Is there any point in IR training without a GPS?

jsstevens

jsstevens

Final Approach
PoA Supporter
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
6,822
Display Name
Display name:
jsstevens
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
 
While it's true that most of the approaches these days are RNAV, there are still quite a lot of other options. Keep in mind that you don't necessarily need an approach to get into the airport, but rather to get under the deck (if it isn't too low). That may mean approaches at a neighboring airport, canceling IFR, then proceeding VFR to the destination. This is a common way to get under marine layer here.

Yes, the utility is reduced without an IFR GPS, but it's not useless. You can still get through a cloud deck safely and legally, and all the way to the ground at some airports. None of these would be possible without an instrument rating.
 
I'm certainly not abandoning the rating just wondering if I should start looking for somewhere else to get the rest of my training.

John
 
Are we talking training or flying IFR?

For training
If you're by airports with precision and non precision non-GPS approaches, why not?

If you can shoot a VOR/NDB/LOC/ILS, you ain't going to have any trouble with a GPS after you learn whatever flavors buttonology
 
You need the rating,then you can determine if you need a GPS for the approaches in your area.
 
My home airport has ILS/LOC approaches. But if I want to travel (which I do) it becomes harder.
 
I canned the idea till I have a WAAS capable GPS with LPV. There are several ILS in the area but most of them require ADF or DME, neither which I have.

Plus, since that is the IFR end goal in mind, I rather just train from the start with a WAAS/LPV GPS.
 
I could probably do it without in my area, but I think there are a lot of places where GPS is really the only viable alternative. Might limit where you can land, but folks were flying IFR long before the satellites went up.
 
jsstevens said:
My home airport has ILS/LOC approaches. But if I want to travel (which I do) it becomes harder.
Click to expand...

Let's put it this way....

Almost all of the airplanes I currently have access to have GPS's, mostly WAAS.

I still have the same problem. Not because destination airports have no terrestrial approaches, but because the interesting ones have no approaches at all. Or else conditions that make instrument approaches in the clouds inadvisible (e.g., IMC in the Sierra is usually accompanied by either ice or thunderstorms, depending on season).
 
While it's true that your initial destination might only have RNAV approaches, there's a strong chance that an airport not too far away will have a usable ILS, LOC or VOR approach. Look at the flights you've done in the past and do some analysis on how successful you would've been on those flights with a /U or /A platform, then make your call.

My home airport, N07, has a RNAV (GPS) approach with minimums of 1100' AGL (almost useless). I end up at CDW (RNAV and LOC approach) when the weather is low. If I can't get it with the LOC approach at CDW, plan C is the ILS at MMU, not far away.

I use the IR ticket to get through or above enroute layers much more often than I need it to shoot approaches.
 
Is it fair to divide the question into two parts: En-route without GPS and Approach without GPS?

En-route you lose the direct-to, and maybe some more workload sequencing through on the NAV Radio.
Approach is being discussed already.

I have no answer, but am curious. (also, GPS approach vs WASS GPS approach is a topic of interest)

Hope I didn't threadjack
 
Just my opinion I could be wrong: I think getting the rating, without an IFR GPS, is still worthwhile. You'll learn almost everything you need to know to operate IFR. You can "add" IFR GPS usage later, when you have access to an airplane with the box. Many IFR flights terminate with a visual approach, and early on, you'll probably set yourself some higher personal minimums, anyway.
 
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.
 
Last edited:
I trained in a 172 with 2 430W and felt spoiled. It was very easy to do my IR in that platform. One of my short IFR XCs, my instructor "failed" both GPSs and said to navigate using the airways using radials. Same thing happened on one of my legs for the long XC. I flew a Warrior /U on several occasions into hard IMC and had to tell the controller unable to proceed direct to a fix. Is it doable? Sure. Practical? Maybe. Depends where you're located and what airport you're trying to get in and out of.
 
I think you should do your IFR training in an IFR equipped GPS platform. Programming the waypoints, approaches, suspend (garmin) to missed approaches is invaluable.
 
Get the rating. First, as already noted, instrument flying is more than just shooting approaches. Second, if you learn to shoot precision approaches, like and an ILS, and non-precision approaches, like a VOR, then you have all the skills necessary to shoot any GPS approach from LNAV down to LPV. Basically then all you have to do once you start flying with GPS is to learn the buttonology of whatever box you're flying with.
 
Last edited:
I am training for my IR right now and found that the basic skills in instrument flying make one a much better pilot especially basic attitude flying and learning how to really use trim to fly light touch! Most airports seem to be headed the GPS RNAV route so if I was to ever buy a plane, it would definitely have to have a Garmin WAAS GPS in it already or be a serious bargain. GPS is the future. With that said, there are tons of airports in California with LOC, ILS, and VOR approaches.
 
tsts4 said:
Get the rating. First, as already noted, instrument flying is more than just shooting approaches. Second, if you learn to shoot precision approaches, like and an ILS, and non-precision approaches, like a VOR, then you have all the skills necessary to shoot any GPS approach from LNAV down to LPV. Basically then all you have to do once you start flying with GPS is to learn the buttonology of whatever box you're flying with.
Click to expand...

