Beagle
It is worth taking a look at some of the more recently developed aviation software for GPSs before reaching a conclusion.
PocketFMS is a good example.
The maps cover the whole of Europe and are as detailed as the “official” charts. Monthly updates are freely available. There is a growing user group that work together to keep the non critical data up to date. The software can be run on a PC with full facilities and the flight plans “uploaded” to your GPS. METAR and TAFS can be downloaded for all airports for a given FIR not just en route airports. The frequency information for every airport is shown as well as that for all navigation beacons, all controlled airspace is shown including UK class A, as are all danger areas depicted. VFR approach profiles are available for all airports as well as VFR circuit diagrams and AIP extract. Agreed NOTAMS are not yet shown. Agreed, I am not suggesting this is an “IFR”compliant setup.
Proponents of restricting the use of GPS should take a look at this type of software and of the more recent offerings from Garmin and others before reaching a conclusion. It is surprising how much the software and hardware has progressed.
The reality is all the time the system is working there is really no need to look at a chart or a flight guide again because you have all the information on the display in front of you. I accept the caveat "all the time it is working" and thats why the chart and flight guide will remain firmly by my side but as I posted previoulsy not one GPS has yet let me down and with running twin GPSs there is a bit of redundancy as well.
The real question is how far you rely on “modern” technology and how far you allow the “old” skills to deteriorate. Sailors use to be able to use a sextant, but not many still can, sailors use to be able to “plot” a course using the manual navigation skills we use in the air, and most making serious passages still can, but many are totally reliant on GPS. The fact is as GPS has been perceived as becoming more and more reliable, and sets cheaper, so more than one can be carried, the more sailors have been prepared to rely on the GPS never letting them down. In reality pilots maybe have it easier because were the GPS to fail (at least in the UK at any rate) they will get a steer from D and D if the “old” skills have become so rusty they do not work!
The question this poses is whether we continue to be correct placing all the emphasis on teaching the “old” skills as part of our PPL training whilst almost totalling ignoring the use of GPSs? Might we at some point become totally reliant on GPSs as our primary means of navigation with most pilots taught these skills during their training with little emphasis on traditional skills? After all in most SEPs we trust our lives to at best double redundancy (two mags, two fuel pumps) and at worst to single redundancy (one engine). I would be interested to know the statistics for engine failures a year compared with twin GPS failures a year - I reckon I know which has the better odds.
An anecdote which for me illustrates well the advantages of GPS. I remember getting a bit too close to some very bad weather in an area with which I was not very familiar and with none of the en route diversions I had planned looking very attractive. There was a somewhat pressing need to go in a completely different direction which as it happened was between charts. The nearest function was able to pull up and at a glance eliminate all the airports in an unsuitable direction, plot a steer, show any danger areas that required avoiding, provide all the frequency information needed, pull up the terrain and ensure there was sufficient fuel to beat a hasty retreat. That’s all information that traditional skills should also be able to provide us with but the instancy with which it is available is a heck of a way of reducing cockpit stress and freeing up time to get on with the more important tasks of flying the old girl!