Thanks for the exciting story. I'm really glad it worked out OK.

--

Scott

I thought I would share my most recent IFR flight so that some of you can
learn from my mistakes. This was quite a humbling experience.

I took off in my Cardinal RG with my girlfriend from N14 in NJ for a flight
to Reading (RDG) in PA. The weather was reported as 2600 overcast, 7 miles
vis, wind 040 at 5. I filed IFR and received the simple clearance: RBV,
ARD, PTW, direct, maintain 2000, expect 4000 5 mins after departure.

I took off and climbed to 2000, headed for RBV and contacted departure.
They told me to go up to 4000 and go direct ARD. That would be the end of
what started as a routine flight. At about 3800' I started looking for ice.
By the time I got to 4000 I had about an 1/8 of an inch. I contacted ATC
and explained the problem and they descended me to 3000. By time I got to
3000 I had a 1/4 inch and it appeared that it was no longer accumulating
rapidly. I couldn't determine if it was continuing, but at a much slower
pace. My px was getting nervous. The windscreen was frozen over. That
made me nervous. I put the heat on and put the defroster on and within a
minute I had a baseball-sized hole to look out of.

I set the ap and asked atc if I could go lower. Answer, "no". I requested
to return to N14. They gave me a couple of turns for traffic and told me to
stand by. Then a series of problems started.
1) My mind was focused on the ice.
2) my mind was focused on my nervous px.
3) I'm giving instructions to her to get the approach charts for N14 out of
my flight bag and she's having problems finding it and I'm getting
frustrated
4)atc now changes my clearance to return to N14 and tells me to intercept
the RBV 232 radial and descend to 2000

As I am setting the freq. I notice that the airspeed in 55 mph!! I
instinctively pitch down and this scares my px and she lets out a scream. I
check the other gauges and when I realize I am not in a climb and the power
is set right I suddenly realize the pitot is just frozen. I turn on the
pitot heat. DUH!! I start to ID the nav aid and spin the OBS to 232 when I
hear a loud sound of air rushing!! Getting louder!! I feel some G forces!!
I look at the AI and I am in a descending, right wing low attitude!! I pick
up the wing and notice that the ap cut out! Hmmm or did I forget to turn it
back on?! On my plane there is no audible warning if the ap is turned off
(is that required? If not it should be!)
5) atc comes on and wants to know why I'm not turning to intercept the 232
radial. I re-set the ap and advise that I am turning now. This frustrates
me more and I'm starting to sweat and wonder what I got myself into.
6) I'm now a bit disoriented now and I look down at my GPS and somehow it
got zoomed all the way out to the continental US!! WTF!! I zoom back in
cursing that I don't need this or any more distractions. ATC clears me for
the vor-a approach but had me maintain 2000 until PONDE (the FAF) and gives
me a modified missed for some reason. This adds more work. I set the
approach into the GPS.

The pitot finally cleared and at 2000 I was not picking up any more ice.
AAMOF the ice began melting off the windshield and when I finally got to the
FAF I blew a sigh of relief and descended out of the clouds at 1800'.

When I landed and watched all that ice sliding off my wings, tail, cowling,
windscreen and thought about the unusual attitude I allowed myself to get
in, I vowed that I will learn many lessons from this flight.

Most of all I should have realized that the freezing level was right inside
my assigned altitude and I should have never launched. Second, needed to
add pitot heat to my IFR Before Takeoff checklist section, to have all the
approaches out for the DEPARTURE ap, as well as, the destination in case you
find yourself coming back sooner than planned. And lastly, I called my A&P
and said I had to have an alarm on the ap disconnect.

I really found myself with my shorts around my ankles. I hope you too can
learn something from my mistakes, idoticy and short-sightedness.

Kobra

That's typically how it happens... a series of fubars adding up to
a statistic. I'm glad you came out smelling like a rose on that one,
give yourself credit for the skills that pulled it out. I'm sure
you're an even better pilot now that you have this one behind you.

Thanks for the heads up.

Kobra wrote:

> I thought I would share my most recent IFR flight so that some of you can
> learn from my mistakes. This was quite a humbling experience.
>
> I took off in my Cardinal RG with my girlfriend from N14 in NJ for a flight
> to Reading (RDG) in PA. The weather was reported as 2600 overcast, 7 miles
> vis, wind 040 at 5. I filed IFR and received the simple clearance: RBV,
> ARD, PTW, direct, maintain 2000, expect 4000 5 mins after departure.
>
> I took off and climbed to 2000, headed for RBV and contacted departure.
> They told me to go up to 4000 and go direct ARD. That would be the end of
> what started as a routine flight. At about 3800' I started looking for ice.
> By the time I got to 4000 I had about an 1/8 of an inch. I contacted ATC
> and explained the problem and they descended me to 3000. By time I got to
> 3000 I had a 1/4 inch and it appeared that it was no longer accumulating
> rapidly. I couldn't determine if it was continuing, but at a much slower
> pace. My px was getting nervous. The windscreen was frozen over. That
> made me nervous. I put the heat on and put the defroster on and within a
> minute I had a baseball-sized hole to look out of.
>
> I set the ap and asked atc if I could go lower. Answer, "no". I requested
> to return to N14. They gave me a couple of turns for traffic and told me to
> stand by. Then a series of problems started.
> 1) My mind was focused on the ice.
> 2) my mind was focused on my nervous px.
> 3) I'm giving instructions to her to get the approach charts for N14 out of
> my flight bag and she's having problems finding it and I'm getting
> frustrated
> 4)atc now changes my clearance to return to N14 and tells me to intercept
> the RBV 232 radial and descend to 2000
>
> As I am setting the freq. I notice that the airspeed in 55 mph!! I
> instinctively pitch down and this scares my px and she lets out a scream. I
> check the other gauges and when I realize I am not in a climb and the power
> is set right I suddenly realize the pitot is just frozen. I turn on the
> pitot heat. DUH!! I start to ID the nav aid and spin the OBS to 232 when I
> hear a loud sound of air rushing!! Getting louder!! I feel some G forces!!
> I look at the AI and I am in a descending, right wing low attitude!! I pick
> up the wing and notice that the ap cut out! Hmmm or did I forget to turn it
> back on?! On my plane there is no audible warning if the ap is turned off
> (is that required? If not it should be!)
> 5) atc comes on and wants to know why I'm not turning to intercept the 232
> radial. I re-set the ap and advise that I am turning now. This frustrates
> me more and I'm starting to sweat and wonder what I got myself into.

