Is there any point in IR training without a GPS?

MAKG1 said:
Neither of us said anything about IMC. The regulation says rather explicitly that you must file IFR for your cross country. You said that you can do all your training without ever filing. No, you can't.
Click to expand...

I see what you were talking about, could have worded that better for sure, and yeah I did forget you do need to file for that one lesson.

Should have just said, you're OK with the plane the OP mentioned ;)
 
Last edited:
James331 said:
I see what you were talking about, could have worded that better for sure, and yeah I did forget you do need to file for that one lesson.

Should have just said, you're OK with the plane the OP mentioned ;)
Click to expand...

He sure is, as long as he satisfies the 91.205 (and POH) requirements for instrument flight. The really, really annoying one is the clock...
 
MAKG1 said:
He sure is, as long as he satisfies the 91.205 (and POH) requirements for instrument flight. The really, really annoying one is the clock...
Click to expand...

Yes, yes it is. The plane with the single nav radio satisfies the clock because one page of the GPS display has a clock. In reality, I use my watch and a kitchen timer but still.

John
 
jsstevens said:
Yes, yes it is. The plane with the single nav radio satisfies the clock because one page of the GPS display has a clock. In reality, I use my watch and a kitchen timer but still.

John
Click to expand...

That seems to depend upon which FSDO you ask.

Though I just use a wristwatch.

I do use the analog clock on Pipers for tank switching, though (use the tank the minute hand points to).
 
I may end up flying the non-GPS plane for the IR checkride depends on MX time periods but since most of the C172 have a Garmin GPS may as well learn how to use it for instrument flying. Today learned how to fly RNAV GPS approach and that was fun. I do like the extra situational awareness that the GPS provides for flying holding patterns. Of course you have to use VOR as primary nav for holds.
 
Blueangel said:
I may end up flying the non-GPS plane for the IR checkride depends on MX time periods but since most of the C172 have a Garmin GPS may as well learn how to use it for instrument flying. Today learned how to fly RNAV GPS approach and that was fun. I do like the extra situational awareness that the GPS provides for flying holding patterns. Of course you have to use VOR as primary nav for holds.
Click to expand...

Why?
 
Blueangel said:
Most of the local San Diego CFII that I talk to recommend learning without GPS but I told them that since GPS is the future, I'd only want to fly with one with it. Anyways most of the IFR rating focus on VOR, DME and ILS/LOC so FAA and DPEs still thinks these more important than GPS for now. DPE fail the GPS on many check ride experiences I have heard from friends who completed the rating except for the GPS approach part.
Click to expand...

Might be true in your neck of the woods but not everywhere and definitely not here in the mid-Atlantic region. In my limited experience I have found the FAA not only pro GPS, perhaps a bit too pro--- maybe you've heard of Nextgen and the VOR MON program? I'm /G, do most o f my IFR traveling in the Southeast and always file direct and mostly get it.

Yes the DPE failed my GPS on my checkride -- so what? I expected it so it was a non-event. Guess what, systems fail in real life too, and not just GPS.
 
I did my IFR without a gps. Once you have the skills, applying them to different technology is easy.
 
RotorDude said:
Why?
Click to expand...
If it's a VFR GPS, it can't be primary navigation.

If it's TSO'd, there is nothing wrong with using OBS mode for a hold (in fact, it's pretty useful). Just make sure you understand how sequencing works and when to push that OBS button and twist the OBS (hint: not at the same time on a 430, 650 or G1000). You can get into trouble if you don't do it right, but if you do, it works well. No zone of confusion when holding directly over a navaid. As a student, it's a good idea to back it up with a VOR in case you F up. It's much easier to recover with the VOR.
 
Do you have access to a simulator? IF you don't you are throwing away money for inferior training.
 
MAKG1 said:
If it's a VFR GPS, it can't be primary navigation.
Click to expand...

The context I was replying to was that he flew RNAV GPS approach, but for some reason I couldn't understand (hence my question) was not permitted to use the GPS for holds. If he flew that approach with it, one would assume it was IFR legal.
 
