ASA CX3 flight computer or cellphone app?

[imcool]

Hello members,
I have started ground school and I am wondering about ASA CX3 flight computer, is it worth buying or an android or iOS cellphone/tablet app has a better alternative for it?
are you using such an app, can you please name the app?
https://www.pilotshop.ca/asa-cx-3-flight-computer.html

Please provide your comments and inputs.
Best Regards.

[myka1405]

For PPL ground school, I'd recommend using the E6B and learn how to do the basic stuff (ground speed checks, altitude/airspeed calculation, etc). You can get away with only using an E6B for a PPL written exam, but if you feel comfortable with the E6B, you can get the CX3 (vital for CPL and INRAT) to make your calculations faster. It's super easy to use but never forget to use your E6B once in a while. There are certain calculations required in the CPL and INRAT exams that cannot be solved with the CX3 exclusively, so always have both if you decide to purchase it.

[photofly]

If you’re planning on taking a TC exam, you won’t be permitted to use a cellphone app.

E6B is the best.

[imcool]

A E6B flight computer was given to me with the ground school written exam kit.

I will buy CX3 as cellphone app is not allowed in TC exam, you have made a good point, but my next question is after we clear the exam and doing recreational flying for that purpose do you use cx3 flight computer or do you use cellphone app(please name it)?
Thanks again.

[455tt]

The E6B's are "slide rules" from the last century.

Sure they work, but they are slow and tedious to use and are very prone to user errors. How many people do you know today, outside of aviation, that will pull out a slide rule from their shirt pocket to do a quick calculation? Maybe you have not even heard of a slide rule. That's OK if not. It is what they used to do calculations before computers, in the days of manual type writers and slate chalkboards.

The CX3's and other modern electronic flight computers are fast and accurate and much easier to use since they give you "prompts" for the inputs required in a calculation. As well, they have a memory feature when completing a problem chain so something you worked out previously is held for another calculation further along in the chain (e.g. you work out a ground speed, then you enter the distance, the computer remembers the ground speed so as to give your leg time). And they are all fine for purposes of TC exams as stated.

As for apps, outside of the flight training or testing environment, use whatever you want. Many of them are free.

It's a funny thing in flight training, you will get into serious trouble if you dare to suggest using anything other than an ancient E6B. I suppose old habits die hard.

And remember as well, if you are good at math, you can easily do all routine flight calculations at the PPL level with a pocket calculator or if you are really good at math, in your head, if you happen to know a little basic high school Grade 9 trigonometry.

Of course for whatever numbers generated for an aviation calculation, whether mentally, with an E6B or electronic flight computer or whatever, you must always THINK about whether the numbers make sense: if you have a tailwind, is your ground speed you worked out greater than your TAS; if the winds are from the right, your correction for drift must be into wind etc. etc.

So really you should feel free to go with whatever you want to and where necessary, to keep the peace with the numerous luddites that will be training you, follow your school's demands to use an old E6B and don't make waves. Imagine you are time traveller sent back to the 1950's for ground school with your electronic devices and are attending a class: better to keep your modern devices secret, as the teacher and students will never understand these.

But this is just my opinion, many will differ with me I am sure and will give many creative reasons why old E6B type slide rules are actually superior.

[photofly]

Maybe you have not even heard of a slide rule. That's OK if not. It is what they used to do calculations before computers, in the days of manual type writers and slate chalkboards....

... Imagine you are time traveller sent back to the 1950's for ground school with your electronic devices and are attending a class: better to keep your modern devices secret, as the teacher and students will never understand these.

Goodness me, you're a patronizing little shit, sometimes, aren't you?

E6B advantages: you can use one with one hand, and in turbulence.

The batteries don't fall out when you drop one. They don’t leak either, and wreck two hundred dollars of equipment.

The E6B is way faster since you don't have to navigate through a series of menus to find the calculation that you want or type in numbers (that you can easily enter incorrectly)

The memory feature lasts for years: the one in my Cessna still shows the groundspeed of my last cross-country flight, I don't even remember when the flight was, but I could tell you today how fast I was going.

The instructions are printed on it: you don't need an instruction book (that you lost, or even if you had, were forbidden to take into an exam).

