The way the airline industry would look at this would be to use the SID as loaded into the RNAV and back it up with raw data.
It is the most accurate way of flying, the GPS you have fitted is classed as RNAV ( even in Luddite Europe), you can revert to VOR/DME/ADF if required.
With the Accuracy required by airport noise abatement procedures it is now getting to the point that SID’s & STAR’s can’t be flown accurately enough using VOR/ADF so RNAV is the order of the day. I doubt if an Airbus A320 could fly the above SID without using the RNAV and leave the crew with sufficient capacity to deal with an aircraft technical problem, they would fly it with RNAV and the VOR & ADF hard tuned so they could monitor progress and let the RNAV do the work.
The big question would be is the IR test an exercise in accademic theory or the optimum operation of the aircraft you are flying ? Only your examiner can answer that !
OTOH on a flight test, the examiner might want to see that you are able to fly on raw data.
Yes but then he can just “fail” the GPS, just like any other partial panel exercise. Without the examiner telling me I can’t use the GPS I would definitely set it up.
With the Accuracy required by airport noise abatement procedures it is now getting to the point that SID’s & STAR’s can’t be flown accurately enough using VOR/ADF so RNAV is the order of the day.
Indeed. I once got a rather unpleasant (and unprofessional IMO) questioning on the radio by Zurich departure when I flew a classic SID using classic instruments (my BRNAV approved GPS had this procedure coded completely wrongly, so I couldn’t use it). I was well within VOR tracking limits, but if the VOR providing track is 30nm away…
Without the examiner telling me I can’t use the GPS I would definitely set it up.
I agree, though there can be a fear of GPS usage when having a test done.
This fear may be a particular UK thing; there is a strong ex RAF tradition and an even stronger “elitist” perception around the IR, not helped by a few of the examiners having been a bunch of sadists. The result is that even if the examiner does not actually switch off the GPS, you will worry about even looking at it, in case he fails you for looking at it. I can speak only for myself but I certainly found that fear to be very powerful. It is a bit like the “transfer of responsibility” which happens to many people when there is somebody more experienced in the RHS.
I can’t remember what exactly happened on my initial UK IR test but I would have not allowed the GPS to be turned off; I would have allowed it to be dimmed, only. Otherwise, if things went badly wrong, it would have been extremely embarrassing to do a CAS bust while having an IR test in an N-reg!
I once got a rather unpleasant (and unprofessional IMO) questioning on the radio by Zurich departure
Like when the EDNY controller told me in an extremely arrogant voice that I was flying far too slowly and if it was not for his warning I would have stalled and crashed on the final approach? 
can’t remember what exactly happened on my initial UK IR test but I would have not allowed the GPS to be turned off; I would have allowed it to be dimmed, only
Do you have the freedom to make that choice on a full IR test? When I did IMCr renewals my GNS430 was put into a non-map mode and could only be used for the required frequency selections. There was no point thinking about sticking the iPad on the yoke either! I expect the same for my SEP renewal tomorrow – no GPS allowed. On the other hand when I did a fairly recent FAA BFR the examiner was happy to have whatever electronic equipment I wanted switched on and wasnt bothered by the GNS430, SD and NataAware configuration :-)
I actually had a really nice examiner but it was established before the test that GPS would be allowed only for the enroute sections.
Those were the rules at the time – no doubt they have changed a bit since.
I am pretty sure I would never allow anybody to turn off my GPS, under any circumstances whatsoever. It’s just stupid to do that. Dimming the screen is enough.
IR revalidations are completely different. You need to hand-fly the ILS (which I think is reasonable, since an ILS is the ultimate lifesaver, which is also why my handheld radio does ILS) but the rest is pretty well as you would fly for real.
Obviously DME and ADF need to be identified, but does everyone agree that the ident provided automatically by the Garmin kit is sufficient for VOR and ILS?
Also, please could someone tell me how to switch off both G1000 PFDs (ie the PFD and the button backing the PFD up onto the MFD) in order to do partial panel? I have resorted to paper and Blu-tack, but there must be a better way!
Obviously DME and ADF need to be identified, but does everyone agree that the ident provided automatically by the Garmin kit is sufficient for VOR and ILS?
Are these IDs, in fact, automatically generated from the ID signal? My G1000 manual doesn’t say if the ID is picked up from the database or generated from the received ID signal.
They are IDd from the signal. Only the breaker can turn them off. You can dim them.
My examiner went into the menu, pressed a button about 1000 times and dimmed the PFD to nothing. I was too busy to notice the details…
Funnily with my G1000 installation you have 2 pfds but no backup nav instruments. You have an AI, altimeter, magnetic compass and ASI but that is it. So how do you do partial panel approaches?
