Interesting, Red Chilli - didn't, know that, but I will read up on it. And I will also take Fuji's words of caution on board, too.
The method of navigating I'm talking about, Fuji, is using a map which represents the masts, together with the techniques I've described already. Saying "A GPS is the best way to navigate", as IO540 does, might suggest that taking the normal precautions of drawing a route on a chart which avoids controlled airspace, programming it into your GPS and flying it will be sufficient. What I am trying to emphasize is that in good VMC this is fine, because you can visually avoid terrain. In poor VMC, you must plan a route which avoids the terrain
before turning on the GPS (notwithstanding what Red Chilli has said). Sorry if I didn't make that 100% clear.
A minority of posts on this thread seem to suggest (whether intentionally or not) that every PPL should be able to fly in 1500m viz since this is the legal minimum for VFR, or possibly 3000m viz since this is the legal minimum for a PPL - this is an attitude which I find
extremely dangerous, and I hope that I have misunderstood those posts concerned.
I have already highlighted the difference between safe and legal. To suggest that every PPL must be able to do everything he is legally allowed to do the moment he is issued with his license is complete nonsense. And one of the things he is legally allowed to do, but should not attempt, is fly in 3km viz.
IO540, in your last post, you say:
An instrument qualified pilot (IMCR or IR) has far better ways to navigate, and isn't going to be kerb crawling in 1500m or 3000m looking for villages, hedges, roads, lakes...
This is generally true, but the restriction to 3km viz which is legally placed on JAR PPL holders is removed when they get an instrument qualification for a reason. The reason is two-fold: first, they might well need to navigate in this kind of viz to approach an airfield without a published instrument approach, after either flying an instrument approach at a nearby airfield, or descending to VMC not below 1000 feet above the nearest obstacle within 5nm - or even to circle-to-land at an airfield with an instrument approach. (There is a separate issue here of home-grown instrument approaches, but that's an entirely different subject altogether.) Secondly, the instrument-qualified pilot is better equipped to use his instruments to keep the aircraft the right way up in these conditions.
So I would suggest that it is the instrument-qualified pilot who is more likely to be flying visually in these conditions, in the final stages of a flight, rather than the PPL who is not instrument qualified, who will hopefully be sitting in the club-house with a cup of tea (or a pint of beer if the weather is set to stay for the day)?
FFF
------------------