RotorDude said:
The context I was replying to was that he flew RNAV GPS approach, but for some reason I couldn't understand (hence my question) was not permitted to use the GPS for holds. If he flew that approach with it, one would assume it was IFR legal.
Click to expand...
Since he also posted about flying it under actual conditions in this thread, I suspect that's a good assumption. ;)
 
jsstevens said:
Since I'm not just getting the rating to get the rating (as valuable as that is, and I mean no sarcasm) I want to fly in actual which the flight instructor said he would do in either airplane with no qualms. He's braver more experienced than I am, as he should be. I guess my main concern is am I simply setting up to need significant training post check ride before I can really use the rating?

John
Click to expand...
No. You're not setting yourself up for significant training. You do need to learn the box. A significant portion can be learned through reading the manual and working a gps simulator on a computer or in the ac on ground power so it's time but not money.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Training without means you will need to learn how to use GPS when you fly with one. Training with GPS means it's use is integrated into your training. That's about it.

My IFR training platform didn't have DME, and GPS had not been invented yet, so that meant I had to learn how to use them when I flew airplanes that had them.

We are all faced with learning something new.
Click to expand...
This. Thousands of pilots got their IR before they had access to IFR certified units, or before the GPS system was available. They learned how to use it later. It's true that some terrestrial based approaches have gone away but if you are in an area where enough are available to train and test I don't see any problem. It's your own preference that matters.
 
Start your training without a GPS. When you do finally get ahold of one and it does fail, you will have a strong skill set to fall back on.

Like taking off out of SHD this morning. LIFR and I was given one clearance, and then issued another one last minute as I was released for departure. It was fairly simple, but wasn't meant to be flown with a GPS. If I wasn't as comfortable flying without a GPS, it could have been a much bigger issue for me.

There is more to IFR flying than SIAD's.
 
Cpt_Kirk said:
Start your training without a GPS. When you do finally get ahold of one and it does fail, you will have a strong skill set to fall back on.

Like taking off out of SHD this morning. LIFR and I was given one clearance, and then issued another one last minute as I was released for departure. It was fairly simple, but wasn't meant to be flown with a GPS. If I wasn't as comfortable flying without a GPS, it could have been a much bigger issue for me.
Click to expand...
Care to share? That's not a challenge. There are a few things that are much, much easier to do with a VOR than with a GPS work-around and real-world examples are good to have.
 
Actually, that begs a question I probably should know the answer to.

I've only flown one SID. It's the NIMITZ THREE departure from Oakland. Essentially, it's equivalent to what you would get in a typical clearance .... on departure turn right heading 315 radar vectors XXX (for that flight, SGD). It's just a lot more specific about what to do for lost comms. So, that's what goes in the GPS.

At what point does the GPS give up the 315 heading and proceed direct SAU? I would hand fly it after reaching 4000, but the GPS doesn't necessarily know my climb rate. I flew this in a G1000 (which does estimate climb in real time), but it exists on GNS430Ws and GTN650s, which don't do VNAV (at least, not in the same way).
 
MAKG1 said:
Actually, that begs a question I probably should know the answer to.

I've only flown one SID. It's the NIMITZ THREE departure from Oakland. Essentially, it's equivalent to what you would get in a typical clearance .... on departure turn right heading 315 radar vectors XXX (for that flight, SGD). It's just a lot more specific about what to do for lost comms. So, that's what goes in the GPS.

At what point does the GPS give up the 315 heading and proceed direct SAU? I would hand fly it after reaching 4000, but the GPS doesn't necessarily know my climb rate. I flew this in a G1000 (which does estimate climb in real time), but it exists on GNS430Ws and GTN650s, which don't do VNAV (at least, not in the same way).
Click to expand...
Possibly they estimate barometric altitude using GPS altitude and altimeter setting? I believe that's how the 480 does it with missed approach segments that are pilot nav until reaching a certain altitude, but I'm not certain. There's also the question of what temperature they assume the column is at relative to standard, since they don't have any temperature information.
 