They don't muddle up the two different concepts of accuracy and precision, which is a vital distinction for pilots. Something the previous poster seems not to understand.

On the subject of thinking about your results: if you understand what turning the wheel to the left or right actually means, you're half way there. Similarly when you use the reverse: your wind triangle is drawn on the device for you and is really easy to interpret.

An E6B and an iPad with Foreflight are the two best things to have to hand in flight, in my opinion. Since that is what is important, those are the tools you should practice using on the ground.

[TrilliumFlt]

For what is worth my thinkng is that an E6B or other such "engaged" functions offer the added value of developing critical thinking. There is a tendency to accept answers provided by an electronic device as acurate and without risk of error. The "sixth sense" of critical thinking; applying the sniff test to all we do while operating an airplane, is at risk of becoming a lost skill in the ever evolving electronic rhelm.

[ayseven]

E6B. No batteries required. You need to know your way around them anyways, regardless of what you want to use in the real world. If you are too lazy to learn how to use an E6B, you should not be flying, in my opinion - it is just another strange-at-first thing to get your mind on what is really going on during your flight, as hinted at above. Your mind should never really rest during a flight, and having used an E6B helps you get to the place you need to be mentally sharp.

[valleyboy]

I always used a jepp wiz wheel because it fit into my shirt pocket. I can remember the push against the jepp computer wheels over the clunky (I guess eb6 style) and the argument that the answers generated differed between the 2 and that jepp was too accurate. The jepp wheel got me through all exams and just before I wrote my private exam they would not allow any technical help and want vector diagrams done manually - damn I was on the cutting edge of technology back then and as mentioned didn't need batteries or even a flight bag

I can't help but chuckle every time I see a student pilot hauling a 50 kg flight bag out to a basic trainer. I think back and remember that I flew for a living for many years and never had a flight bag. Damn couldn't even have sun glasses because the ones I owned littered the bottom of many lakes,

I guess ars of the pants flying is outdated and frowned upon as being unsafe and unprofessional, what a shame.

[TrilliumFlt]

On a related note the Jeppy wizwheel can do a basic sun shot as well, now thats really reach backwards in technology

[youhavecontrol]

IMO, I'd stick with the cheap circular slide rule during your training and then after that, you're free to use what ever you want for your calculations when you fly post-training.

For a few reasons:

-Using the slide rule is a great way to get your mind thinking/visualizing vectors, unit conversions, etc.
-You can't take a phone with you into the exam, so you'll need to be familiar with one of the approved devices anyways.
-A slide rule is much easier to use in turbulence and you can operate it with one hand. It's really easy to hit the wrong button and screw up your number crunching when using an electronic calculator or touch-screen app.
-when you're good at it, you can do wicked-fast calculations on the slide rule.
-the old-school slide rule has no battery and can survive just about anything (coffee spills, dropping) except being left on the panel dash in the sun to warp.
-In my experience, electronic devices are faster at the velocity calculations, but are actually slower at ETA and en-route Ground Speed calculations. So, the electronic device may make your planning faster, but not necessarily your en-route work.

Again, this is just my experience. It may sound like I'm pushing an archaic device like some old-timer, but I instructed for a few years and absolutely never felt the need to get an electronic E6B. I used Jeppsen CR3 for 10 years, did all my training and instructing with it, and even used it for my ATPL exams with no problems at all. I would never insist my students use one thing over the other, but for fun I would often race them to see if they could calculate as fast on their calculators as I could on the slide-rule. It was a fun way of showing that older tech isn't necessarily worse. The whiz wheel does take practice though.

[C-GKNT]

The E6B's are "slide rules" from the last century.
...

Actually AT LEAST 2 centuries ago.

[goldeneagle]

The E6B's are "slide rules" from the last century.
...

Actually AT LEAST 2 centuries ago.

In fact, the E6B in it's current form was developed in the 30's. So the wiz wheel is between 80 and 90 years old, a far cry from 2 centuries.

[C-GKNT]

The E6B's are "slide rules" from the last century.
...

Actually AT LEAST 2 centuries ago.

In fact, the E6B in it's current form was developed in the 30's. So the wiz wheel is between 80 and 90 years old, a far cry from 2 centuries.

