eyeinthesky wrote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">If you are flying IFR (IMC or not) you must have the equipment and skills to allow you to complete that flight safely. Since the CAA does not yet see fit to agree to the use of GPS as a primary navigation aid (which is wahat the original question was suggesting) then you need to be competent in the interpretation and operation of those navaids which are permitted. </font>
I'm still waiting to be told precisely which legislation requires me to have and use an ADF for these procedures outside controlled airspace.
Nor am I aware of a concept of a 'primary navigation aid' within UK law.
I don't disagree with the general sentiment of your post. Certainly, it helps to learn
and practice a whole range of procedures for both VFR and IFR flying. But training and practice has to be prioritised and there is a limit to what one can do in finite time. How much time do
you spend practising VDF or QGH approaches in case that ADF fails.
I think we need to be a little more pragmatic about training people for IFR flight. There are very few accidents that have occurred because pilots were incapable of flying an NDB approach -- and none because they were incapable of flying an NDB hold. Most IFR accidents involving less experienced pilots are due to either of loss of control when a pilot is under a heavy workload, or CFIT caused by a lack of situational awareness of the surrounding terrain. I'm not convinced that teaching pilots to fly perfect racetracks on a WWII nav system prepares pilots adequately for the real world.