MAKG1 said:
At what point does the GPS give up the 315 heading and proceed direct SAU? I would hand fly it after reaching 4000, but the GPS doesn't necessarily know my climb rate. I flew this in a G1000 (which does estimate climb in real time), but it exists on GNS430Ws and GTN650s, which don't do VNAV (at least, not in the same way).
Click to expand...

It's not an RNAV SID or even a conventional nav SID. It's radar vectors. You fly the heading until ATC provides vectors. If you lose comm, then you follow the lost comm procedure on the chart. Your RNAV navigator can't be coded for any of this.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Care to share? That's not a challenge. There are a few things that are much, much easier to do with a VOR than with a GPS work-around and real-world examples are good to have.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't exactly it's much, much easier to than it is to program in the GPS. But, to me, it's more familiar.

It's the SNDOA2 (Shenandoah Two) departure out of KSHD. See attached.

I was short of 23 and had been given my route clearance without being released. I filed direct and received it. I checked and double checked everything while waiting on the inbound to land and cancel IFR. Once he called back, I was released via the SHD2 (not the runway heading to 6,000, as originally assigned) with a new altitude assignment and a void time in 5 minutes.

I pulled out the chart, reviewed it, plugged the freq. in, selected the VLOC mode on the GPS, moved the CDI, moved the heading bug, changed my altitude preselect, briefed myself, and was on my way.

If I wanted to use the GPS, I could have added the MOL (Montebello) VOR to my FPL page, selected the OBS mode, selected the radial, moved my heading bug, and could have been on my way but chose not to for other reasons.
 

Attachments

  • image.png
    image.png
    368.4 KB · Views: 19
I definitely recommend downloading the free Garmin GPS simulator. I have it for the 430/530 on my old window netbooks since it doesn't work with Mac or later PC Windows versions. Saves money learning to use it at home instead of in the airplane. Garmin also has one for the newer 650/750 GPS tbat I have on my iPad.
 
Blueangel said:
I definitely recommend downloading the free Garmin GPS simulator. I have it for the 430/530 on my old window netbooks since it doesn't work with Mac or later PC Windows versions. Saves money learning to use it at home instead of in the airplane. Garmin also has one for the newer 650/750 GPS tbat I have on my iPad.
Click to expand...
I don't understand the part about not running on later versions of Windows. I'm running it on my Windows 10 laptop.
 
Cpt_Kirk said:
I wouldn't exactly it's much, much easier to than it is to program in the GPS. But, to me, it's more familiar.

It's the SNDOA2 (Shenandoah Two) departure out of KSHD. See attached.

I was short of 23 and had been given my route clearance without being released. I filed direct and received it. I checked and double checked everything while waiting on the inbound to land and cancel IFR. Once he called back, I was released via the SHD2 (not the runway heading to 6,000, as originally assigned) with a new altitude assignment and a void time in 5 minutes.

I pulled out the chart, reviewed it, plugged the freq. in, selected the VLOC mode on the GPS, moved the CDI, moved the heading bug, changed my altitude preselect, briefed myself, and was on my way.

If I wanted to use the GPS, I could have added the MOL (Montebello) VOR to my FPL page, selected the OBS mode, selected the radial, moved my heading bug, and could have been on my way but chose not to for other reasons.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that one seems to be an overall tie.
 
an instrument rating is about flying the aircraft by reference to instruments. that is the basic foundation. it does not matter what navigation you have. learning the basics is the first step. learning to fly a basic ils, loc,vor and adf, holding and flying an airway is the rating. learning how to use the high tech gadgets can come later. why spend a lot of money to learn how to program a RNAV with xyz to get the rating. its is much easier in my option to learn how to fly the rnav super with xyz with the confidence that you can keep the airplane upright and not under the pressure of a check airman in the other seat. do the basic rating and get some instruction in how to use the box, fly the box in VFR until you are comfortable then launch into the clouds with it. children of the magenta IS real and very dangerous. turning right, set an obs and watch the needle center is a whole lot easier on a check ride than reprogramming a box under pressure, because if its in there the examiner WILL make sure you can use it properly.

bob
 
Once you learn all the rest, RNAVs with a good GPS feel like cheating. You won't have a problem learning to use one after you have your ticket.

