I am not anti-technology, but an instrument pilot is supposed to be able to
fly partial panel, etc. To say that an instructor NEEDS one seems to imply
that they can't do without it.

Granted I seem to take a hard line view of a lot of "conventional wisdom".

I don't know why one would not be able to provide vectors without one. A
simple compass rose on a sectional/enroute chart is probably all the
visual/mental help one needs, though I have never instructed.

The problem with handhelds is that people come to rely on them so much they
lose all other navigation skills, procedures and situational awareness.
When the batteries die or the thing freezes, the pilot is left with
unpracticed, old skills and is in trouble.

I agree though - they can be real handy to have around when things go bad.
The trick is to ensure they are not used as a crutch...

I am not sure what
"Ryan Ferguson" wrote in message
om...
"Richard Hertz" wrote in message
v.net...

Besides, if you're going to instruct
in actual you need one anyway.

Huh? care to explain that?

Maybe a slightly better wording would be "you're going to want one"
rather than need one. I view it as part of my responsibility as an
instrument flight instructor. I need to be prepared to get the
airplane back to home base in the event the panel goes dark. I can
fly a fair approach on a Garmin 295. It's really nice being able to
paint the FAC, then fly the closest applicable approach (VOR,
localizer, etc.) that overlays that course. Or if the GPS is so
equipped, you can even load the approach and fly it. Power in the
palm of your hand.

(I've had a total electrical failure in cold IMC in a light twin.
Thank the lawd for handheld GPS.)

And, it's nice for providing 'vectors' to the student, as Michael has
suggested.

... or if you're a luddite or just think the damn things are a waste
of time, be my guest and fly without - that's your prerogative.

-Ryan