Roy Smith wrote in
:

I flew with somebody recently who just got their instrument rating a
few months ago, in a GPS-equipped airplane. His GPS and BAI skills
were fine, but when I suggested we fly one leg without the GPS, just
using VORs and a chart for en-route navigation, he said he had never
done that in training.

He was taught that if the GPS should ever die, the fallback would be
to use the #2 radio to request vectors. The only real use he had made
of VORs was to fly a VOR approach (mostly partial-panel, because
that's what the checkride required), never en-route. Is this really
the way new instrument students are being taught these days? Is the
VOR already dead in the classroom?

The way the system works in the US, CFIs and CFIIs are new, low-time
pilots building enough time to get a real job, so it's not that
surprising that some of the training is substandard.

I know it's not a good model, but economics being what they are, I don't
have a suggestion for a viable alternative.

--
Regards,

Stan

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." B. Franklin