THIS Technology Could REVOLUTIONIZE Airline Safety!

-----------------------------------------------------
What is Quantum Navigation, and what does it have to do with the aviation industry?

Well, it turns out that this technology could be what we need, to solve a very serious problem: GPS jamming and spoofing. Because when it becomes available, quantum navigation could actually replace GPS – COMPLETELY.

-----------------------------------------------------
If you want to support the work I do on the channel, join my Patreon crew and get awesome perks and help me move the channel forward!

Our Connections:

Social:

Download the FREE Mentour Aviation app for all the latest aviation content

Below you will find the links to videos and sources used in this episode.

SOURCES
-----------------------------------------------------

#Mentourpilot #pilot #aircraft

[wittibear]

Hey Petter, the most amazing thing happened today. I am a primary school teacher (ages 5-12) in a public (gov owned) school Sydney, Australia. I current teach science to all grades from Kindergarten to Year 6. Today I taught a Year 4 (10yo). We were discussing reliable sources to use online, including YouTube channels. I discussed how I was very interested in aviation and how I had found a channel that outlines information about aircraft, how they fly and what causes aviation accidents. I explained that I thought it was a reliable source because the person who researches and presents the information was a captain for an airline. One of the students asked if I meant Mentour Pilot, because he watches it too and he wants to be a pilot.
I just wanted to let you know that you are being watched by future pilots who aren’t even old enough to drive yet!

[peterdurand]

As an old retired 767 pilot I am amazed at the advances in navigation. However the old ones weren't too bad. Back in the days before GPS we relied on IRS for long range nav. It updated automatically using ground aids before going over water. It never ceased to amaze me when after a few hours over water, arriving over a long/lat reporting point, we could see another aircraft directly overhead or below at the exact same spot. Cheers, , Peter

[JohnDrewVoice]

In 1965, as a fourteen-year-old boy, I flew from New York to Manchester, England on a BOAC Boeing 707. Only three passengers were in the first-class compartment—my mother, myself, and a businessman. About thirty minutes into the flight, the co-pilot emerged from the cockpit seated himself in the first-class compartment, reclined his seat, and lay his head back, apparently intending to sleep.

Moments later, the flight attendant leaned over toward me and said, "The captain requests your presence in the cockpit." I happily followed her into the cockpit, and the captain introduced himself, the radio operator, and the navigator, and instructed me to be seated in the co-captains seat. For the next several hours, the captain explained many of the controls and instructed me in making minor throttle adjustments. I was even allowed to slightly bank the craft and return it to the proper heading. Of course, these adjustments were negligible and the pilot never took his hands from the controls.

Perhaps a half-hour later, my mother was brought into the cockpit and was shown how to celestially navigate by the navigator. There was a sextant installed in the overhead. I wonder if this was a feature on all Boeing 707s or just the British versions of the craft.


I remained in the cockpit until just before landing in Edinburgh, then returned to my seat and remained there until landing in Manchester.

[challengerultralightadventure]

If the earth were flat, nothing would exist, because cats would have knocked everything off the edge thousands of years ago.

[umatgreyhound]

Hey Petr, 40 professional pilot here. Have flown with the old sextant sticking out my celestial port many times and doppler radars for drift. Also have used, Omega, LORAN, Microwave Landing Systems and Pressure navigation in Antarctica. This was one of the best overviews I've seen! Just the right amount of detail for pro and basic enough for the layman. Very well written and edited sir!

[Mahoota]

Lol loved the slight dig at flat earthers 😂

[macflod]

I work in Oceanographic survey and construction.
We use RLG, FOG and INS underwater. Mostly FOGs are used and preferred, out of the manufacturers we use, FOGs tend to be a more reliable name in our field however they are more sensitive to shock forces making them lose the accurate specifications though but their high accuracy is not always needed for our work.

I have heard RLGs are much more resilient as the whole mirror and laser assembly is a single glass prizm so they not going to move position away or closer to each other and they are used to aim artillery guns as they can with stand the shocks well.

As for INS we use it, but it will drift in minutes without additional sensors aiding it.

Problem underwater is GPS doesn’t reach so by using GPS to get vessel position we then use an acoustic system to get position of underwater ROVs, structures etc in relation to Vessel and fron this we can know it underwater position. But it is not accurate like GPS but it is accurate enough.
There are different acoustic systems that can be used. You can set up almost like your own temporary satellite array in a local area underwate but the method im most used to is you have vessel ping and remote beacons on underwater objects will reply back. The hydrophones (ears ) on the vessel are numerous and in an array. Depending on the timing between each hearing the reply it can calculate a direction and you can get a range based on the time from the vessel ping to the reply. This is usually done every 2-3 seconds. Remote becons do not always have a power source subsea and so it depends on how long you need the battery to last; more pings, less time you will have battery last.
However sound in water travels slow enough that delay becomes an issue especially in deep water (1000m+) like found in Gulf of Mexico, west Africa for exanple. Sound will travel about 1500m/s, but 2000m depth means possibly getting close to 3 seconds between transmit- travel down and up time- process signal time. In the real world environment it is not unusual to lose replies or chirps not be heard by beacons underwater due to other noise, and masking (not being in line of sight) so on our navigation we will see position but it will only update once every couple of seconds or so in normal use.
However if 1 or 2 of these replies are missed you go considerable time and distance if ROV is traveling where position is not known. This means rocks could appear meters away from their real location in a survey. There are ways to correct for this but correcting is not as good or accurate as getting accurate data during a survey.
This reason is why we use INS on Rov when surveying, so as to assist and it has become standard required equipment a lot of the time. It will fill in the gaps between the replies and especially if we miss replies. So instead of seeing our ROV move as a series of dots updating every few seconds- it will be a smooth line traveling as it is in real life.

