They're all very valid and agreeable points, but I'll reinstate what I already said: I'd feel less comfortable flying with a pilot who, for years and years, as a matter of fact has always navigated (both VFR and IFR) solely looking at the GPS screen.

I do know of pilot's who have flown a "black line" on a GPS without a lot of thought to what's along that black line route. In two cases, it was flight instructors and students. One accident was fatal for three, and the other accident had two very lucky people, as the aircraft hit trees on a ridgeline during a very black & moonless night. They didn't see the mountain at all. The reason I say "black line", is because these GPS's were the older point to point variety. No color, and no terrain or obstacles. Since both of these accidents were in my normal cross country flight area, I've duplicated both, with my terrain database GPS. With the info I have, there is no way I'd hit these mountains. The GPS is blasting warnings into my headphones, and the screen is flashing red.In the case of the survivors hitting a ridge, the plan was to fly VOR to VOR, and open the IFR flight plan while airborne. It was around 10:00 P.M. I don't know if they set the OBS, or just used the VORs as GPS waypoints. What they didn't do, is look at the sectional, and notice one mountain in the path of their 8500' flight level. The rest is flat desert. Luckily for them, it was winter snows to cushion the impact, and they had cellphones that worked, considering the remote area.I've already mentioned that I never just hit a "direct too" button and go for it. I plan every cross country. I just prefer flying direct to places of interest, and I'm not encumbered by a VOR to VOR system. There is nothing wrong with that. Flying direct is much more the norm these days, thanks to GPS. Geof A. has already said the same thing. In reality, there are many who are flying for years, using the GPS and not radio nav. It just depends how you do it . You can blindly follow the magenta line, or blindly follow a VOR to VOR path. The results can be just as disastrous.FWIW, there is no doubt in my mind, that I'd rather be in an aircraft equipped with a modern moving map color GPS with terrain features, than an older radio nav only airplane...............when flying IFR. And I wouldn't care in the least, if the pilot hadn't dialed OBS's for years. I'd just want the pilot to be profiecient with the GPS/ glass panel setup. Just far too many accidents with the "old" navigation method. For proof, look up the enhanced ground warning system. It's the one with GPS combined with radar. The accident level went down greatly, when this modern piece of equipment was put into use.L.Adamson

Well luckily that would not be Larry or me..

In one of the many, endless threads like this one; Larry flat out admitted that he's all but forgotten VOR navigation, and has no interest in re-learning it, because his airplane doesn't even have a VOR reciever.. :(

I've already mentioned that I never just hit a "direct too" button and go for it. I plan every cross country. I just prefer flying direct to places of interest, and I'm not encumbered by a VOR to VOR system. There is nothing wrong with that. Flying direct is much more the norm these days, thanks to GPS. Geof A. has already said the same thing. In reality, there are many who are flying for years, using the GPS and not radio nav. It just depends how you do it . You can blindly follow the magenta line, or blindly follow a VOR to VOR path. The results can be just as disastrous.

There is no 'VOR-to-VOR' encumbrance.. Flying VOR-to-VOR isn't much more of a skill than following a line on a moving map. If you're a skilled radio navigator, you can fly direct to just about anywhere.. plotting waypoints, and actually piloting the airplane :(Not being able to, is the complacency that Murmur is no doubt refering to .. and the only gripe I have with GPS... the inevitable dependancy..

But I bet when ndb's came out there were people that said they would not fly with a pilot that could not do a wind triangle,

Forget about what came out , and when... Would you, today, well after GPS' emergence, want to be a passenger to a pilot who couldn't break a wind down to its, crosswing/headwind/tailwind components , and come up with headings and ground-speeds, accordingly ?

and when vor's came out there were people that said they would not fly with someone who could not do a good ndb bearing.

Same deal.. regardless of current technology; would you trust a pilot who couldn't track and NDB, regardless of the wind ?

Probably some that would not fly if you could not do celestial navigating at one point either.

You got me on that one.. lol :(

"At some point vor's will be finished-along with slant range dme and ndb's/adf. Until there is a reliable backup for gps though they will be the suitable backup. I at least expect though I'll probably never have to use them for primary again. So far that has been the case. There are lots of things I worry more about losing on a flight other than gps..."Without a doubt, but in the meantime There is no backup if the Sat Nav system goes down. At the end of the day how much does it really matter how reliable it's been in the past or how reliable it will be in the future? Putting your cards into one system is a formula that can result with dire consequences. if Mr. Adamson lost his GPS receiver in the mountain Range during IFR I'm positive he would be Really Really dissapointed about not having that NAV Receiver in his homebuilt. He would be flying perfectly blind. - Having a backup is a lot better than being caught with your pants down. Agreeable yes? I'm not going to sit here about its reliability - I know it's reliable. I wont sit here and talk about it's accuracy - I know it's accurate. At the end of the day though, your are as safe a pilot as you make yourself. With all the technology in the world we can make dummie pilots with this coming generation who would have to Truely screw up in normal circumstances to end up toasted. The problem with that though is that you now have pilot's who don't stand a flying chance when their system fails.Look at what fast food has done to us :( we're the "Biggest boned" nation in the world. Give people an easier way, they'll make great use of it. Many times, in total and utter contradiction to good health.All good things are only good when used in Balance.

In one of the many, endless threads like this one; Larry flat out admitted that he's all but forgotten VOR navigation, and has no interest in re-learning it, because his airplane doesn't even have a VOR reciever.. :( There is no 'VOR-to-VOR' encumbrance.. Flying VOR-to-VOR isn't much more of a skill than following a line on a moving map. If you're a skilled radio navigator, you can fly direct to just about anywhere.. plotting waypoints, and actually piloting the airplane :(Not being able to, is the complacency that Murmur is no doubt refering to .. and the only gripe I have with GPS... the inevitable dependancy..

Brett-------------- You're fogetting! I live in mountain country, VOR's are line of sight. GPS is not. Therefor 'VOR-to-VOR' encumbrance is exactly what I said. Why don't you come out and try it. Yes, I have absolutely no interest in rotating OBS's. If I had them, it would be to just bide my time. L.Adamson

"At some point vor's will be finished-along with slant range dme and ndb's/adf. Until there is a reliable backup for gps though they will be the suitable backup. I at least expect though I'll probably never have to use them for primary again. So far that has been the case. There are lots of things I worry more about losing on a flight other than gps..."Without a doubt, but in the meantime There is no backup if the Sat Nav system goes down. At the end of the day how much does it really matter how reliable it's been in the past or how reliable it will be in the future? Putting your cards into one system is a formula that can result with dire consequences. if Mr. Adamson lost his GPS receiver in the mountain Range during IFR I'm positive he would be Really Really dissapointed about not having that NAV Receiver in his homebuilt. He would be flying perfectly blind. - Having a backup is a lot better than being caught with your pants down. Agreeable yes? I'm not going to sit here about its reliability - I know it's reliable. I wont sit here and talk about it's accuracy - I know it's accurate. At the end of the day though, your are as safe a pilot as you make yourself. With all the technology in the world we can make dummie pilots with this coming generation who would have to Truely screw up in normal circumstances to end up toasted. The problem with that though is that you now have pilot's who don't stand a flying chance when their system fails.Look at what fast food has done to us :( we're the "Biggest boned" nation in the world. Give people an easier way, they'll make great use of it. Many times, in total and utter contradiction to good health.All good things are only good when used in Balance.

You're very good at making up statistics that you don't have a clue about. I get very tired of this "If the Sat Nav system goes down". VORs are line of sight, won't work through a mountain pass, and are heavily effected by weather. If my aircraft was in fact, fully IFR equipped, I'd have that radio nav capibility.If IFR, I'd be stuck on a different flight path altogether. If IFR, I'd certainly prefer synthetic vision over an OBS needle, if crap hit's the fan. In the meantime, I could care less about radio nav, and I'm by far....................not the only one. Why don't you step into the future? You've already said that you didn't care if you had a GPS reciever or not. In my own case, I'm well aware that a GPS has far more to offer than radio nav. You don't care for GPS, I have little use for VOR's. The problem I see here, is that either you or Brett have much experience with GPS & WAAS. That is a fact. Should either of you gain the experience, as so many of my , friends, associates, and those from various forums that I participate in........................then come back, and we'll discuse it. In the meantime, don't give this "pilots don't have a standing chance" malarky. I could throw statistics at you, that would make you throw up. L.Adamson

What the heck does line of sight have to do with VOR use ? Either you recieve it, or you don't... and there's plenty of coverage out there.. You keep revealing that you don't understand VOR navigation.. You are not limmited to flying VOR-to-VOR.. and in fact are discouraged to do so, while VFR.I'd be happy to teach how to plot and fly a direct course by VORs.. never once being limited to the radials between them ..EDIT..Larry.. you're doing it again.. nobody is arguing against GPS use... we're just arguing that GPS dependency is bad. Nobody (including ME) disagrees that GPS is a superior (by far) form of navigation...

Forget about what came out , and when... Would you, today, well after GPS' emergence, want to be a passenger to a pilot who couldn't break a wind down to its, crosswing/headwind/tailwind components , and come up with headings and ground-speeds, accordingly ?Same deal.. regardless of current technology; would you trust a pilot who couldn't track and NDB, regardless of the wind ?You got me on that one.. lol :(

No because I believe all pilots train to a higher standard whether they use an adf, vor, or gps. The source of navigation used has little to do with this.

"At some point vor's will be finished-along with slant range dme and ndb's/adf. Until there is a reliable backup for gps though they will be the suitable backup. I at least expect though I'll probably never have to use them for primary again. So far that has been the case. There are lots of things I worry more about losing on a flight other than gps..."Without a doubt, but in the meantime There is no backup if the Sat Nav system goes down. At the end of the day how much does it really matter how reliable it's been in the past or how reliable it will be in the future? Putting your cards into one system is a formula that can result with dire consequences. if Mr. Adamson lost his GPS receiver in the mountain Range during IFR I'm positive he would be Really Really dissapointed about not having that NAV Receiver in his homebuilt. He would be flying perfectly blind. - Having a backup is a lot better than being caught with your pants down. Agreeable yes? I'm not going to sit here about its reliability - I know it's reliable. I wont sit here and talk about it's accuracy - I know it's accurate. At the end of the day though, your are as safe a pilot as you make yourself. With all the technology in the world we can make dummie pilots with this coming generation who would have to Truely screw up in normal circumstances to end up toasted. The problem with that though is that you now have pilot's who don't stand a flying chance when their system fails.Look at what fast food has done to us :( we're the "Biggest boned" nation in the world. Give people an easier way, they'll make great use of it. Many times, in total and utter contradiction to good health.All good things are only good when used in Balance.

Ryan-you are the one that keeps saying putting cards into one system.I have never said that.

What the heck does line of sight have to do with VOR use ? Either you recieve it, or you don't... and there's plenty of coverage out there.. You keep revealing that you don't understand VOR navigation.. You are not limmited to flying VOR-to-VOR.. and in fact are discouraged to do so, while VFR.I'd be happy to teach how to plot and fly a direct course by VORs.. never once being limited to the radials between them ..

Geeze, How many times have we gone over this?????????????????????????????????????????????????????? It's getting real monotonous!!!!!You know that I'm very aware that VORs work from VOR to VOR. It's exactly this system I used in the old days. But I chose more direct routes and through mountain passes. And if you think I'm going to start triangulating intersections from VOR's for specific areas, then think again. I understand VOR navigation perfectly, I think it stinks. It's "primitive"........................as expressed by a different website.You really did loose this argument at Flightsim Com, when I put it to the test. Why start over?L.Adamson

L Adamson, Since my very first post I said it was a welcome tool. I've also said yes - Happy to leave it on the ground, and Its of my opinion that a Good instructor will certainly turn it off for his student. You've made it out to be a necessity - I'm telling you right now, No it's not. It's a welcome tool in the arsenal, JUST THE SAME as VOR and dead reckoning. They are all tools of navigation, and are all happilly welcome in my cockpit. If I do not have a GPS though, (or if it fails) then so be it. It will not ruin my day, because I am equipped and well practiced on Both other forms of navigation.Capiche?

No because I believe all pilots train to a higher standard whether they use an adf, vor, or gps. The source of navigation used has little to do with this.

Exactly ... :(

You really did loose this argument at Flightsim Com, when I put it to the test. Why start over?

Lose ? In what way ? Where was I proven wrong ? Are you saying that the winning argument was to indeed become over-dependent on GPS ? Care to revisit that argument ?

Exactly ... :(Lose ? In what way ? Where was I proven wrong ? Are you saying that the winning argument was to indeed become over-dependent on GPS ? Care to revisit that argument ?

No I don't care to revisit. When I posted a few of your thoughts (exact quotes) to a large group of pilots, from all walks of life..............you wouldn't have appreciated the majority of the responses. I didn't link them, then.......... and won't now.L.Adamson

Yeah.. the old, nameless experts. :( I'll be happy to share (have them post themselves, so you can respond) responses to your posts.. re: not caring about the responsibilities that come with the license..

Actually I've agreed with you, in your statements and used them against the statements of Mr. Adamson. who does infact, put his cards into one system of Radio navigation - (Darth vadar impression) From Space (Because GPS is a fancy radio and clock, it just takes what we've done in the past for navigation and turned it celestial, with a high degree of Trigonometric calculations in between). Like any system though it's bound to failure (A human trait, which we often learn from but alas we're not yet perfect beings).My quotations of you, are in my own support of the use and practice of other radio navigation techniques, and even the good old mark 1 eyeball (Which is also a great navigational tool). rather than sole reliance on the GPS system. :( That's all.

No because I believe all pilots train to a higher standard whether they use an adf, vor, or gps. The source of navigation used has little to do with this.Ryan-you are the one that keeps saying putting cards into one system.I have never said that.

Edit:.. Because I'd sure like to hear from, and question an expert pilot willing to say it's OK to neglect ANY nav skill