The use of GPS...
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FAO WHOEVER STARTED THIS THREAD
make sure you put in your article how GPS should now be recognised as the way people are going to navigate. Apart from a few people on here.
Someone needs to bash into the CAA's head that the PPL syllabus should cover how to use one properly. Including how to keep you GPS up to date.
HOW MANY OF YOU GUYS THAT RELY ON GPS SKIP THROUGH THAT PAGE THAT SAYS 'DATABASE EXPIRED'?
make sure you put in your article how GPS should now be recognised as the way people are going to navigate. Apart from a few people on here.
Someone needs to bash into the CAA's head that the PPL syllabus should cover how to use one properly. Including how to keep you GPS up to date.
HOW MANY OF YOU GUYS THAT RELY ON GPS SKIP THROUGH THAT PAGE THAT SAYS 'DATABASE EXPIRED'?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FA
You could start by asking the CAA to provide their VFR chart data to PocketFMS free of charge
That would be a true test of their determination to improve something.
You won't get very far!
You could start by asking the CAA to provide their VFR chart data to PocketFMS free of charge
That would be a true test of their determination to improve something.
You won't get very far!
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GPS is a great 'tool', in other words, something which can be used as an aid (but not a sole aid or technique).
But it's only any good if people are trained how to use it (which is haphazard right now), people are made aware of its limitations (haphazard again), the database is kept up to date (a big variable !!), and people still maintain the other skills to allow them to compensate for equipment failure or reduced capability.
Unless you get joined up thinking from the CAA, then it's not going to happen.
That said, once GPS is an accepted part of the culture, I'd introduce a few things. Anyone using a GPS who penetrated CAS or an active Danger Area would have their licence removed and their hands cut off for good measure.
Plus I'd have several days a year (unannounced) where the system was shut off or severely degraded to ensure people can still cope without it. With the same penalties above for anyone getting in trouble. GA pilots could see it as akin to their 6 monthly sim check which ATPLs require 
And finally, I'd make anyone who believes GPS can never fail or get you in trouble have a look at unedited photos of accident sites where pilots have come to a bloody end because they believed the same.
PS the last paragraph wasn't serious ... or was it ??
But it's only any good if people are trained how to use it (which is haphazard right now), people are made aware of its limitations (haphazard again), the database is kept up to date (a big variable !!), and people still maintain the other skills to allow them to compensate for equipment failure or reduced capability.
Unless you get joined up thinking from the CAA, then it's not going to happen.
That said, once GPS is an accepted part of the culture, I'd introduce a few things. Anyone using a GPS who penetrated CAS or an active Danger Area would have their licence removed and their hands cut off for good measure.
Plus I'd have several days a year (unannounced) where the system was shut off or severely degraded to ensure people can still cope without it. With the same penalties above for anyone getting in trouble. GA pilots could see it as akin to their 6 monthly sim check which ATPLs require And finally, I'd make anyone who believes GPS can never fail or get you in trouble have a look at unedited photos of accident sites where pilots have come to a bloody end because they believed the same.PS the last paragraph wasn't serious ... or was it ??
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You could start by asking the CAA to provide their VFR chart data to PocketFMS free of charge
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mmmm, so an organisation which is tasked by the Government to make full cost recovery through its users should give away portions of its work for free to a company who will then use that free information to make themselves lots of money. Very capitalist
Ok, they do ask for a donation (which I have given), but it's not required. They are far from capitalists making lots of money
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PR - erhm - as the software is free, I am wondering how they make money? 
You might subscribe to the enhanced maps but I am not sure I would want to earn a living from a once off payment of £30 or whatever it is now.
Within your vein of flippancy, of course you would have to apply the same rules to the “traditional” navigators who bust CAS, and whilst you are running your simulated GPS outage you should transmit the following message to all aircraft without GPS:
All aircraft are now required to divert to a position which will be passed to you by the unit you are currently working. The position will be up to 60 miles away and you are required to ensure you miss all danger areas and CAS en route, you are also required to inform your unit of your estimate for that position. Your progress WILL be closely monitored. I wonder how many will successfully manage the task??