And yeah, your checkride will be easier without a GPS on board. One less thing to do. I didn't have an autopilot and was glad I didn't have to mess with one on the ride.
 
Basic aircraft control in IMC is the foundation of IFR flying. You must learn this regardless what nav. equipment you use.

There is more GPS approaches available today than any other approach types combined. Do you really want to not have them in your bag of tricks from day one of your IFR flying?

And for those who say "it is a breeze, you can teach IFR GPS usage yourself in no time" I say "dig a little deeper". You probably have some gaps in your training, esp. around failure modes, abnormal procedures and GPS-autopilot interface.
 
Good point about failure modes. I know that, having never had a failure of my 480 (other than a seating problem that caused it to be not able to command the transponder), and having learned it by experience and from books that only treat the unit as functioning normally, I'm not at all familiar with its failure modes, whether common or uncommon. It's unlikely I would recognize a subtle failure that only affects part of its functionality.
 
I would recommend training with what you will fly. If that includes GPS, fine. But you should be prepared to fly approaches with everything in your panel, including precision and non-precision approaches and navigation by VOR. I learned IFR before GPS, so I can fly with the old equipment including ADF which I no longer own. Fly what you practice, and practice what you fly.
 
Affordable planes do not have GPS but are IFR certified. I see a Piper Warrior for sale locally at good price and it is IFR but no GPS. That would be the perfect IFR trainer and time builder. Insurance cheap too compared to retracts.
 
In the 480 I'd just select the VOR (using NRST VOR most likely fastest way to tune the VOR or selected it as a way point). DIRECT CRS-TO (or CRS-FROM) dial up 036 ENTER.
Could put it in the flight plan if I wanted to, but there's no particular advantage to do that since you're going to get RV to your filed plan soon anyhow (only in a degenerate case will you be going to MOL).
 
kzadora said:
Basic aircraft control in IMC is the foundation of IFR flying. You must learn this regardless what nav. equipment you use.

There is more GPS approaches available today than any other approach types combined. Do you really want to not have them in your bag of tricks from day one of your IFR flying?

And for those who say "it is a breeze, you can teach IFR GPS usage yourself in no time" I say "dig a little deeper". You probably have some gaps in your training, esp. around failure modes, abnormal procedures and GPS-autopilot interface.
Click to expand...


you are correct, and that is my point exactly. none of that is on the PTS as required to learn to get an IR. why add all that on top of what you need to learn to get the IR. learn the basics in an aircraft that is not going to cost as much as a wizz bang equipped aircraft, get the rating and now you can concentrate on learning the box without the pressure of also getting the rating on top of that. If you own the aircraft thats a different story, but most of the rental fleet i have seen cost a lot more to rent when they have a 430 or what ever installed. the aircraft i am getting typed in right now will do .1 rnp autolands, its fun enough to learn without having to learn to fly by instruments with it.

bob
 
I did my IR training in 3 difference airplanes. One, a Piper Arrow, was /U. One, a C-182, was /A. And one, the C-172 I took the ride in, was /G. Using a variety of planes probably cost me some time and money, but the Arrow taught me what I WANT DME. I sure missed it in the Arrow. The C-182 would have been fine for the ride, but it had an ADF and I didn't feel like that level of pain in the ride. The C-172 does not have an ADF receiver. We (the club) took that out when the GNS-430W went in. Even if you learn in a GPS equipped plane, learn the other tools, too. You'll get checked on them.
 
jsstevens said:
After that somewhat provocative title, I'm not advocating being a "child of the magenta line". In all seriousness, both aircraft I have currently available do not have usable IFR GPS. As I start to do some flight planning as if I was going places IFR, I'm finding more and more airports that have NO approaches other than GPS (well, RNAV). Given the planes I have available, I couldn't use them in IMC.