I agree with Todd. There are still quite a few /U aircraft flying in the system, although they are getting fewer all the time.
 
Once you learn how to use your individual GPS, there is nothing cosmic about GPS approaches. It's tracking a course which you already know how to do. Would I personally hold off on doing the instrument rating because I don't have an IFR GPS? No.
 
Gucci Pilot said:
Once you learn how to use your individual GPS, there is nothing cosmic about GPS approaches. It's tracking a course which you already know how to do. Would I personally hold off on doing the instrument rating because I don't have an IFR GPS? No.
Click to expand...

Agree. Do a couple practice GPS approaches, use a GPS simulator, read the manual, do a few more approaches if necessary, and you're done.
 
The old pattern a and b exercise pretty much covers the flying aspect of all approaches. Just a series of instructions you follow in the proper order and a runway appears at the end.... Or it doesn't and you go around. Get the rating. Learn GPS when you have one. Getting your head wrapped around situational awareness without a gps is a good skill to have. When you get access to a gps just learn the box. You won't regret learning without it first.
 
LPV and LP are to non-WAAS LNAV similar to what a VOR approach is to ILS and LOC approaches.

And, learning the structure of the RNAV system; the various types of ARINC legs and the fact it is a to-to system of navigation. But, plenty of people have learned these concepts long after getting their instrument rating.
 
I sure hope so. No GPS in my cherokee,only ADF, DME and VOR/GS.
 
I guess I wasn't clear: I'm getting the rating. It's just a question of whether I stay where I am or find somewhere with GPS in the plane.

I can fly approaches and vectors and track VORs with no problem. I can even fly DME arcs no sweat. (Radio work is still keeping me on my toes, but even that is going OK.) I need more practice on holds and more practice in general because my saturation level is high.

I am definitely not wasting my written! I will get the rating.

John
 
Seems the answer to the original thread title is: Yes

and then later you can play with GPS and Glass panels and eventually a red handle :)
 
I thought you could only have Sextant with the autopilot engaged. (and/or with someone to whom you're engaged)
 
One plane has an ADF, but there are no approaches around here (according to the flight instructor, I haven't checked. I'm pretty sure he's right because he likes ADF approaches.)

I, unfortunately, haven't learned to use a sextant although my brother in law can teach me. He uses one on his sailboat. In addition to his GPS.

There IS a red handle in the airplane, but it controls the mixture.

John
 
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.
 
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...

I wouldn't limit yourself to /G planes only, I'd pick the most basic and cheapest plane you can find, learning with a basic six pack, two nav heads and no moving map will help you greatly.
 
James331 said:
I wouldn't limit yourself to /G planes only, I'd pick the most basic and cheapest plane you can find, learning with a basic six pack, two nav heads and no moving map will help you greatly.
Click to expand...

How would you feel about out of date enroute IFR GPS (using it only as a DME) and one nav head? One plane has that. The other has two VOR/LOC one with GS and a DME that's highly intermittent.

John
 
Less than ideal, but sure.

Remember you can do your entire IFR training and never need to file IFR, not ideal but you can.
 
James331 said:
Less than ideal, but sure.

Remember you can do your entire IFR training and never need to file IFR, not ideal but you can.
Click to expand...

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
 
No, the more you can do with the less you have the better off you'll be when you have even more tools.

Only additional training would be to get you settled into a specific aircraft.

I'd rather transition a person who can get through a IFR flight with fewer systems and less automation, than someone who came from a plane which had every bell and whistle available. Learning good fundamentals is much harder to teach than learning systems.
 
Yes.....better learn how to operate that stop watch....so you can appreciate the moving map. :D

Also....making cool peace signs to the CDI to determine your hold entry is a right of passage.
 
Not having a GPS will make the checkride easier. Easiest instruments to pass checkride are two VORs, one with glideslope and nothing else. Works fine, then carry a handheld GPS once you get your ticket. Then fly the gauges!

I do just fine with a non WAAS IFR GPS enroute and then fly the ILS or simple VOR or RNAV approaches without glideslope. Depends on what approaches are available where you want to land. If your home base has only RNAV WAAS you will be wanting WAAS (expensive but nice to have).
 
Last edited:
MAKG1 said:
No, you can't. 14 CFR 61.65(d)(2)(ii).
Click to expand...


I think it's not as cut and dry as you think it is, wx permitting, filing IFR and going IMC are not always the same thing, won't make friends with any controllers if you do this on the wrong wx day, not ideal as I said, but not black and white ether.
 
James331 said:
I think it's not as cut and dry as you think it is, wx permitting, filing IFR and going IMC are not always the same thing, won't make friends with any controllers if you do this on the wrong wx day, not ideal as I said, but not black and white ether.
Click to expand...

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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top