Of course if you fail the task, and you only have 5 minutes to establish yourself correctly on the new route, all priviliges will be immediately revoked.
Only kidding.
You might subscribe to the enhanced maps but I am not sure I would want to earn a living from a once off payment of £30 or whatever it is now.
Within your vein of flippancy, of course you would have to apply the same rules to the “traditional” navigators who bust CAS, and whilst you are running your simulated GPS outage you should transmit the following message to all aircraft without GPS:
All aircraft are now required to divert to a position which will be passed to you by the unit you are currently working. The position will be up to 60 miles away and you are required to ensure you miss all danger areas and CAS en route, you are also required to inform your unit of your estimate for that position. Your progress WILL be closely monitored. I wonder how many will successfully manage the task??
Of course if you fail the task, and you only have 5 minutes to establish yourself correctly on the new route, all priviliges will be immediately revoked.
Only kidding.
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why would an ATC unit require you to divert somewhere 60 miles away ??
That's just being silly
Point taken on the PocketFMS being 'free', however the CAA would presumably then have to open it up to everyone for free, some of whom would seek to make money out of it. Or would Jeppesen, Garmin, etc, also move in to the world of 'freeware' ?
That's just being silly
Point taken on the PocketFMS being 'free', however the CAA would presumably then have to open it up to everyone for free, some of whom would seek to make money out of it. Or would Jeppesen, Garmin, etc, also move in to the world of 'freeware' ?
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Outlawed
Posts: 561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder if in a parallel universe, someone on a motorist's website who enquired about purchasing a Tom Tom, is being slated by a red-faced old duffer for not using the Royal Automobile Club's map of the British Empire for all their navigation?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"would Jeppesen, Garmin, etc, also move in to the world of 'freeware' "
Garmin and everybody else use Jepp GPS data, and Jepp wouldn't touch CAA VFR chart data because it's no good to them; it's specific to the UK, they would be unlikely to get as lucky elsewhere in Europe, it is in raster form so isn't suitable for rotation according to aircraft heading. It's all flat; you can't click on a round blob called "Goodwood" and see the airfield data like you can with the Jepp GPS database. See Memory Map for example. Pretty maps and it makes a nice 2nd GPS but that's it. I am sure the CAA data could be incorporated into a deeper database but who will do it?
Sadly, this is all "mental masturbation" as someone referred to something else here recently. It will never happen. An individual can do it, a low level network of pilots could do it, but any overt venture can't because of copyright issues.
To me, flying abroad is the biggest attraction of flying and would never buy a GPS unless it had unified coverage for all of Europe.
In time, things may change. Eurocontrol are doing a project called Skyview (can't find the URL right now) which is basically a database of everything aviation, and you can build up the desired layers of airfields, navaids, airspace, etc. The resulting maps are pretty rough but they are free and, I guess, totally official. I have no idea if the data can be used commercially but it would appear ideal for a GPS. There is a lot of stuff like that going on at Eurocontrol. They are working on ading an autorouting function to the CFMU website, for example (for airways routes, taking into account SRDs, CDRs etc). They already have it in-house.
Nothing can be more expensive than Jepp's 28-day updates and they are milking the European "grab a copyright on this and that" machine for all it's worth.
Garmin and everybody else use Jepp GPS data, and Jepp wouldn't touch CAA VFR chart data because it's no good to them; it's specific to the UK, they would be unlikely to get as lucky elsewhere in Europe, it is in raster form so isn't suitable for rotation according to aircraft heading. It's all flat; you can't click on a round blob called "Goodwood" and see the airfield data like you can with the Jepp GPS database. See Memory Map for example. Pretty maps and it makes a nice 2nd GPS but that's it. I am sure the CAA data could be incorporated into a deeper database but who will do it?
