mh wrote:
If you can’t fly without, there might really be a point about claims of deteriorating skill and adverse safety effects of new technology, that I thought were just myths…
I said will, not can 
Of course, without doubt the old navigation skills, flying using compass, paper map and a clock will indeed deteriorate when we never use them. But so what? It’s like saying a person with a diesel Diamond somehow is a safety risk because he has forgotten how to operate a “real” engine.
No it’s not. Non-GPS navigational skills are a reasonable backup for an easy to anticipate failure.
Managing engines of different types are differences between aircraft types or models.
Thread drift I know.
Well, everywhere is someone else’s backyard and non gps navigation works there like it does in our backyard (which can be as far as 350 NM in our aero clubs flight school, depending on the student). We use a mixture of DR, pilotage, VORs, ADF, and bearings by a ground station (FIS, ATC or VDF) in addition to the GPS.
I teach never to rely on just one navigation method, unless really necessary. Most pilots use GPS and pilotage, backed up by VORs and the ADF when there is a NDB on course accidentally. VORs are great to identify waypoints or reporting points or take times…
mh wrote:
We use a mixture of DR, pilotage, VORs, ADF, and bearings by a ground station (FIS, ATC or VDF) in addition to the GPS.
what does the term “pilotage” mean?
Pilotage is matching the map to what you see out of the aircraft’s window. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilotage
mh wrote:
Pilotage is matching the map to what you see out of the aircraft’s window. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilotage
thanks, i learned something.
that lead me to what google says for “etymology pilot”, we’re all rudders!:
