Ever notice the majority of 'glass' cockpits have analog backup guages.....hmmmmmmNow can we get back to the OP?

It's always this same, weird position that when someone embraced radio navigation, you have to come to the GPS rescue.. This thread started out on how simming relates to PPL training, and you're citing accident statistics again.. It's getting bizarre..

For years, it's always been quite noticeable, that within flight simulation forums..........you'll often hear that "following the magenta line is quite boring". And in a way it is. The glass panels are often hard to see, when reduced to monitor size. The GPS's are usually simplistic, and only simulated a portion of what the real life counterpart does. GPS's will often be referred to as toy's, laziness, luxuries, and non-essential for VFR flight. And then I'll always read............"well, what are you going to do, when it fails, and you're totally lost over........wherever" (such as Mohave).That is why, I do what I do. It takes a flight simulation forum, to give GPS the bum rap that it gets. You know what happened last time. It was one simmer after another, piling on, in support of the tried and true method of air navigation (VOR/NAV). After all, twisting those dials, and watching the needle center..........does sound a little more interesting, when the simulated scenery is boring. Why not?..........anyone can just follow the magenta line.I'm always aware, that when I bring up the virtues of GPS and associated "glass", that there will be the defenders of old school "pilot skills". I even had a pilot from Wyoming tell me, not to fly over his state, if I wasn't using the VOR system. Didn't matter that I was using GPS with terrain and obstacle data-bases. Of course, I fly over Wyoming all the time. Someone on an X-Plane forum, mentioned that he doesn't look at scenery, as his job is to navigate, and scenery is for the passenger.Well, I differ. I built, and maintain a plane to look at the ground from a "higher" point of view. We have thousands of square miles of beautiful, panoramic & varied scenery around here. While flying close to the Grand Canyon, or within it's VFR corridors, I'd rather see the boundaries laid out on the GPS's moving map, then spending all my time, trying to locate landmarks on the ground. I always know where I've been, where I am, and.. how far and the time... to where I'm going. I'm just here, to present the other side. That's all for now.L.Adamson

Sure.. I can see wanting to make certain that an aspect of something as important as navigation does not get mis-represented (see any irony ?).. But that's not the case in this thread, nor most of the others where we've debated. GPS was not even brought up, let alone given a rap, bum or otherwise. Your entry into this thread itself, was incoherent. A decision between glass, or steam for training was on the table, and your choice was glass, because you have little use for radio-navigation. I've yet to come across a G1000 installation that did not have a pair of nav-radios, and a fully functional HSI... not to mention that radio-navigation is still an important part piloting, especially if you ever desire an instrument rating. That you chose to neglect that set of skills is your business, but to outright discourage budding pilots from embracing it is, well.. weird...to the point where you even suggested that learning radio-navigation fell under the catagory of bad habbits picked up in simming, and you knew several instructors who agreed.As for any problems I do have with GPS use, it has nothing to do WITH GPS itself... it has to do with pilots so dependent upon it, that they'd go into a panic if it failed.. (seen it) .. or pilots who cannot give a simple position report without looking at the GPS (seen it), even for the tower at an airport they can SEE (seen it). And where do these problems begin ? ... poor, fudamental training, and/or neglecting basic skills.ANYway, can I suggest that you wait until an anti-GPS debate begins, before defending it.. instead of starting the debate ?

I'm looking for that story. Is it in Jan or Feb? While looking through the Feb. issue, I did see the story of a pilot who busted a Vice President TFR because he was on a local flight, didn't get a briefing, and left his Garmin 696 with XM weather home. Had he had the Garmin, as I do, the TFR would have shown up in bright red. That's another advantage of today's technology. Real time, in the cockpit weather, as well as TFR information and exact location.My "experimental" catagory aircraft (a Van's RV6A) had to pass the 91.205 requirements with an FAA designated inspector. But..............it doesn't have NAV/COMMs or DME. It does have two Comms, a Garmin 696 GPS tied into the aircraft's power, plus it's batteries, a backup GPS, a handheld nav/comm, two axis auto-pilot, night lighting, transponder, compass, leather seats, constant speed prop, and more. Just as I built my plane with no NAV/Comms............many others do the same. And these others, include many airline pilots, military pilots, and so forth. Unless the aircraft is to be certified for IFR, the NAV/comms are not required.L.Adamson

Look under the "Never Again" column for the article about the pilot who got so wrapped up in the brightness of his moving map at night that he almost flew into a mountain. Either Jan or Feb issue, I don't have it with me here.That's some nice optional equipment you have in your RV-6...and your reply shows you've completely missed my point. I'll try and explain it better. 91.205 spells out the _minimum_ equipment that you are required to have. The _minimum_ amount of equipment that an aircraft can be equipped with. The _minimum_ amount of equipment that you may have at your disposal to work with. Which means that for VFR, a pilot may only have a magnetic compass and a chart to navigate with. I'm glad that you will have multiple redundant gps driven moving maps in your plane. But you can still legally and potentially fly with nothing but a mag compass and a map to navigate with. As an instructor, I will completely be remiss if I signed you off without verifying that you are competent navigating with nothing but a mag compass and map. Can you understand that? Because after you leave the door with my legal endorsement for you to go for your checkride or keep flying for the next two years, I have no idea what you are going to do. There is no legally binding framework for me to be assured that you are only going to ever fly with a working moving map at your disposal, if I only instructed you at using that equipment and ignored pilotage and vor navigation. Therefore, I cannot, and will not, ignore those "basic" or "fundamental" skills that you so eschew and that you will need when your optional equipment is not there for you.