Sadly, this is all "mental masturbation" as someone referred to something else here recently. It will never happen. An individual can do it, a low level network of pilots could do it, but any overt venture can't because of copyright issues.
To me, flying abroad is the biggest attraction of flying and would never buy a GPS unless it had unified coverage for all of Europe.
In time, things may change. Eurocontrol are doing a project called Skyview (can't find the URL right now) which is basically a database of everything aviation, and you can build up the desired layers of airfields, navaids, airspace, etc. The resulting maps are pretty rough but they are free and, I guess, totally official. I have no idea if the data can be used commercially but it would appear ideal for a GPS. There is a lot of stuff like that going on at Eurocontrol. They are working on ading an autorouting function to the CFMU website, for example (for airways routes, taking into account SRDs, CDRs etc). They already have it in-house.
Nothing can be more expensive than Jepp's 28-day updates and they are milking the European "grab a copyright on this and that" machine for all it's worth.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Strafer, I'll have you know that not all RAC members are old duffers! Some are even under the age of 30 do you know..... They even allow sprog's in now for "family" days.
Anyway back to GPS.... Surely it is not beyond the realms of possibility that a totally integrated planning/mapping system that can be downloaded directly to a GPS can be developed?
The ability to plan a route and get all current NOTAMS, Wx, airspace as well as topographical data in one place and then shove it into one box in the cockpit (via USB "dongle" or whatever) would make life an awful lot simpler and less prone to mistakes.
I suppose it just requires all the different agencies to get together and communicate.
Anyway back to GPS.... Surely it is not beyond the realms of possibility that a totally integrated planning/mapping system that can be downloaded directly to a GPS can be developed?
The ability to plan a route and get all current NOTAMS, Wx, airspace as well as topographical data in one place and then shove it into one box in the cockpit (via USB "dongle" or whatever) would make life an awful lot simpler and less prone to mistakes.
I suppose it just requires all the different agencies to get together and communicate.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Age: 85
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why do all those pilots who are suspicious of GPS use as justification that it won't do everything - it doesn't have this bit of information, it doesn't have that".
Does your ILS system have all this, terrain avoidance, danger areas?
Of course not - your GPS is a tool and a good one at that, and it is in addition to the other means of navigation available to the pilot.
Stop thinking that everyone who uses GPS 1. never consults the map or does a plog and 2. only ever uses the GOTO button!
Does your ILS system have all this, terrain avoidance, danger areas?
Of course not - your GPS is a tool and a good one at that, and it is in addition to the other means of navigation available to the pilot.
Stop thinking that everyone who uses GPS 1. never consults the map or does a plog and 2. only ever uses the GOTO button!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Why would an ATC unit require you to divert somewhere 60 miles away ??
That's just being silly"
Prune Radar - ah, well if you read my earlier post you would know why.
"Anyway back to GPS.... Surely it is not beyond the realms of possibility that a totally integrated planning/mapping system that can be downloaded directly to a GPS can be developed?"
Say again slowly - I hate to take your pseudonym in vein, but to say it again very slowly it has already been done! - minus only the NOTAMS.
I think some of these posts typify one of the biggest problems with GPS (and other "new" tecnologies for that matter). People simply cant be bothered to understand what it does, and what its capabilities are. I dont mind that in itself (we are all sometimes too busy) but I do have a problem when they are willing to criticise from such an ill informed position.
That's just being silly"
Prune Radar - ah, well if you read my earlier post you would know why.
"Anyway back to GPS.... Surely it is not beyond the realms of possibility that a totally integrated planning/mapping system that can be downloaded directly to a GPS can be developed?"
Say again slowly - I hate to take your pseudonym in vein, but to say it again very slowly it has already been done! - minus only the NOTAMS.
I think some of these posts typify one of the biggest problems with GPS (and other "new" tecnologies for that matter). People simply cant be bothered to understand what it does, and what its capabilities are. I dont mind that in itself (we are all sometimes too busy) but I do have a problem when they are willing to criticise from such an ill informed position.
