midlifeflyer

I’m always worried about a powerful magnet near the panel. Is that not really a concern?

I've seen that as well. In one, there was a checkride failure in which, after intercepting a VOR radial, the next task was a vectored ILS. The pilot blew thought the localizer. Twice before the DPE called it quits. You probably can guess exactly what happened. But while I agree it's a standardization issue, I don't think it's UI-related. Rather, I think there's a tendency to teach auto loading and autoswitching as the best way to do it. The result is that the trainee gets complacent and doesn't perform the basic tune and identify task. After all, the system will take care of it, won't it? Worse yet, that complacency gets translated into other tasks, mostly in the form of failure to do two things: Look at what's next laterally and vertically. Determine what needs to be done in order to accomplish that next step from both an aircraft configuration and avionics system standpoint.

To me, the bigger issue is that even those who learned on new avionics have trouble with them. I think I mentioned at some time that the final one on the list - clearing/bypassing the hold-in-lieu when cleared straight in - joined the list when three pilots in a row screwed it up. All three received their instrument ratings with a similar system (the task is the same with whatever you have). One of them also received their CFII in one. That's my favorite instrument training rant these days. The nature of instrument training has always meant a lack of real-world tasks. With VOR and ADF, there was a limited amount of functionality so performing those tasks was at least part to the standard curriculum. But with the new avionics, there's a basic proficiency problem when passing the instrument checkride.

I don’t think a request for priority is necessarily the same as declaring an emergency.

“Emergency” has become a click bait word on YouTube.

I wouldn't compare updating an iOS app with updating panel avionics but I know there have been issues with updating the panel, whether working with cards or wirelessly. Yes, Garmin switched to standard SD cards with the G1000 as early as 2005. The requirements/recommendations changed a bit through the years. At first it had to be "Garmin" branded SD cards but then it changed to the current "open market SDHC cards," although the recommend the ones they'd been rebranding for years - SanDisk. They still require a "Garmin" TSO'd card for Gx0000 units where the navdata card has to remain in the unit during flight, but those are also SanDisk.

The good new is that “proficiency” in this case is more about the set-up process. I see people wondering “what’s wrong” when they fail to place the frequency in active, confirm and identify, change/confirm the VLOC source selection or, after being so used to auto-skewing HSIs, twist the CDI/course needle.

Best one of those I've seen was a local business journal that did a local aviation article that said I owned a jet.

Huh?

No way I’m going around with a damaged airplane.

I’d be careful of that broad statement. The manual hold in OBS mode wont work with Avidyne units. Interceptions, yes, but manual holds, no. Avidyne OBS mode does not suspend automatic sequencing.

I think there’s a little “where and how do you expect to fly IFR?” in the answer to your question. Already mentioned is the potential need for an ILS in case of a GPS failure. Same for VOR enroute capability (I don’t put VOR or LOC approaches in the same category since too many of the remaining ones in many areas also require DME.) A third reason to retain VOR capability is, there are some tasks that are simply easier and more efficient with VOR than with GPS. I’ve seen pilots screw up things as simple as intercepting a radial inbound (outbound is more difficult). One would hope that a GPS only pilot will have learned how to do them, but instrument training, with its emphasis on local approach procedures, tends to be deficient in that area. If none of those reasons apply to you, I don’t see a problem with having only GPS IFR navigation capability.

Whew! Thanks for explaining. I’m glad I misunderstood your comment and that it was about stages of training and not, “with an AP I feel I’m not behind, but without one I feel Iam.”

"Letting go" is actually a big deal. It takes advantage of the airplane's inherent stability. I think all of us have a tendency to unconsciously pressure the controls when we do something else (I do a left climb). When we look back, we are off course, off altitude, or both. When I teach this, I talk in terms of "guarding" the controls rather than letting go entirely - keeping your had around the control without touching it. Usual reaction to my suggestion is, "but the airplane will go all over the place." My response, "Not as badly as when you do it." or "But it gained 50'!" "When you held the controls it gained 150'"

I don’t know what you intended, but as a fellow 70+ I find the juxtaposition of those two statement very concerning.