I have one basic question to all those who say you should master the basics before moving on -- why? We don't expect people these days to be able to alter the timing, mixture etc on their car's engine as computers do it for you. If anyone can go out and shed a few hundred beans on a GPS that gives them instant track and groundspeed, why not use it for primary nav?
And before anyone else chimes in with tales of derring-do where they were left with a paperclip and a copy of the AA 1946 road atlas for navigation, just how often, per flying hour, have these tales occurred? And how many flying hours do you think your average PPL student flies?
Sure, keep the historical methods around to placate the ex-RAF half-wings who shine their trousers on Belgrano seats, and for the amusement of those who choose to indulge in them; but isn't it time that we start seeing the whizz-wheel and magnetic compass crowd as more akin to the Tiger Moths and Piper Cubs of this world -- all right for those who enjoy them, but no longer a mandated part of flying training?
We don't, after all, expect all new PPLs to do their primary flying training in a taildragging biplane, so why do we teach them to navigate as if they are flying such a beast?