Last edited by Fuji Abound; 24th Jan 2006 at 19:04.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why does the topic of GPS always arouse religious navigation wars??
GPS is by far the most accurate and easy to use navigation system, but the context in which it is used is important. I have a handheld GPS the trusty little pilot III from Garmin. It is very convenient to use since I can download routes and update its database from my PC using Navbox and Jepp.
It is my primary navigation aid and I've been guided right across France by it before now, BUT IT's NOT THE ONLY ONE, because like everything else it can fail and indeed it lost all contact with satellites while I was flying in the crud only the other day.
I was not then blind because I had two VOR and a DME and an ADF all tuned and I knew precisely where I was because I had been cross referencing my GPS position with my chart at regular intervals and could now do the same using the radio aids. The difference is that the answer is probably a mile or more out with Radio Navaids and it's much more work for the old brain to cope with when flying the plane and managing the engine.
Happily the little beast recovered and helped me into my destination which had no approach to follow and before anyone jumps down my throat the cloud base was well above circuit height and vis about 3kms so I could have used nothing but MK1 eyeball if push had come to shove.
The whole point about tools is they are supposed to make things easier to accomplish well. Surely no-one is going to suggest that GPS doesn't make navigation easier and more accurate
GPS is by far the most accurate and easy to use navigation system, but the context in which it is used is important. I have a handheld GPS the trusty little pilot III from Garmin. It is very convenient to use since I can download routes and update its database from my PC using Navbox and Jepp.
It is my primary navigation aid and I've been guided right across France by it before now, BUT IT's NOT THE ONLY ONE, because like everything else it can fail and indeed it lost all contact with satellites while I was flying in the crud only the other day.
I was not then blind because I had two VOR and a DME and an ADF all tuned and I knew precisely where I was because I had been cross referencing my GPS position with my chart at regular intervals and could now do the same using the radio aids. The difference is that the answer is probably a mile or more out with Radio Navaids and it's much more work for the old brain to cope with when flying the plane and managing the engine.
Happily the little beast recovered and helped me into my destination which had no approach to follow and before anyone jumps down my throat the cloud base was well above circuit height and vis about 3kms so I could have used nothing but MK1 eyeball if push had come to shove.
The whole point about tools is they are supposed to make things easier to accomplish well. Surely no-one is going to suggest that GPS doesn't make navigation easier and more accurate
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fuji, in that case it hasn't been done has it!
Why are NOTAMs not included? A truly integrated system would do it all, not miss out fairly vital bits of info.
Johnm, I have no idea why there is such a lot of passion aroused when the subject of GPS is raised, but I agree that it's all a bit silly.
GPS is brilliant and an incredible aid to safety, I think the nay-sayers have just never used it fully or experienced the piece of mind it can bring. Having operated for a long time without it and a fair while with it, I for one never go anywhere without having a handheld unit in my headset case. You never know when it may come in useful. Having a proper panel mounted moving map display in colour is even better!
Why are NOTAMs not included? A truly integrated system would do it all, not miss out fairly vital bits of info.
Johnm, I have no idea why there is such a lot of passion aroused when the subject of GPS is raised, but I agree that it's all a bit silly.
GPS is brilliant and an incredible aid to safety, I think the nay-sayers have just never used it fully or experienced the piece of mind it can bring. Having operated for a long time without it and a fair while with it, I for one never go anywhere without having a handheld unit in my headset case. You never know when it may come in useful. Having a proper panel mounted moving map display in colour is even better!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'll hold my own council on the merits of GPS versus 'traditional' navigation but please can some body give me a simple technical explanation (leave your prejudices and opinions behind, I just want science).
Question: Why am I allowed to make an NDB approach with all it's know deficiencies (night effect, weather effect, coast effect etc.) and absolutley no integrity checking (well OK, it has a morse ident.) but I am not allowed to make a non-precision GPS approach with a RAIM certified GPS set?
