Have you ever...

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 03:30:40 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote in AzG7e.15718$Bb3.2289@attbi_s22::


And if the sun suddenly went supernova, I'd be in big trouble, too.

What you suggest isn't likely to occur in our time. What I suggested
has occurred recently and is likely to occur again.

I know, a lot of you guys do. Despite the fact that you've probably got
a
Garmin/Lowrance/AvMap on your yoke that is 500 - 1000 times more accurate
and intuitive than your old 1953 Narco 12, you feel compelled to "follow
the
needle" cuz that's what you're used to doing.

Actually, GPS was a part of my IR training. It was just annoyingly bad
luck
that I took the checkride in a /A instead of /G. Fortunately, I'd a good
CFII. The /A had an ADF; the /G didn't. Naturally, though, the DE
required an NDB approach of me. No problem.

Totally different point. Of course VORs are necessary for IFR flight
training, and of course they should be a major part of the written.

The topic is what could we eliminate from the Private, in order to make
flying more accessible to all?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 13:37:41 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote in FsP7e.17988$GJ.659@attbi_s71::

Who in the world uses VORs
for daily flight anymore?


Those of us who refuse to pay $400/yr "Garmin tax" for data collected
and produced at taxpayer expense.

Garmin charges $400 per year to keep their databases current?

Glad I own an AvMap.

Is your AvMap certified for aerial navigation?

Larry,

What I suggested
has occurred recently and is likely to occur again.


When was the last widespread GPS outage (when was the first, for that
matter?)? Except local outages announced per NOTAM, since those don't
really count.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Jay,

Glad I own an AvMap.


So what do you pay for a database update program with monthly updates?
Compare apples to apples, please.

FWIW, it's not Garmin but Jeppesen charging that amount - and the
Garmin is an IFR certified unit, yours isn't.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Jay Honeck wrote:

Totally different point. Of course VORs are necessary for IFR flight
training, and of course they should be a major part of the written.

My point was that I don't argue from a "because it's what I'm used to"
perspective. I'm quite comfortable with GPSs, having flown behind a couple
of BK models and the Garmin 430.

The topic is what could we eliminate from the Private, in order to make
flying more accessible to all?

The planes in which I did my PPL didn't have GPS. They couldn't even be
counted upon to have two working VORs...or even two working COMMs. A VOR
was the only electronic navaid available in those aircraft.

Upgrade the entire fleet, and I might be taking your side of the argument
(actually, it would be moot {8^). But as long as VORs are actually in the
aircraft (and I don't mean a fancy VOR-exploiting moving map RNAV type
machine {8^), the pilots flying those should learn them.

- Andrew

Jay Honeck wrote:
Since nowadays VFR pilots have little use for VORs, (I don't turn them
on -- ever -- except for the occasional practice VOR approach), to put
those
kind of questions on the Private written exam is just another way to weed
out
potential pilots.


Gee...when I took the written back in 1980, most of the questions were 1)
pilotage/dead-reckoning, 2) ADF, and 3) VOR, in that order. RNAV didn't
exist except in bizjets and DME was an analog display (50nm max range).

Your cross-country was supposed to be pilotage and using VOR's only for
cross-checking.

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 08:20:56 -0400, Andrew Gideon
wrote in ne.com::

But I would like to see the test simplified *if* it would translate
to more pilots.

I would prefer that any changes to the airman's written test primarily
result in increased safety not numbers.

With the advent of GPS satellite navigation equipped aircraft it seems
more appropriate to _ADD_ GPS related questions to the test.

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 13:40:17 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote in
5vP7e.16612$xL4.10899@attbi_s72::

The "failed pilots" we should be concerned about are the ones who fail
because they are so intimidated by the process that they never even take the
test.

I would prefer not to share the sky with those individuals, thanks.

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 13:44:44 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote in gzP7e.17999$GJ.670@attbi_s71::

The topic is what could we eliminate from the Private, in order to make
flying more accessible to all?

A more appropriate question might be, what should be added to the
airman's written test to increase flight safety.