I've learned ILS and LOC approaches (and fly them all the time) and I would want to know that as well, but it seems like a plane without GPS is not terribly useful as an instrument platform.

Thoughts?
John
Click to expand...
Goodness... how on earth did we ever fly IFR without them before?

Just remember.. the system you fly in is predicated on there NOT being GPS, and when it all goes to crap and the radar is down, it can still be done with a compass and stopwatch... whether you are up to the task or not.
 
Doggtyred said:
Goodness... how on earth did we ever fly IFR without them before?

Just remember.. the system you fly in is predicated on there NOT being GPS, and when it all goes to crap and the radar is down, it can still be done with a compass and stopwatch... whether you are up to the task or not.
Click to expand...

I'm absolutely dedicated to navigation without GPS. I do it all the time. Even charts and eyeballs sometimes. But there are less and less airports with any sort of approaches that don't require GPS. My question, which, in composing your charming sarcasm apparently you didn't read to the end of, is:how much use for real world IFR, which might well include flying a approach at the end, is a non-GPS airplane useful for?

That system, which is somehow predicated on GPS not being there, still has a great many airports (and more all the time) which REQUIRE GPS to get into under IMC.

John
 
jsstevens said:
After that somewhat provocative title, I'm not advocating being a "child of the magenta line". In all seriousness, both aircraft I have currently available do not have usable IFR GPS. As I start to do some flight planning as if I was going places IFR, I'm finding more and more airports that have NO approaches other than GPS (well, RNAV). Given the planes I have available, I couldn't use them in IMC.

I've learned ILS and LOC approaches (and fly them all the time) and I would want to know that as well, but it seems like a plane without GPS is not terribly useful as an instrument platform.

Thoughts?
John
Click to expand...

That was my thinking too John and it's also why I spent about 14K putting a GTN-650 in the plane I owned when I did my instrument rating :).

But I also live in an area where there are a LOT of small fields that have RNAV/GPS only approaches so it made sense for me. I did have two VOR's with glideslopes in the plane so yeah I could do what you did, but the glideslope is out a lot at KSRQ, sometimes even the LOC for certain approaches. If I wanted to do practice approaches that basically would leave me with nothing.
 
I've flown all over the country, and even up through Canada over the last two years IFR. Although there are some planning factors, it's fairly easy to do it with just the basic 6-pack (/u). One ILS, and one VOR, VFR only moving map GPS makes it pretty much idiot proof. Enroute direct is perfectly acceptable when you are under radar coverage, or pretty much anywhere in the flat lands. When i fill out my flight plan, i put "VFR GPS EQUIPPED" in the remarks block and get routed direct more often than not.

A VFR moving map is an essential tool to situational awareness. AFAIK, it's perfectly legal to fly "direct" to a compass heading as long as you are above the OROCA, or MVA for your airspace sector. It's fun to dial in the VORs and cross check your positions with the stations as you pass them by. I'd say I have about 100hrs of practice on this one now.

In most of the country, it's pretty rare to actually fly an approach to mins (although it does happen). Having extra gas, and some good backup plans can be essential!

V/r,

Dana
 
jsstevens said:
I'm absolutely dedicated to navigation without GPS. I do it all the time. Even charts and eyeballs sometimes. But there are less and less airports with any sort of approaches that don't require GPS.
Click to expand...

My understanding is that the FAA intends to maintain at least one ground based IAP at all airports that have them now. The old /U equipment should still get you by unless you need approaches at some of the airports that didn't have approaches pre-GPS. As ThomasDR72 said, you can use a VFR GPS along with the analog instruments.
 
IF you are competent in a /A airplane, they do just fine in IMC and are very useful. Also keep in mind that you can fly an approach to another nearby airport and go under the clouds to your destination. GPS is very useful at times, but for a lot of people with 1000ft + personal minimums, it is far from a necessity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top