Talk:E6B

message: i just stumbled across this, uplifting story about this page: http://blog.wirelizard.ca/pivot/entry.php?id=43  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.143.235.237 (talk) 10:08, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The term "E6-B" is notthe true name of the device.  Rather, it is merely one of many varying models of the device.  Please see the detailed discussion on this, below.Clepsydrae (talk) 00:47, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

text: I strongly concur.  In fact, so does the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), along with the United States Military, both of who refer to it in their various manuals as a "DR computer," "DR flight computer," or "flight computer."  The most common reference is that of a "DR computer," in AFM 51-40, AFPAM 11-216, FAA-H-8083-25B, and FAA-H-8083-18.  The first two are used for all pilots and navigators in the U.S. Air Force, and the second two are used by the FAA for all civilian pilots.
Reference above to the E-6B being called the Crap1 in the UK is true, but is only part of the story. The Crap1 is the version used by private pilots, but it is the Crap5 that is used by students for the Airline Transport Pilot Licence for their groundschool course. The Crap5 includes, for example, provision for Mach/TAS calculations which the private pilot would not need. The CRP designation as such seems to be the preserve of Pooleys, the main UK supplier of this type of instrument. Pooleys also supply a whole range of other variants, such as some with and some without 'wind arms' and also circular versions that do not use a drift slide.BroomstickPilot (talk) 10:21, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original Discussion 

message: Does anyone hold the copyright or patent for the E-6B style flight computer? (ie, a transparent rotating slider over concentric circles on one side with a logarithmic circular slide rule on the other) Sancho McCann 02:14, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see that the article answers my question!.... Good article! Sancho McCann 02:17, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright? 

message: I just wanted to disclose that the link that I added a few months ago to the online e-6b applet was a link to my own website. I didn't realize at the time that this is not appropriate. So, I would like to open discussion as regards the appropriateness of this link. I believe it improves the article by allowing a reader to interact with a simulated E-6B. As regards the conflict of interest, it is not a monetary interest, as the website is a university website and the E-6B software is released under the GPL. Sancho 06:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Your link is fine and appropriate to the article in my opinion and is not COI.  But you may want to fix the link in the article so it does not lead to a redirect page. Russeasby 20:10, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, thanks! Sancho 07:49, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflict of interest 

message: The model given to USAF Navigators has MB-4A stamped on the top, contra this article.--72.191.31.112 (talk) 04:46, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  MB-4A 

message: On November 12 I added an external link to my webpage showing the derivation to solution of the triangle of velocities, rather than just the equations.  The link was removed as spam.  I didn't realise external links were inappropriate.  While my website is a commercial photography site the page the link pointed to, and all the other aviation related pages on the site, are all free with no commercial interest.  I would like to open discussion as regards the appropriateness of this link.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.188.36.31 (talk) 09:16, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Derivation of mathematical solution 

message: The article states a metal and plastic flight computer will wear out before an equivalent cardboard one. My experience says this to be false, having inherited several old metal flight computers, and a single paper one. The metal ones are all in good condition, and contrary to the article have gotten stiffer over the years rather than spinning freely as the plastic is worn. The paper one however has nearly disintegrated and is harder to read, enough to avoid carrying it on an actual flight. My primary flight computer is labeled Piper Flight Computer PC-3, those wishing to rename the article "Flight Computer" should take note, was my father's and was carried by him during over 7000 hours of long cross country flights and the associated planning, and it is so stiff I have to rub a bit of pencil graphite under the rotating portion so I can use it one-handed in the cockpit. Additionally, while the E6B moniker is used colloquially in the United States, I hear it used often by pilots in reference to the electronic flight computers as well, which are currently not covered here, so renaming the article Flight Computer and redirecting E6B and variant names seems like the best course of action.
Davidlvann (talk) 23:41, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur.  There is indeed much NPOV commentary in the article, and some of it as you mentioned is incorrect.  Thank you for information on the PC-3.  I will try my best to include it in subsequent edits.  I wonder how many manufacturers came up with their own DR computers and included them as aftermarket accessories?  You're right, the metal (aluminum) ones stiffen up over time, I assume due to oxidation roughening the surfaces.  I've tried graphite, silicone, and finally, a bit of polishing compound for the edges of the wind face.  Dry silicone for the front and the polishing compound for the back (thoroughly cleaned, of course) seems to work best.  I wouldn't dare use it on the front side as it would take the silkscreen off.Clepsydrae (talk) 02:01, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

text: They will certainly receive mention, and thank you for that input.  However, while the E-6B may get its own page, it's a DR computer, the same as the MB-4A, PC-3, and others mentioned here.  Furthermore, the term DR computer includes both mechanical (circular slide rules) as well as electronic devices, so both sections will appear.  While I understand how you personally feel, there's nothing notable about the E-6B that's not equally notable about the MB-4A and others as DR computers.  The focus of the article will remain on the history and operation of a DR computer.  Still needs a lot of work!Clepsydrae (talk) 02:01, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Construction and Durability 