Am I missing something?
Question: Why am I allowed to make an NDB approach with all it's know deficiencies (night effect, weather effect, coast effect etc.) and absolutley no integrity checking (well OK, it has a morse ident.) but I am not allowed to make a non-precision GPS approach with a RAIM certified GPS set?
Am I missing something?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
nipper, I think you are missing the commercial angle. Europe is putting up a GPS system which will have the same strengths and weaknesses as the US one will (the US are upgrading capabilities so by the time the European one is in place it won't be any better).
The only explanation I can come up with is the Europeans will not allow the use of the free American system as it will then be a real bugger to get them to use the chargeable European one when it is in place. Better to ban the use until the European system is in a position to charge, then require European entities to use it. A bit cynical perhaps, but I cannot come up with any other reason that makes sense. I cannot see the US ever turning GPS off, even in Europe. Too many American people and companies use it.
The only explanation I can come up with is the Europeans will not allow the use of the free American system as it will then be a real bugger to get them to use the chargeable European one when it is in place. Better to ban the use until the European system is in a position to charge, then require European entities to use it. A bit cynical perhaps, but I cannot come up with any other reason that makes sense. I cannot see the US ever turning GPS off, even in Europe. Too many American people and companies use it.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I have no idea why there is such a lot of passion aroused when the subject of GPS is raised"
I think it is little to do with GPS itself. After all, what do I care how somebody else navigates. The only time I might care is if they get lost, bust some airspace, and then we all end up paying some price for that in the form of restrictions. If everybody else is flying at 600ft AGL (because they want to read the road signs) then so much the better; less traffic where I go
I think the reason it gets people going is the much wider issue of where GA is going, and the picture is bleak on nearly every front.
There is the year on year decline in GA activity. PPL issue is down and down. Already nearly every UK airfield is under constant threat, financially, NIMBY-wise, planning-wise. The GA fleet is 25-30 years old and rotting away happily, with so few new planes coming along.
Flying does have some utility value but only once you get an instrument qualification, and most UK GA airfields have no instrument approaches. So it's down to the leisure element. Most leisure activities are driven by social factors. Yet the airfield social scene is full of anoraks!
That's what gets me going; it's the pretence by the anorak group that all is well, while everything is gradually falling apart. Their anti-GPS anti-anything-modern attitude is just a visible trademark. The crap put out by the CAA just makes the situation "official".
The problem (a decline in GA) is also happening in the USA. However they have some advantages: it's happening a lot slower; GA is more integrated into their economy; there is a lot more money about in it; and they have modern planes (e.g. Cirrus) that sell in enough numbers to offer a hope of replacing the rotting Cessna/Piper fleet.
I think it is little to do with GPS itself. After all, what do I care how somebody else navigates. The only time I might care is if they get lost, bust some airspace, and then we all end up paying some price for that in the form of restrictions. If everybody else is flying at 600ft AGL (because they want to read the road signs) then so much the better; less traffic where I go
I think the reason it gets people going is the much wider issue of where GA is going, and the picture is bleak on nearly every front.
There is the year on year decline in GA activity. PPL issue is down and down. Already nearly every UK airfield is under constant threat, financially, NIMBY-wise, planning-wise. The GA fleet is 25-30 years old and rotting away happily, with so few new planes coming along.
Flying does have some utility value but only once you get an instrument qualification, and most UK GA airfields have no instrument approaches. So it's down to the leisure element. Most leisure activities are driven by social factors. Yet the airfield social scene is full of anoraks!
That's what gets me going; it's the pretence by the anorak group that all is well, while everything is gradually falling apart. Their anti-GPS anti-anything-modern attitude is just a visible trademark. The crap put out by the CAA just makes the situation "official".
