Sidney

NDB approach is a non precision approach. Takes less Partial Panel
proficiency.

ILS is a precision approach.

GPS could be either a precession or non precision approach depending
on configuration. Eventually all will be precession.

You can flop around on a NDB approach with it's higher minimums easier
on partial panel than you can on a precision ILS.

On instruments, it is hard enough with full panel to fly precision IFR
especially if the ILS beams have splits in them and the needles bounce
from stop to stop at minimums. We used to practice at Scramento and
never felt comfortable making the ILS approach there due to erratic
needle movements on final.

Does that explain my feelings enough?

It's been so many years since I made a real partial panel approach.
It was a Radio Range (A/N) approach as I recall. Hit cone of silence,
turned to heading to field, let down to minimum altitude and flew the
time (minutes and seconds) to field. All the pilots wore those fancy
chronometers to time from cone of silence to field for instrument
approaches in those days )

Some still wear along with the white scarf )

People laughed at the white scarf but in a fighter when it was hot you
could rub the skin off your neck looking for enemy aircraft. The soft
(silk) white scarf made it easier to keep your head on a swivel like
they told you. First time you were jumped and didn't see them coming
they didn't have to tell you again to keep a look out behind you if
you survived that first combat mission )

Good flying Sydney

Big John

If you are seriously going to fly IFR than all of your landings should
be from practice instrument approaches. This is what we did in the Air
Defense Command. One out of a hundred would be a straight VFR landing.
When Wx was bad we were right at home since we had been flying the
approach each flight each day. Even if you don't use a hood, the
procedures and communications become a piece of cake.


----clip----

How many GA pilots today could make even a NDB approach partial panel
much less a ILS or GPS approach?

I'm confused here -- the implication seems to be that you feel
an NDB approach would be easier partial-panel than an ILS or
GPS approach. If I'm interpreting you correctly, why?

Thanks,
Sydney