They quantim navigation. I could see that making its way to my industry too as iif i understand correctly, i can see it could possibly remove some of the other equipment if it replaced INS units. It would also potentially save time and work when getting everything set up and calibrated i guess.

[michaelkaliski]

Back in the 1970s I flew on a Boeing 707 that was equipped with inertial navigation for trans polar flights. The system used gyroscopes and ring lasers to track the changes in position from a fixed starting point. It did drift over time but was still good enough to be within a few miles at the end of several thousand miles of flight. The difference between then and now is that the equipment fits in a shoe box today rather than completely filling an equipment bay and the space between the two pilot seats in the 707. That was also the time that the first GPS systems started to appear. You frequently had to wait six or more hours between fixes from the limited number of satellites available at the time.

[RickGottschald]

Not a pilot but I love learning about aviation and Navigation. It adds to the "useless info" that I use or share with others when they say..."how do they do that?"

[PsRohrbaugh]

My grandfather was a navigator turned electronics warfare officer in the airforce. He said the laser ring gyroscope was the biggest advancement in avionics ever. Before that, with mechanical gyros, the lubricating oil the military used was a highly guarded secret both in terms of composition and location - there were heavily fortified stockpiles around the nation and only a few people knew all the locations of the gyroscope oil.

[kaiying]

Cryogenic cooling means it's unlikely to be taking over from GPS for anything smaller than an aircraft. I can't see anything running cryo-tanks from a battery for long.

[Kelters]

As a "boomer" who worked for a while at Decca when I was young, it was interesting to see a quick glimpse of one of those old nav. systems we were making that were rather "secret" at the time.

[Sudsbn]

I enjoy your show and the way you present information, however, I have a couple of comments regarding your assessment of IRS systems:

• I’ve been hearing about “cold atom” navigation (you referred to it as quantum nav) for nearly 20 years. I’m glad it’s finally coming to fruition.
• FOG is not an improvement to RLG. Both systems are spec’d to 0.8nm/hr drift. NGC went full in with FOG while Honeywell stuck with RLG. Honeywell owns the commercial market.
• FOG is not preferred by space applications. Space tends toward Hemispherical Resonator Gyroscope (HRG) “wine glass” systems.
• RLG/FOG systems cannot “detect” the earth’s rotation rate. They assume the rotation rate given the inputted initial position. In a near mishap, an F-22 pilot (in Alaska) inputted 16 degrees vice 61 degrees latitude. The system went “upside down” and the aircraft temporarily departed controlled flight.
• GPS is not “primary” in an IRS. Both inertial and GPS inputs go through a Kalman filter. Inertial is more accurate in the short term. A spurious GPS input will not send the IRS off-kilter.
• Stellar nav is extremely accurate. Several military aircraft use (e.g. LN-120) for different applications. The obvious limitation is clouds…

I’ve been out of the industry for a “few” years so my info might be a little dated. Keep up the great channel!

[FoamCrusher]

Excellent explanations!

In the early 2000’s I was on a SWA flight from Sacramento to San Diego. It was the first fight of the day for that aircraft that had the new upturned wing tips. A strong storm was passing through, with winds 35 kts and gusts up to 45 kts. As we boarded, the plane was noticeably bouncing around.

After boarding was complete, we made no move to pushback for over 30 mins when the pilot made a PA saying the aircraft was fine, but the bouncing around would not allow the three gyroscopes to synchronize and we could not take off until they all give the same result. He said the new wingtips made the plane move about more in the unusual lateral wind than the old straight wingtips.

After a few more minutes, he even moved the aircraft behind a hanger in an attempt to shelter the plane from the wind. No joy. We had to stay in the ground another hour until the storm front passed and the plane stopped bouncing around enough so the gyros synced.

Technology is nice…when it works! works. 21:12

[franciscocolon]

My first job out of university was as a navigator/bombardier in B52’s. Radar, celestial, and dead reckoning.
Talk about becoming technologically unemployed.

[adruno]

There is also the Hemispherical resonator gyroscope, used on satelites and Nuclear Subs.
According to Wiki :
It is highly accurate and is not sensitive to external environmental perturbations. The resonating shell weighs only a few grams and it is perfectly balanced, which makes it insensitive to vibrations, accelerations, and shocks.

[minutiesabotage]

There is also another type of navigation being studied that is based on pulsars and quasars in outer space. It's essentially an unjammable combination of GPS (where the pulsars are the satellites) and celestial navigation. Celestial drift is very slow and easy to correct for.

[Hartbreak]

It's also worth pointing out that some military planes used a form of automatic celestial navigation called astro-inertial navigation. If I remember correctly the SR-71 used such a system and it's rumored that the B-2 uses such a system as well.

[davidsanderson]

My father was a WWII era naval fighter pilot. His writing about his experience included the following:

Navigation was one of the essential flying skills you had to master in the days before GPS. A typical carrier mission required flying over a featureless ocean searching for enemy aircraft, while at the same time charting compass heading, time, and wind drift on a small pullout navigation table in the cockpit. Most importantly, you had to keep track of a floating runway that was sailing away from your starting location at 15-20 knots the whole time you were aloft. Wind drift had to be estimated by looking at ocean whitecaps and waves. So it was with some relief that you came back into visual contact with the carrier when returning from a mission, knowing that you had done your navigation calculation correctly. That relief was followed, however, by a white-knuckle landing on a runway heaving in the ocean swells.

[EpicWink]

I did a research project on this tech (ring trap Bose-Einstein Condensates) 10 years ago, cool to see that it's being implemented now.

An issue is decoherence, or the atom bunches becoming less quantum and useful due to eg warning up. At the time, that was projected to be on the order of months in real deployments