Have a look here! There are two films.The image quality is poor but the message is clear. These are War time training films done by the Royal Air Force in "very" low level navigation. Remember the Dam Busters? They did this at the same tree top height at night all the way across the North Sea deep into German territory and back again!!!!GPS has its uses but it will never replace the mark 1 eyeball and map. for the most obvious reasons. And, clearly demonstrated by these films!Can we finish with this argument that GPS is better? It isn't as good as the mark 1 eyeball and learning how to use that is a pre-requisite of pilot training. Accept that if you want to become a real pilot. vololiberista

Boy, I go away for a few days, and didn't realize I'd open up a can of worms re: glass vs steam. Well, I've decided that when I start training. it will definitely be with steam gauges. The reasons have been discussed already, but mainly, I want to be very comfortable with gauges for safety and backup, but when I travel and want to rent a plane, I would like the flexibility of being able to rent a plane with gauges if that's all that is available. With that said, I love technology and gadgets, and GPS in particular, and understand the benefits of using GPS. My plan is that when I complete training(on gauges), I will get checked out on the G1000 Skyhawk as well. I was told by the instructor that 3-5 hours should do it.Other than that, you guys have really shared a lot of great information with me and is quite helpful. I'm verty excited and honestly, a little nervous because I now know this is going to happen. I'm going to the airport later to schedule my discovery flight and then go from there. I think I'm going to fly twice a week to get training started. My goal is to get my ppl in 50 hours. From doing the research, I think that is realistic. Time will tell.

Boy, I go away for a few days, and didn't realize I'd open up a can of worms re: glass vs steam. Well, I've decided that when I start training. it will definitely be with steam gauges. The reasons have been discussed already, but mainly, I want to be very comfortable with gauges for safety and backup, but when I travel and want to rent a plane, I would like the flexibility of being able to rent a plane with gauges if that's all that is available. With that said, I love technology and gadgets, and GPS in particular, and understand the benefits of using GPS. My plan is that when I complete training(on gauges), I will get checked out on the G1000 Skyhawk as well. I was told by the instructor that 3-5 hours should do it.Other than that, you guys have really shared a lot of great information with me and is quite helpful. I'm verty excited and honestly, a little nervous because I now know this is going to happen. I'm going to the airport later to schedule my discovery flight and then go from there. I think I'm going to fly twice a week to get training started. My goal is to get my ppl in 50 hours. From doing the research, I think that is realistic. Time will tell.

Make certain to do a good proportion of your training in limited weather conditions. Firstly to teach you the crosswind landing techniques and secondly to help you understand when a flight, however pressing the appointment maybe is a "no go".vololiberista

Have a look here! There are two films.The image quality is poor but the message is clear. These are War time training films done by the Royal Air Force in "very" low level navigation. Remember the Dam Busters? They did this at the same tree top height at night all the way across the North Sea deep into German territory and back again!!!!GPS has its uses but it will never replace the mark 1 eyeball and map. for the most obvious reasons. And, clearly demonstrated by these films!Can we finish with this argument that GPS is better? It isn't as good as the mark 1 eyeball and learning how to use that is a pre-requisite of pilot training. Accept that if you want to become a real pilot.

For simplicity............I suppose I can just say........I disagree. The mark 1 eyeball has it's uses, but doesn't always provide the info, we really need....at the moment.L.Adamson

For simplicity............I suppose I can just say........I disagree. The mark 1 eyeball has it's uses, but doesn't always provide the info, we really need....at the moment.L.Adamson

You may disagree and that's your perogative. However you will never be a competant pilot!vololiberista

Boy, I go away for a few days, and didn't realize I'd open up a can of worms re: glass vs steam. Well, I've decided that when I start training. it will definitely be with steam gauges. The reasons have been discussed already, but mainly, I want to be very comfortable with gauges for safety and backup, but when I travel and want to rent a plane, I would like the flexibility of being able to rent a plane with gauges if that's all that is available. With that said, I love technology and gadgets, and GPS in particular, and understand the benefits of using GPS. My plan is that when I complete training(on gauges), I will get checked out on the G1000 Skyhawk as well. I was told by the instructor that 3-5 hours should do it.Other than that, you guys have really shared a lot of great information with me and is quite helpful. I'm verty excited and honestly, a little nervous because I now know this is going to happen. I'm going to the airport later to schedule my discovery flight and then go from there. I think I'm going to fly twice a week to get training started. My goal is to get my ppl in 50 hours. From doing the research, I think that is realistic. Time will tell.

