Have we stopped teaching VOR skills?

Is this really the way new instrument
students are being taught these days? Is the VOR already dead in the
classroom?

Let's see...
I passed my Private Pilot in Jan, and got my instrument rating a
couple weeks ago. GPS? not much. Got my PPL in a Tomahawk with
one navcom. I can switch freqs and dial quickly to approximate where
I am. IFR? Give me a plane with 2 VORs and "I'm golden". Gimme an
ADF and a (real, not GPS) DME, and I'm quite happy.

Now I just need to get confident enough to go fly in the soup
alone....

--Don
Don Byrer
Electronics Technician / Friendly but Sarcastic Pilot
FAA Airways Facilites/Tech Ops, RADAR/Data/Comm @ CLE
Amateur Radio KJ5KB
Instrument Pilot Commercial Student
PP-ASEL 30 Jan 2005 "-IA" 25 Mar 2005

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

"William W. Plummer" wrote in
:

When I get back to my instrument training, I'm simply not going to
have a GPS in sight. GPS is easy to learn after full training on the
standard instruments.

I've been doing this for a few years now, and IMO it's easier to fly
using a VOR than a GPS. With a VOR, you just tune the frequency, set the
OBS to the correct radial, and keep the needle centered. That's all
there is to it. A GPS, OTOH, can be very complicated to set up,
especially for an approach. Different brands have radically different
user interfaces, and different ways of setting things. It takes far more
effort and practice to use a GPS than a VOR, especially if you find
yourself in an aircraft with a different brand installed than the one
you're used to. It's very easy to get into a lot of trouble setting up
the GPS. Don't even think about trying to fly a GPS approach without
spending a great deal of time familiarizing yourself with the box.

--
Regards,

Stan

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

Roy Smith wrote in
:


Well, but maybe that's the real question? Is visualizing location in
space by interpreting a CDI needle indeed a basic IFR skill? It
certainly was when I did my instrument training, but is it still?
Will it always be? The moving map GPS gives so much more information.

I think it's a basic skill for now. I've never flown with a moving-map
GPS, so I still rely on the HSI needle. The interface of the Trimble
2101+ is very primitive, and gives little more than what you see on the
DME and CDI. A moving map, with more information, more clearly
presented, would be very welcome, though. Why make things harder than
necessary? If the FAA has its way, the VOR network will go away
entirely. It's too expensive to maintain, and it's certainly obsolete.
Especially for a pilot flying alone, who doesn't fly that often, anything
that helps reduce complexity and the need for interpretation is going to
be safer.

--
Regards,

Stan

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

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.

I don't know why this should be so complicated for any IFR student
or IFR pilot. The GPS is easier to fly with but the computer
skills for it are a lot more demanding. A GPS is very accurate
but if you have it set up wrong it could very accurately
drive you into a mountain side. But enroute, jeez, to me I don't
see a difference between tune-identify-twist-set or setup the
GPS and then fly the needle. Ok, the GPS gives you very exact
course vs. desired course but you still have to fly the needle.

Gerald Sylvester

Journeyman wrote:
In article , William W. Plummer wrote:

When I get back to my instrument training, I'm simply not going to have
a GPS in sight. GPS is easy to learn after full training on the
standard instruments.


I appreciate the attitude. If you can mentally translate from keeping
the needle centered to your position along an airway, you can do it
whether the needle represents a VOR signal, localizer signal, or
GPS. That's the basic IFR nav skill to master.

Once you have the basics, though, don't underestimate the complexity
of current GPS interfaces. I swear, you need a degree in computer
science to operate those things (fortunately for me...). I've had
the plane for a year now, and I'm still learning things about the
GPS.

On today's trip, I used the flight plan for the first time since
my flight home when I bought the plane. That time, I had another
pilot flying, so I could have as much heads down time as I needed.
This time, I did the flight plan on the ground before starting the
engine.

Despite the complexity of the capabilities, it does make things
easier once you get comfortable with it. Anyone can use the moving
map and direct-to feature right away, particularly for VFR flight,
but the more advanced features take practice to master.


Morris (just a direct-to kinda guy)

What has emerged is that there are two skills to be learned: Instrument
flying and GPS operation. My choice is to do the former in the plane
with an instructor and the latter on the ground with a manual.

In fact I do quite a bit of "Geocaching" using the GPS to find hidden
treasure. And after a year I'm still finding out stuff about the
simple little Garmin 12.

"William W. Plummer" wrote:

When I get back to my instrument training, I'm simply not going to have
a GPS in sight.