message: I have seen many incorrectly titled Wikipedia articles, and this article is a prime example of what no other encyclopedia would ever allow, for many reasons:
* The principle reason:  The terms "E6B" and "E6-B" are not the name of the device, which is properly called a "dead reckoning computer."  Rather, E6-B is merely one of many types of dead reckoning computers, specifically, the ones used by Army Air Forces.  The Air Force type designation is "MB-4."  Some civilian models, such as the ones from ASA, are labeled, "E6-B" or "E6-B2."  Other civilian models use different nomenclature.
* The most common device over the last 30 years, issued by the military and used by pilots and navigators from all branches of the military, is labeled on the surface of its face as, "COMPUTER, AIR NAVIGATION, DEAD RECKONING, TYPE MB-4A."
* Both the Air Force Air Navigation Manual (AFM 51-40) from July 1973 as well as Flying Operations/Air Navigation (AFPAM 11-216, 1 March 2001) refer to the device as an "MB-4" or "MB-4A," "circular slide rule," "DR computer," or "dead reckoning computer."
* Both FAA-H-8083-25A, "Pilot's Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge, 2008," FAA-H-8083-18, "Flight Navigator Handbook" and ICAO publications depict it as a "dead reckoning computer."  This is most apparent in the captions and supporting text to figures 4-12 and 4-13 of FAA-H-8083-18.
Thus, the only term which is common to all military and civilian governing agencies worldwide, one which is neither a superset nor a subset of the actual device, is "dead reckoning computer."
Below we find a list of possible titles for this Wikipedia page:
* E6B, E6-B, E6-B2, and related:  This is is merely one type of dead reckoning computer and by default, it excludes all other types in common use today.  This is, therefore, a very poor choice for the title of this Wikipedia article.  In fact, it is a subset of circular slide rules commonly referred to and labeled "dead reckoning computer."
* MB-4:  Similar to "E6-B," it refers to one of the most common military types of dead reckoning computer.  Thus, it is no more appropriate as the title of this article than EB6, as it, too, is a subset of dead reckoning computers.
* Flight computer:  This is closer to the truth in that it's generic, inclusive of the many types of dead reckoning computers out there, and is indeed printed on the face of some civilian models.  However, this term is not widely used in either flight training or flight operating manuals, and is rarely used in discussions.  The other problem with using "flight computer" is that in the last 30 years, this term is more commonly applied to the computerized avionics built into the airplane itself, as well as many different handheld devices that are indeed flight computers but only some of which are electronic dead reckoning computers.  Therefore, this choice would be inappropriate as it's a superset of the set of dead reckoning computers.
* Circular slide rule:  While this is technically accurate, neither is it in common usage nor is it commonly used in either military or civilian technical manuals, ergo, it's another wrong choice for the title of this page.
* Whiz wheel:  While this is what people call it more than anything else, by far, that's never been any sort of official title or name.  Therefore, this, too is not an appropriate title for this article.
* DR computer:  This is indeed a correct generic name for this device and is commonly used throughout the aviation community.  However, it contains an acronym that's not self-explanatory and with which most people are unfamiliar.
* Dead reckoning computer:  This is not only the correct generic and official name for this device, in wide use throughout both civilian and military aviation communities, but also as found in the leading piloting and navigator manuals printed by the Department of Defense, the Federal Aviation Administration and International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).  This is also what's printed on the face of both military and and most civilian models/types.  Googling "dead reckoning computer" and selecting "Images" provides a display of the widest range of these devices, and with many more pictures, than entering "E6B" or "E6-6."
Recommendations:
* Change the title of this article to:  Dead reckoning computer
* Redirect all of the following to Dead reckoning computer:  
** E6B
** E6-B
** MB-4
** MB-4A
** DR computer
** Whiz wheel
* Replace the "Flight computer" page with a disambiguation page for all types of flight computers, including both modern avionics, handheld computers, and the dead reckoning computer.
* Keep the "circular slide rule" section in the "slide rule" article, as it explains the advantages and disadvantages of both quite well.Clepsydrae (talk) 20:51, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I found this page by searching for E6B, the only name I have heard anyone use for the device, regardless of what the official name is. Dead reckoning is only one of the calculations it assists with anyway. - NiD.29 (talk) 06:44, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion Regarding using the device's proper name, "Dead Reckoning Computer" as the proper title for this Wikipedia Article 

message: While some of the elements in this section are reasonably accurate, the section lacks proper citation and remains horrendously NPOV towards the name, "E-6B," to the point of being grossly inaccurate and in part, flat out fabricated out of thin air.  As a "history," it fails, miserably. Clepsydrae (talk) 10:47, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of the E-6B