I was referring to "slide rules" invented sometime in the 1600's.

[youhavecontrol]

*slight thread drift* I don't understand how "It's xxx years old technology" somehow means it's now irrelevant. There's many old inventions where time has proved it's value. The magnetic compass is over 1000 years old and we still have them in aircraft, despite many, many innovations since then.

[praveen4143]

As an ardent fan of the E-6B, I say go for a CX-3. Hear me out.

I have used and taught using both a CX-2 and an E-6B extensively for many years now, I could always see that using an E-6B was the superior choice for many reasons. Someone who has learned to use the E-6B at an average PPL level can do calculations on it faster than a similar person using a CX-2 because it was cumbersome. Not to mention the whole batteries dying out part.

The CX-3, however is a game changer. Firstly, the whole system has been revamped and made much more user friendly. Even a rookie on the CX-3 will probably beat a pro using an E-6B in my humble opinion. The new device also has a decent battery indicator from what I have seen and thus more reliable to know if it is coming due for a swap.

Also, all of you guys complaining about batteries dying out. Has none of you used a headset with ANR? Don't you carry spare batteries? Almost anyone I have seen tends to do so. If you are so paranoid about losing the use of the CX-3 mid-flight, maybe carry 4 more spares.

Anyone who wants to verify the superiority of the CX-3, do try out the CX-3 simulator here and tell me it isn't good!

[iflyforpie]

Don’t bother with anything but an E6B.

You’ll never use any flight computer in real life. The E6B gives you a more fundamental and graphical representation of your problems and is far less susceptible to finger problems or gross errors. Plus they are cheap. You can probably find one for free from an older pilot.

All it is there to do is educate you on the various primary aspects of aerial navigation like the relationship between CAS and TAS... or be a backup if you need to figure out a problem—particularly if that problem is one where you have to work it backwards or look at multiple results without having to plug it in every time due to the witchcraft that allows the E6B to represent one set ratio across many numbers.

In real life you are using a GPS or FMS and computerized operational flight plan and doing rough but acceptably accurate speed and fuel consumption with things like miles per minute (eg: 2 miles a minute for a Cessna 182, 6 miles a minute for a Q400, 5 miles a minute for an Encore Q400 with 4 in the decent, etc) and simple multiplication or addition for burn.

[praveen4143]

Don’t bother with anything but an E6B.

You’ll never use any flight computer in real life.

Disagree. If the OP is going to become a professional pilot, there will be at least 4-5 exams that they will need the flight computer for over the course of their first 5 years in aviation. Not to mention how many times they will use it if they do not end up using electronic charts. Pro pilots in the industry tend to have this habit of pooh-poohing anything in the flight training side of things as somehow being overkill and unnecessary. There are a lot of things that will come handy to a rookie that is "growing up" within the industry.

While the mighty E-6B is great at doing calculations, it is not wrong for someone to want to use technology to achieve the end goal. We have all moved from paper charts to iPads ourselves but somehow feel like we should beat up the new guy for wanting to use more updated technology whether or not the prevailing arguments make sense.

[photofly]

Don’t bother with anything but an E6B.

You’ll never use any flight computer in real life.

Disagree. If the OP is going to become a professional pilot, there will be at least 4-5 exams that they will need the flight computer for over the course of their first 5 years in aviation.

That was the point. You’ll use a flight computer for exams, but not in real life. Exams are not real life.

We have all moved from paper charts to iPads ourselves but somehow feel like we should beat up the new guy for wanting to use more updated technology whether or not the prevailing arguments make sense.

Nobody is beating anyone up for wanting something new. I think iPads are great for both students and in “real life”. The argument isn’t that a CX3 is new. The argument is that a CX3 is demonstrably inferior to a regular E6B.

[photofly]

Anyone who wants to verify the superiority of the CX-3, do try out the CX-3 simulator here and tell me it isn't good!

If it’s as bad as the simulator it’s still a pile of turd, and I still think an E6B is better.

[455tt]

If it’s as bad as the simulator it’s still a pile of turd, and I still think an E6B is better.

So by your use of the word "if", are we to assume you've never even tried out a CX3 before?

If not, do you dislike new technology in general, or just electronic flight computers?