Good luck and welcome to a very exclusive club! If you have questions during your training, be sure to come back and ask, the people here (most of them) are a great resourse.

You may disagree and that's your perogative. However you will never be a competant pilot!vololiberista

This is exactly why..............I get into these stupid, silly, flight sim forum arguments. Let's just say that I'm a near walking encyclopedia of flight into terrain accidents. I have numerous personal reasons for doing so. My "brain" is full of the why's and wherefor's , as to what's happened in the course of many years. Believe me............the Mark 1 eyeballs have been the "failing" for many pilots. Doesn't matter if they had high hours, or low. Same with IFR & VFR, unintentional IMCOther than that............the fact that I prefer satellite weather, an exact knowledge of the fuel situation, current TFR's, winds, boundaries, terrain, obstacles, alt settings,etc..........will never make me a competent pilot........ whatever.L.Adamson --- throwing my cell phone away, and riding my horse to the nearest telegraph office..

Look under the "Never Again" column for the article about the pilot who got so wrapped up in the brightness of his moving map at night that he almost flew into a mountain. Either Jan or Feb issue, I don't have it with me here.

Ah.............."Never Again" from the January issue of AOPA magazine. I read that one. It's means a lot, as that's exactly where I live....fly. I look at those canyons everyday. It's the western slope of the Rocky Mtns. on the east side of Salt Lake City. KSLC for anyone who wants to enter this location into flight simulator. L.Adamson

This is exactly why..............I get into these stupid, silly, flight sim forum arguments. Let's just say that I'm a near walking encyclopedia of flight into terrain accidents. I have numerous personal reasons for doing so. My "brain" is full of the why's and wherefor's , as to what's happened in the course of many years. Believe me............the Mark 1 eyeballs have been the "failing" for many pilots. Doesn't matter if they had high hours, or low. Same with IFR & VFR, unintentional IMCOther than that............the fact that I prefer satellite weather, an exact knowledge of the fuel situation, current TFR's, winds, boundaries, terrain, obstacles, alt settings,etc..........will never make me a competent pilot........ whatever.L.Adamson --- throwing my cell phone away, and riding my horse to the nearest telegraph office..

There is nothing wrong with using satellite weather and moving map gps. It's great if you've got it. What is wrong, however, is not knowing how to fly without it.

There is nothing wrong with using satellite weather and moving map gps. It's great if you've got it. What is wrong, however, is not knowing how to fly without it.

True...But on the otherhand, this information is available (in the USA), so why not use it? That's why I really got irked, when I saw the article "15 ways you can improve your flying" in Jan. Flying magazine. The author suggested turning the GPS off on VFR flights. He also used the term "when they work"..........referring to GPS. At that moment, I realized that the writer of this article, seems to have little GPS experience.Of course, I brought up this article with a group of pilots at lunch last week. The thoughts, were the same as mine. "Why"? Why would you want to give up so much real time information, for the sake of old school?Personally, I find it much more interesting, to watch the sequencing of real life GPS/auto-pilots during a hold. The racetrack is of perfect proportions, as well as the entries. This also allows the pilot to keep track of everything else. Since our experimental forums have pilots from NASA, military, commercial, Honeywell, several A/P companies, an Airbus 380 test pilot, and so on,.... we get to see a lot of this high tech nav equipment. Of course, to operate this equipment with precision and knowledge, it requires a fair amount of education and practice. Just like study for the "old ways". Jumping into a Garmin 1000 or G500 cockpit with little knowlege, just doesn't work. As to why.........some get the impression that use of a GPS........is just jumping in, and hitting the "direct button", is beyond me.L.Adamson

True...But on the otherhand, this information is available (in the USA), so why not use it? That's why I really got irked, when I saw the article "15 ways you can improve your flying" in Jan. Flying magazine. The author suggested turning the GPS off on VFR flights. He also used the term "when they work"..........referring to GPS. At that moment, I realized that the writer of this article, seems to have little GPS experience.Of course, I brought up this article with a group of pilots at lunch last week. The thoughts, were the same as mine. "Why"? Why would you want to give up so much real time information, for the sake of old school?L.Adamson

The reason the author suggest that you turn it off sometimes is the same reason why you would practice an engine failure, or a short field landing. You may have no choice but to do it some day. And its great that you have the wealth to equip yourself with all this technology. Not all pilots owners, not all clubs/fbos, and not all companies outfit their aircraft that well since there is no requirement to do so. The regulations stipulate a certain amount of minimal equipment that has been determined as necessary and your moving maps did not make that list. Since it is probably harder to navigate with only that minimal equipment than it is to navigate with the moving map, you need to ensure that you are capable of functioning under the harsher circumstances of not having a moving map. So you really should stop trying to convince people that the only way to fly is with GPS, because it is not. Until the regulations add moving maps into the minimal required equipment for VFR, there is still a place and need to learn and be proficient at the traditional skills.GPS does not always work. A couple of months ago, they Navy was jamming the signals out around the Fallon ranges. Airliners heading to and fro the west coast were getting large reroutes to avoid being affected by the loss of gps signals.