[Matt]

2D

Yeah, I know where the NDBs are.

This thread originally suggested a new IMC-like rating for Europe. The point I've been hinting at is that the IR is still (rightly) based on radio aids, cockpit instrumentation and airspace structures that were developed decades ago. In all fields, technical change tends to make things safer, easier and more accessible for people of less than superhuman ability. Since we're on the cusp of massive technical change in GA, it makes sense to address the licensing and technical issues together in a harmonised way.

In summary:

The airspace divisions governing IR vs. IMC will disappear.

Easily interpreted navigation systems which integrate accurate inputs (probably GPS and VOR) will become commonplace.

Integrated presentation of aircraft attitude, speed, navigation and traffic information will appear. We could certainly have a synthetic topographical 'outside view' in front of us entirely derived from 3D world data.

Complex engine management will become a thing of the past.

I'm not really interested in arguing endlessly about the superiority of the IR. I am very interested in anything that would open up GA as a practical means of transport for a reasonable proportion of the population, and keep the activity alive for all of us.

[TonyL]

2d
The total cost to get a IMC rating is in the region of

[2Donkeys]

If you are required to do the "full" course. You could easily be parted with up to

[Steve Morley]

With the amount of jobs flying civilian aircraft none of it is smart money:-)
I admit to wasting my hard earned on a frivolous hobby. Beats coke for a high!

[TonyL]

prefer pepsi max

[Julian Scarfe]

"If what you are saying is that as an IMC holder, you are not confident flying NDB procedures, then you are not alone."

I would think that "confidence flying NDB procedures" would be a good definition of "overconfidence".

"But that is not a reason to remove it from a syllabus (IMC or IR). It should go when it is no longer relevant - and that point hasn't been reached yet by a long chalk with NDBs- in the real world."

Has it not? The US has had GPS-overlay approaches for something like 10 years. I know of no accidents in the US related to GPS-overlays in the absence of an ADF, and none of the US pilots I know would dream of fitting or replacing an ADF in their aircraft.

I think the time for NDBs to disappear off the face of the earth is approaching rapidly. Of course you're right in that until the CAA gets its act together and approves GPS approaches en masse, we'll still have to suffer the eccentricities of the ADF in training courses. But I guess I'm drifting off topic...

[2Donkeys]

Your last para is exactly my point. Too early for us to avoid suffering the joys of ADF and NDB, whilst we will still be called to use them on a regular basis.

2D

[Ian]

Hi folks - well, hell of a thread, thanks to all the contributors. I feel it has been (still is) a really valuable discussion. If this airways flight/sim arm wrestling contest does actually take place, it would be good to meet you folks for the day and chat through my original post over a coffee/beer. Although, I have absolutely no intention of being a competitor (!) as I originally mentioned, I am relatively new to this game - but not new to driving change! Perhaps this could be the first meeting of an august working party as both sets of views are represented........hey, come back - jeez, now where did everybody go....! Also, maybe if the flight does not happen, Ian S et al would consider condensing the thread and key points into an article re: the IMC/IR conumdrum and relative merits uses. Cheers!