Well your second post had nothing to do with MDR, in fact it seems now to have nothing to do with what your student was doing. He evidently did not think "...that still-air planning ... was OK ..." as you said since you now say he used MDR to account for the wind. That is not still-air planning.
I was redsponding to your obvious negative attitude for which you have given no good justification.
If your friend flew UAS a couple of years ago I can assure you he was taught to use a flight computer. I can assure you the military do still use the basic techniques, as I teach some UAS graduates. I am not entirely surprised that your student can no longer use the Dalton computer, even forgotten about it at all, as most pilots don't like the thing and even more have forgotten how to use it soon after they finish their initial training, EFT or PPL, let alone if they have not needed to for a couple of years (I know I had when I was in that position). You seem very hostile to the military training system, due to a single case, without bothering to consider what can be expected of this person.
Whatever you think, I can assure you that the precision of MDR is "...good enough...". Not only do I think so, as a lowly PPL instructor and ATPL General Navigation instructor, but so do the service instructors I have flown with, and the people writing the training manuals for approved IR training courses, specifically saying that CRP-5s need not be used and giving tables instead with about the same precision as MDR. In-flight errors will not be significantly greater using these techniques.
The purposes of navigation is to get the aircraft efficiently to the desired destination. What does the technique matter as long as it is effective? How do you justify saying this is "...not good enough..." without evidence that MDR is inneffective?