The problem (a decline in GA) is also happening in the USA. However they have some advantages: it's happening a lot slower; GA is more integrated into their economy; there is a lot more money about in it; and they have modern planes (e.g. Cirrus) that sell in enough numbers to offer a hope of replacing the rotting Cessna/Piper fleet.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Slim,
Galileo will be better in the sense that it augments NAVSTAR and possibly GLONASS too, in addition I bet a Galileo versions of WAAS/dGPS and/or psuedollites are developed for precision approaches. That means more satellites, more redundancy and better accuracy (and no RAIM warnings). In addition, the pay to use Galileo will ensure levels of service, which is arguably necessary for commercial certification.
My reading between the lines, is that if you don't subscribe to Galileo, then you only get to use NAVSTAR. If that is the case then you don't get to use GPS approaches in EASA held teritory. In other words, if you don't pay for Galileo then not only can you not use it commercially, but you are limited to ADF and VOR (where they haven't been switched off).
Effectively, if you don't subscribe you can't run a viable commercial operation.
On the plus side, imagine how straight forward a utilitity (personal or otherwise) trip would be with a guarenteed levels of service GPS system. Plus the knowledge that you follow a GPS approach at the other end. Every airfield could have a non-precision approach without having to maintain and power transmiters. I think it would be fab.
However, for me bimbles, I'll stick with the Vagabond for forseeable future
Galileo will be better in the sense that it augments NAVSTAR and possibly GLONASS too, in addition I bet a Galileo versions of WAAS/dGPS and/or psuedollites are developed for precision approaches. That means more satellites, more redundancy and better accuracy (and no RAIM warnings). In addition, the pay to use Galileo will ensure levels of service, which is arguably necessary for commercial certification.
My reading between the lines, is that if you don't subscribe to Galileo, then you only get to use NAVSTAR. If that is the case then you don't get to use GPS approaches in EASA held teritory. In other words, if you don't pay for Galileo then not only can you not use it commercially, but you are limited to ADF and VOR (where they haven't been switched off).
Effectively, if you don't subscribe you can't run a viable commercial operation.
On the plus side, imagine how straight forward a utilitity (personal or otherwise) trip would be with a guarenteed levels of service GPS system. Plus the knowledge that you follow a GPS approach at the other end. Every airfield could have a non-precision approach without having to maintain and power transmiters. I think it would be fab.
However, for me bimbles, I'll stick with the Vagabond for forseeable future
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HWD
I agree with your assessment but
"pay to use Galileo will ensure levels of service, which is arguably necessary for commercial certification"
is straight out of the Galileo PR In reality, the only guarantee of anything whatsoever in this world is the extent to which somebody wants it to be available, and nothing is more "wanted" than Navstar. Galileo is guaranteed to be a white elephant for a time; the only question is how long for.
I expect Galileo will be authorised for GPS approaches only in its "pay per view" mode but who cares? Navstar is about 10x more accurate that is needed for en-route. And we all have to carry VOR/DME/ADF/ILS anyway.
Here in the UK, the CAA wants so much money for approving instrument approaches, and this together with their insistence on full ATC is preventing loads of airfields having GPS approaches. Nobody wants to spend the money, for the tiny extra traffic. In the meantime, commercial ops working out of such airfields get themselves a private unpublished IAP based on a nearby navaid....
I agree with your assessment but
"pay to use Galileo will ensure levels of service, which is arguably necessary for commercial certification"
is straight out of the Galileo PR
In reality, the only guarantee of anything whatsoever in this world is the extent to which somebody wants it to be available, and nothing is more "wanted" than Navstar. Galileo is guaranteed to be a white elephant for a time; the only question is how long for.I expect Galileo will be authorised for GPS approaches only in its "pay per view" mode but who cares? Navstar is about 10x more accurate that is needed for en-route. And we all have to carry VOR/DME/ADF/ILS anyway.
Here in the UK, the CAA wants so much money for approving instrument approaches, and this together with their insistence on full ATC is preventing loads of airfields having GPS approaches. Nobody wants to spend the money, for the tiny extra traffic. In the meantime, commercial ops working out of such airfields get themselves a private unpublished IAP based on a nearby navaid....