Peter wrote:
some use a GPS (not allowed)
This is a bit strange. Saw a program about the brain yesterday, and navigation is one of those things that is hardwired into the brain, it’s one skill we are exceptionally good at by default. So why is it so hard for people nowadays? The whole idea of it is to get the map into your head, I guess this isn’t teached? Too much time used calculating useless magnetic variations and wind corrections? Well, off topic, but strange nonetheless.
LeSving wrote:
So why is it so hard for people nowadays?
Basic skills our ancestors were good at simply disappeared when help arrived to make them obsolete.
Today you get
- folks who can type at 100 words and 500 characters per minute but can’t write a hand written sentence.
- pilots who know all there is to know about flight time limits, law, medical, electronics and still will not reckognize a stall or unusal attitude and crash (AF447)
- people who can not find their homeaddress when the car GPS fails.
- People who will not even start from home without the car navigation system.
- can not calculate the price of two items at a shopping market without a hand held calculator.
I’d think that basic skills vanish with non use. Navigation is no exception, it’s everything. People who have a 12 hour a day a$$gluedtochair job will find it difficult to walk in the evening, people who don’t work out will be out of breath walking to the letter box, people who grow up in this internet is everywhere generation will not know how to use or much less read a book.
But having said all that, a student pilot not capable of doing their nav flights by watching out of the window and the map are seriously lacking. As much as that lady who drove from Holland to Croatia after entering the wrong city name in her personal navigation device and never questioned it for the 3 days it took her to get there. Or the guy driving his SUV into the Danube in Vienna because the Lady told him to… “Turn left at the circle” and he did…
Peter wrote:
It was easy when I did mine in 2000:vis must be 10k+ (9k was not allowed for pre-PPL solo, or for most dual training for that matter)
the QXC route is 150nm and chosen so you cannot possibly get lost (one student did disappear; they phoned every airfield in the SE and eventually found her in Headcorn)
the airfields are pre-warned so they expect you and get traffic out of the way
the more enterprising student would fly the route on FS2000 first
some use a GPS (not allowed)
I am more and more amazed at the UK training scene. I assume that you mean this is representative?
It was when I was there.
I also recall one guy in my group who waited 6 months – right through the summer and bits around that – because the vis was below 10k. It was probably 6-7k a lot of the time, and they would not allow any solo flying. Obviously he was so non-current by the end that he had to re-do a lot of hours. Like nearly all from the group, he dropped out.
Also my PPL skills test was cancelled in 6k vis. I protested (not too loudly) because it was a dead easy route, along the coast. It is impossible to get lost going along the coast.
It was nonsense like that which made me start to write up my trips
Much later I did the VFR in Europe presentation ( here ) but I never did it again because it was obvious flying schools would boycott it, and one has to be careful with airfield politics if based there.
But the training business here for the most part doesn’t give a damn because it has no mandate to produce pilots. The business mandate is to sell hours in a plane, preferably with a RHS FI.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
I’d think that basic skills vanish with non use.
I agree. Use it or lose it.
And I find that the less experienced you are, the quicker you loose the skill.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
I’d think that basic skills vanish with non use
Yes, but still, creating mental maps of the reality around us is what we do all the time, and it stems from being able to navigate in the nature and social skills. It’s not a skill you can lose, unless you are brain dead. I guess practicing in the particular setting is very important.
I think, in the context of this thread (which is producing pilots who can actually go to places rather than chuck it away ASAP) the last thing you would want to be teaching is dead reckoning with a map and a stopwatch. Most of the clients would politely smile and walk out, back into the 21st century – just like they do at the moment.
Just my opinion, you understand 
Peter wrote:
the last thing you would want to be teaching is dead reckoning with a map and a stopwatch
That is what the “school version” of navigation is. I have never used a stop watch when flying, only competition pilots use that in competition navigation (which lots of people in this century engage in btw There are big international competitions in this stuff) IMO that too is simply a mechanized or technical form of navigation, very basic form of technical navigation, but no different than IFR in principle.
I flew the G1000 C-172 a few times last summer. Use 15 minutes to go through the check list. Take off – put on autopilot for 1 hour – land. Am I going to pay £100+ per hour to do that – no way. If I could combine it with work, then maybe, but I can’t, not on a regular basis.
What I am getting at is that all technicalities are redundant in navigation. The only thing needed is to study the map, the brain will do the rest. With some practice, anyone should be able to outperform SD. Obviously this does not work when there is no ground to be seen, and it is more difficult in low viz situations. It’s about freedom, go wherever you want with no technical artifacts. It’s supposed to be fun, I pay to fly, I don’t get paid. Should I get lost, just simply switch on the screen and SD puts me back on track.
With hour building, it’s stuff like this you can do. Really basic stuff that trains your brain to become a better pilot. Muscle and brain memory is like cycling, you get rusty, but you never forget it and practice makes you better.
I don’t disagree about flying in nice VMC and over nice obvious feature-rich terrain (say Norway, not N France), but one of the issues with churning out pilots who cannot go into or above clouds is that they basically cannot go anywhere. They can engage in flight as a purely “sporting” activity, e.g. popping up for a quick local. That certainly has a place (especially aeros) but apart from these specific uses it is no good for even pleasure trips. The cancellation rate is just too great.
So to do flight training properly one would need to combine VFR and IFR and roll it up into one course.
And probably have a separate pipeline for the “sports” activities like aeros.
What is being trained today is a license (the PPL) which pretends to be something useful but isn’t. It’s no good for aeros (they need a lot more training) and it’s no good for going somewhere (likewise).
I know people are told a license is a license to learn (one of many old cliches in GA) but I don’t think it sinks into their conscious mind.