Once you start flying single pilot in actual conditions, you will most
likely learn to really appreciate the rock solid stability of the GPS
needle versus the wobbly VOR needle. "Easy" is actually preferred in GA
single pilot, actual instrument conditions.

Weekly I commute to an airport that only offers VOR approaches and true GPS
instrument approaches (t-shaped approach as opposed to an overlay of a VOR
approach). Both the GPS and the VOR approaches have the same minimums.

When ceiling and visibility are right at minimums, I choose the GPS
approach every time.

GPS is easy to learn after full training on the standard instruments.

Hmmm... as a pilot you are obligated to learn every piece of equipment in
your aircraft. The GPS is a piece of equipment that could really save
your skin and the aircraft if the single engine quits.

Instead of your current attitude, you really should consider incorporating
all of your equipment into your training. Mastering the GPS while in
actual conditions when work load is high is something you really want to do
with an instructor on board, not when you are flying the family in actual
conditions to Hershey Park for your yearly vacation.

Additionally, given the large section of the AIM devoted to GPS (and
assuming you are in the US), your DE will probably be testing you on your
use of the GPS during your instrument checkride.

--
Peter













----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

GPS is easy to learn after full training on the standard instruments.

Hmmm... as a pilot you are obligated to learn every piece of equipment in
your aircraft. The GPS is a piece of equipment that could really save
your skin and the aircraft if the single engine quits.

Instead of your current attitude, you really should consider incorporating
all of your equipment into your training.

The reason not to, is that one needs to learn VOR/DME/ADF navigation and
attitude flying, and there may be a tendency to rely on the GPS, to the
detriment of the more basic =training=. One would therefore have less
than ideal basic skills.

You are right, GPS is a wonderful tool, and should =also= be learned and
integrated. However, the hard part of GPS isn't the GPS or the map or
the needle... it is the interface, and they are =far= from standard.
Teach someone VOR and they are good to go in most any plane. Teach
someone GPS and they will still need a type rating(*) for each and every
other GPS system on the planet.

Jose

(*) note to Steve - this is not to be taken literally - this is merely
a figure of speech. I know what a real type rating is.
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

In article , Roy Smith wrote:

Well, but maybe that's the real question? Is visualizing location in space
by interpreting a CDI needle indeed a basic IFR skill? It certainly was
when I did my instrument training, but is it still? Will it always be?

Yes. Probably not.

We can expect the VOR to eventually go the way of the A-N radio range.

The moving map GPS gives so much more information. Right now, we're in a
transition stage where a well-stocked GA panel consists of a moving map GPS

"Transitional is exactly the right word."

backed up by a conventional nav/com. Maybe 10 years from now, the standard
will be two moving map GPS units (or something more exotic), and the CDI as
we know it today will be as obsolete as the ADF is quickly becomming?

Possibly. I'm not expert on ergonomics, but everyone agres the CDI needle
is simple to handle and it's failure modes are well understood. The GPS
interface is complicated and nonstandard. Long term, I expect them to
figure out the ergonomics. It will probably take more than just another
decade to complete the transition.


Morris

Jose wrote:

The reason not to, is that one needs to learn VOR/DME/ADF navigation and
attitude flying, and there may be a tendency to rely on the GPS, to the
detriment of the more basic =training=. One would therefore have less
than ideal basic skills.

IMO and E, the basic skills of attitude flying rely on scanning the primary
six-pack, whereas tracking a VOR, localizer, or GPS would be considered the
secondary skills. I do not see how utilizing the GPS for navigation
would negatively affect ones attitude flying skills.

But, then again I am not an instructor, nor a multi-decade experienced
pilot, so perhaps I am typing out of my derriere.

You are right, GPS is a wonderful tool, and should =also= be learned and
integrated. However, the hard part of GPS isn't the GPS or the map or
the needle... it is the interface, and they are =far= from standard.
Teach someone VOR and they are good to go in most any plane. Teach
someone GPS and they will still need a type rating(*) for each and every
other GPS system on the planet.

You do have a good point there. In thinking about my comments, I now see
that they stem from the fact that I own and fly the same aircraft. I had
overlooked the interface differences between the different IFR-certified
GPS's.

By the way, I do not advocate letting one's VOR skills atrophy in favor of
the GPS. I have had three GPS failures in my three years of active
instrument flying experience, two on approach (one GPS-software related and
one RAIM failure) and one en route (database expired at 00z while flying,
which required a reboot of the GPS and five minutes to re-acquire).

The latter failure caught me with my pants down as the VORs were not set as
a backup.


--
Peter













----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----