[photofly]

It’s not possible for a CX3 to be much different to a CX2. If it was it would be called a QR27, or something. But, it’s called a CX3, being an upgrade to the turd-like CX2.The simulator proves the point. They’re both a pile of steaming turd compared to an E6B.

For the third time in this thread, I will sing the praises of using an iPad for all sorts of things both as a student pilot and in “real” flying. Clearly, I am not anti-technology. I long for the day that NavCanada ceases to publish paper charts and everyone is forced to to use a tablet. And there I will be, as I do today, with a tablet by my side as I fly. And next to the tablet will be ... an E6B.

[praveen4143]

It’s not possible for a CX3 to be much different to a CX2. If it was it would be called a QR27, or something. But, it’s called a CX3, being an upgrade to the turd-like CX2.The simulator proves the point. They’re both a pile of steaming turd compared to an E6B.

Oh come on, photofly. I have come to expect higher standards of arguments from you!! Are you saying that the iPad from this year or the previous generation is not better than the OG iPad? Try using an OG iPad today and it will screech to a halt moments after you click on the Foreflight or FltPlan app and freeze up on you.

I agree with you that the simulator is buggy but the real thing is much more fluid. Getting the numbers figured out for a cross country leg on the CX-3 took less than half the time it would have taken on a CX-2 when I tried it out about a week ago on a student's device. If I had done the same calculations on the E-6B, I would have taken a few seconds longer than on the CX-3 and I used to swear by the E-6B until I first came upon the CX-3.

[photofly]

Oh come on, photofly. I have come to expect higher standards of arguments from you!! Are you saying that the iPad from this year or the previous generation is not better than the OG iPad?

The iPad is really irrelevant to whether an E6B is better than a CX3. I mentioned the iPad only to make it clear that I have no bias against advanced technological solutions.

I'm happy to use a regular pocket calculator for flight planning (time, speed and distance). Why? Because you have to think, when you use a regular calculator, which number to divide (or multiply) by which number. If you type into fields marked "distance", "groundspeed" and/or "time" then it removes the mental exercise of understanding the calculation that's being performed. But an E6B is just as good.

Another example: indicated vs true airspeed: when you set the dial correctly for density altitude on the E6B you have in front of you a device that can instantly convert any TAS you like. No need to type in more digits. Want to know what 100KIAS is? Look at the dial. 105KIAS? Look at the dial. Want to know what IAS you need to make 110TAS? Look at the dial. It's all in front of you.

Monitoring your cross country progress: once the dial is set to match your ground speed, nothing more to do. Just reference distance to next checkpoint, and the time is right there in front of you. No hands needed to type in data. Change of groundspeed? Thumb and forefinger adjusts the dial. Turn the dial to the left, that means your ground speed is decreasing. Turn it to the right - increasing. Turn it a little - small change in groundspeed. Turn it a lot - big change in groundspeed. It's visceral and immediate.

Another example: wind triangles: type in data into a device is a poor substitute for the diagram that you get on the back of an E6B, that let's you *see* the crosswind affecting your ground track.

Flying isn't about digital data; it's an inherently analogue activity. There's a basic disconnect between typing numbers in, and going somewhere in an airplane. The E6B doesn't have that problem. It's an analogue device.

[digits_]

I have a lot respect for the E6B, it is a beautiful piece of equipment. But I've never really used it other than for a few pre flight prep exercises, groundschool and the mandatory flight tests. Once I got the license, I've never used it anymore. And that was in airplanes without a GPS.

If you are mainly buying one for the flight test, a digital one would be recommended, as you don't need the analogue advantage described above.

When preparing actual flights as a PPL student and pilot, I found it much easier to place 1 or 2 minute tick marks on my route on my map, based on the expected groundspeed and winds. Your actual groundspeed doesn't really matter anymore once flying. The only thing you care about is time. You have X amount of time in your tanks, so figure out where you can go.

Then while flying you keep track. After 2 minutes I should be here, but it took me 2 minutes and 10 seconds, so for every tick mark I'm 10 seconds behind. Wether that's because of wind direction change, wind speed change or airplane performance: you don't really care.

It works really well, you don't need to be spinning dials while flying, and you focus more on the map vs on the E6B.

But whatever works for you of course!