David Megginson wrote in message ...
(Snowbird) writes:
So don't dismiss the viewpoint that it's unsafe to fly pax
IMC without a GPS. Think about your plans if you start
smelling electrical smoke in IMC (BTDT), or if the engine quits,
or even if you have a vacuum failure or wx is forming around
you and you have to scurry for an airport in a hurry. That
GPS adds a lot of safety "bang for the buck" and I have no
argument against the viewpoint of someone who wouldn't leave
home IMC without it.

I agree entirely that a handheld GPS in the flightbag is an excellent
safety investment

Well, just to clarify my views: a handheld GPS in the flightbag
is next to useless. It has to be set up, turn on, and acquired
at the beginning of the flight to have practical value if things
go south.

I didn't have the impression, though, that the poster was writing
about emergency backup

Not clear. The statement IIRC was simply that he wouldn't want
to fly pax in IMC without GPS. I concur.

-- I had the impression that he (and his
instructor) thought that flying with VOR or ADF was somehow more
dangerous than flying with GPS. In fact, if we're talking about using
a handheld GPS in IMC, we're talking about extra workload, because the
pilot has to tune in the VOR and/or ADF and *then* tune the handheld
backup as well.

Huh?

I fly around with two GPS on and acquired in the cockpit, and
I've never "tuned" one yet . I have selected a navaid or
airport -- is that what you mean?

The point is:
A moving map GPS is a significant aid to situational awareness
whether the GPS has anything selected, or not. It will always
tell you where you are relative to nearby airports and navaids.

So it doesn't have to increase workload one iota.

I would agree that using with *any* equipment you're
not proficient with is a dangerous distraction, but given equal
proficiency, tuning and spinning an ADF or VOR receiver involves no
higher a workload than fiddling with GPS buttons.

Actually the opposite is true. Tuning a VOR receiver and setting
the OBS is a significantly *lower* workload than setting up
a route, loading an approach, or even selecting a navaid and
inputting a course on the typical older panel-mount IFR GPS.

However, given a choice between flying a VOR or NDB approach
or flying a stand-alone GPS approach in actual, I want the latter
every time.

My thing with simple wing-leveler autopilots is I'm not
sure how well ours (anyway) would work in really nasty
conditions. The sort of conditions most likely to induce
spatial disorientation. Not dissing it as a safety item
at all, just saying I see it more as a workload-reducer.

Cheers,
Sydney