The guy who said word to this effect (in today's complex airspace) has over 25,000 flying hours, including crossing the Atlantic in piston engined flying boats.
What does that mean?
With all of the threads on GPS seemingly degenerating into this kind of mess, with two very polarised points of view, it is probably not worth continuing.
I confess, when I asked the question, I thought that there would be some light hearted chat - I never thought for a moment that it could become so serious!
I've read some of Chuck's posts and enjoyed them - but struggle to see how anyone's previous experience allows them to become an authority on minimum requirements to get VFR RNP.
I'm here to learn and will listen to everyone. My experience is 250 odd hours of day VFR SEP, almost all of them cross country in the UK, France, Germany, the Netherlands and so on, half in my Auster (wouldn't fly "hands off") the rest in various Robins and Pipers. This was also in all sorts of weather, some of which was worse than forecast and which needed flights replanned "on the fly". All without any nav aids (none of us used them in those days) and none with any problems.
I'm surprised, not having flown for ten years, that there can be such a strong belief that it is difficult to maintain situational awareness without GPS.
Is GPS nice to have? For sure! Is it pretty? Yes. Is it easier? Of course! Is it the only way to fly? That is the question that I sort of asked (light heartedly, imprecisely - mea culpa!) and I really don't feel that this is the case.
Perhaps I'll find differently when I'm finally reprocessed...
