated continuously in all directions. By dint of some clever engineering in the antenna system, the phase of the radial signal changes as you move around the station. On the 360 radial, the difference in phase between the reference and radial signals is zero. Your receiver doesn't measure time differences but, rather, phase differences. The mathematics of this shows that there are actually an infinite number of radials, but there's no point in worrying about more than 360 of them. And then, you can go to Europe and talk about Doppler VORs, which are a whole 'nother story.
A phase difference is a timing difference. If the radial peak is arriving 16.66 ms after the reference peak, for example, then the receiver is on the 180 radial.
@@clownhands You, of course, are correct. The point I was trying to make is that the reference and radial signals are not discrete, but are continuous in time and space. Granted, it make no difference in using VORs or understanding the concept of their operation. As I said, his explanation is sufficient and is intuitively understandable to the vast majority of people. I however, being an avowed electronics geek and an unrepentant pedant, couldn't resist throwing in my two cents. Don't forget: this is all analog. There is no digital signal being transmitted and there is no precision timer implemented in the receiver. The phase of the signals is compared directly, probably using some kind of discriminator circuit which, in more modern receivers, undoubtedly is implemented in DSP.
@@johnopalko5223 indeed, and let’s take a moment to enjoy the devilish cleverness of the engineers who originally conceived this principle of operation so many decades ago!
@@clownhands They were geniuses. Brian Kendal, in _Manual of Avionics,_ ISBN 1-4051-4654-0, specifically states that the VOR receiver uses a digital phase shifter. I suspect the original design incorporated a goniometer as part of the phase detector, which would explain the rotating scale on the omni head.
Another interesting note: VR headsets that use “lighthouses” follow a similar principle. Photosensors with known relative position detect timing differences between a reference pulse (infrared flood light) and a timed sweep of infrared lasers. With two lighthouse stations sending out laser sweeps of the room from opposite sides and with known positions of the photosensors relative to each other the headset can work out its position in 3d space. In the case of the VR headset it is a digital signal, unlike VOR. This is the approach taken by Valve and HTC. VR headsets from Oculus use SLAM (Simultaneous Location And Mapping) instead, which has less physical hardware requirements (no stations) but requires significantly more complex processing.
That was a fantastic explanation for such a complex navigation concept. I was doing the flight training on VOR on MFS and I had no idea what they were talking about, this made is so much clear. Subscribed
Love the way he explain things. I love it when the instructor when teaching something, they treat us (or me) like a total idiot, not literally, of course, We don't need any technical mumbo jumbo, fancy words to impress me, we just want to learn stuff in "English", you know what am saying? I took up electrical engineering in college, gave up on my third year as I had to slap myself silly to stay awake the entire time while in this boring classroom. You guys in school today, you don't know how good you got it. So if you managed to graduate high school or college before the internet, consider yourself a genius. Back in the day, the only help you get is either the library or a private tutor :)
good thanks. I have a question, with which application do you make this video? I specifically mentioned to making gauges and rotating that. appreciate that
Started flying in 1971 and my instructor use to tell me a VOR station looked like an upside down ice cream cone. I depended on them greatly as we didn't have GPS, Foreflight or any other modern day navigational aids.
You say that VOR isn’t user friendly, but I learned to fly before GPS was wide spread and I always found VOR to be very intuitive. Coupled with DME, I was able to always keep myself spatially oriented and visualise where I was on the chart
So how does the aircraft/HSI/VHF receiver workout whether it is FROM or TO the tuned VOR radial? Is DME involved here? (as in the distance is either increasing or diminishing) or is it something to do with how the VOR signal is processed?
I'm a bit late here, but I would assume that it compares the radial selected with what radial you are on. For example, if you have the 060 radial selected and are on the 240 radial, the VOR receiver knows both of those pieces of information. From there it would know that you are flying to the station. If the selected radial and the radial you are on are the same it would show the from flag.
What’s the difference between the zone of ambiguity and the cone of confusion? I’m currently in instrument training and I thought the cone of confusion was reflected in the CDI needle quivering and not accurately reflecting the radial whereas the zone of ambiguity was absence of a flag because it couldn’t tell whether you were TO or FROM the VOR since you’re perpendicular to the selected radial. It’s ambiguous.
How does it know which of the non-reference signals is the right one? Doesn't it still pick up adjacent signals or is the propagation that precisely focused?
The radials are simply the phase difference between the reference signal and the directional signal. The receiver in the aircraft is measuring a phase shift between two radio frequency signals.
CORRECTION THE ROTATIONAL SIGNAL IS THE PHASED RF SIGNAL EQUAL IN FREQ TO THE OMNI SIGNAL IT IS IN PHASE WITH THE OMNI SIGNAL AT NORTH AND 90 DEGREES AT EAST 180 OUT AT SOUTH 270 OUT AT WEST ETC THE RX COMPARES PHASE RELATIONSHIPS THE OBS SHIFTS THE PHASE UNTIL BOTH ARE IN PHASE AND THE NEEDLE CENTERS .
@@-V-K- no no To Fr flags are very important to know understand learn so can use Vor properly. yes it is very confusing imo not many cfis can even explain them easily... omg smfh
my question about this type of equipment..how come most planes have upgraded their instruments, but things like VOR or NDB..why haven't they been upgraded...since this type of navigation is very very old..why is this?
well its first serve as a great backup lets say your ILS or GPS failed in that case you can use the VOR or NDB to land instead of diverting to another airport , yeah they do have a greater margin of error but they have been used for the last couple of decades also the RNAV uses near by stations to determine its location so it needs them as a base for its operations the only instrument that doesn't need a ground or Satellite base equipment is the INS/IRS but they still need the coordinates of your aircraft initially then it can operate within its margin and it cant be as accurate as an ILS also some countries are slowly phasing out NDBs but VORs and DMEs are going to stay for a while longer not to mention a lot of GA Aircrafts that are built in the 60s, 70s, 80s hope this explains why
For navigation. If you imagine the radials like the spokes of a giant wheel on the ground, you can find out which spoke you are on and if you are heading towards the centre (the VOR itself) or away from it. They are sometimes located on airfields. If you can locate two spokes of two VORs, then you are at the crossing point of those two "spokes".
"if you understand that reference please dont date yourself by letting us know" dont worry, my autistic girlfriend has explained rotary phones despite me being an 03 baby and unfortunately Never Getting to use one
Your explanation of how the VOR determines what radial the airplane is on is incorrect. The explanation you gave, unfortunately, is often taught in ground schools leading to many misunderstanding how the VOR actually determines the radial one is on. No information is often better than wrong information.
Pilots need to know how to use the VOR, not how it works, unless they are planning a career in avionics instrumentation and maintenance. Telling the students that the receiver is measuring a phase shift won't make the job of using it correctly any easier.
I've driven past one of those transmitters many times and never knew what it was! When I was a young child, I thought it was the nosecone of an ICBM! Very interesting to finally learn what that strange white structure is. Picture of what I saw from the road: i.imgur.com/1frj2FR.jpg
