It seems fairly obvious (I started learning navigation the “traditional” way) but there are now some interesting counter arguments.
In the gliding movement there is a very similar discussion going on. Yes, teach conventional visual navigation but introduce modern kit at the same time, so when you send someone off on their first cross-country, they have something to fall back on.
In the past, if you became “uncertain of your position”, the advice was to carry on for a bit and if you couldn’t relate to anything on the map, to land in a field before you ended up somewhere you really shouldn’t be. Given the high workload / high stress situation of the first solo flight away from the airfield, trying to stay up as well as navigate, how many incidents / accidents had this as a prominent factor?
Also, in today’s complicated, crowded multi-use airspace, how much leeway is there for making navigational errors before the consequences become serious, given traffic density and the promise of increasing litigation from the regulator? There is definitely a “duty of care” issue and considering you can put together a GPS moving map on a PDA with mount for around £100, there are no excuses. Especially in front of a magistrate.
Being able to have controlled airspace, obstacles, drop zones, danger areas, winch sites, NOTAMs, etc. pop up on the map with a “bing!” if you get too close is such an improvement on what we used to have, that the safety case is obvious. Would you drive a car with no seat belts on the motorway? It’s getting to that point.
I still feel that basic navigation skills should be taught to competence but after that, anything that makes it easier and safer should be welcomed.