This would be a good point to confess that you have a high workload and
ask ATC for a vector in the direction they want you to go. I've done
this once or twice and they can usually give you a vector with almost no
extra work for them and it saves you time and stress at a critical point
in your flight. Don't be afraid to use ATC, they are willing to help if
you let them know you need them.


> 6) I'm now a bit disoriented now and I look down at my GPS and somehow it
> got zoomed all the way out to the continental US!! WTF!! I zoom back in
> cursing that I don't need this or any more distractions. ATC clears me for
> the vor-a approach but had me maintain 2000 until PONDE (the FAF) and gives
> me a modified missed for some reason. This adds more work. I set the
> approach into the GPS.
>
> The pitot finally cleared and at 2000 I was not picking up any more ice.
> AAMOF the ice began melting off the windshield and when I finally got to the
> FAF I blew a sigh of relief and descended out of the clouds at 1800'.
>
> When I landed and watched all that ice sliding off my wings, tail, cowling,
> windscreen and thought about the unusual attitude I allowed myself to get
> in, I vowed that I will learn many lessons from this flight.
>
> Most of all I should have realized that the freezing level was right inside
> my assigned altitude and I should have never launched. Second, needed to
> add pitot heat to my IFR Before Takeoff checklist section, to have all the
> approaches out for the DEPARTURE ap, as well as, the destination in case you
> find yourself coming back sooner than planned. And lastly, I called my A&P
> and said I had to have an alarm on the ap disconnect.

I think you've learned some great lessons here and I think most all of
us have had at least one flight like this. The only lesson I'd add is
the one I mentioned above.

You've given the one reason I don't use an AP much when flying IFR,
however, I understand why many people like and use them.

Matt

Thanks for the post... I'm sure that you learned from your mistakes and
lived to tell us about them... You probably won't get your girlfriend up
any time soon though... I had an incident on New Years day while flying
in IMC and my vacuum pump flaked out so I can relate to the
pucker-factor (although your incident sounds more "puckery" than mine).
I was just in IMC on Saturday and we picked up light icing on the
climb. I knew that the tops were below our assigned altitude and once we
were in the clear the ice melted off. Could you have climbed and got on
top? Did you know where the tops were? What about the winds/temps aloft,
did you know those too? Not to sound critical but I am just curious.

One thing I did once I was in trouble was confess to ATC that I
"required assistance". This helped me in a couple of ways. First and
most important was that the were great at giving me preferential
treatment all the way through turning me around and then getting me
established on the ILS I was making. Second and important too (I thought
anyway) was that I knew that I had another set of eyes on me. That gave
me a good feeling. My hats are off to the ATC folks who do their job
most excellently!!

Note to self: ALWAYS have a instrument approach from your depature
airport not only available but set up in the standby NAV and COM.

Again great job keeping your composure!!! You became a better pilot
because of it...

Jon Kraus
PP-ASEL-IA
Student Money Owner


Kobra wrote:

> I thought I would share my most recent IFR flight so that some of you can
> learn from my mistakes. This was quite a humbling experience.
>
> I took off in my Cardinal RG with my girlfriend from N14 in NJ for a flight
> to Reading (RDG) in PA. The weather was reported as 2600 overcast, 7 miles
> vis, wind 040 at 5. I filed IFR and received the simple clearance: RBV,
> ARD, PTW, direct, maintain 2000, expect 4000 5 mins after departure.
>
> I took off and climbed to 2000, headed for RBV and contacted departure.
> They told me to go up to 4000 and go direct ARD. That would be the end of
> what started as a routine flight. At about 3800' I started looking for ice.
> By the time I got to 4000 I had about an 1/8 of an inch. I contacted ATC
> and explained the problem and they descended me to 3000. By time I got to
> 3000 I had a 1/4 inch and it appeared that it was no longer accumulating
> rapidly. I couldn't determine if it was continuing, but at a much slower
> pace. My px was getting nervous. The windscreen was frozen over. That
> made me nervous. I put the heat on and put the defroster on and within a
> minute I had a baseball-sized hole to look out of.
>
> I set the ap and asked atc if I could go lower. Answer, "no". I requested
> to return to N14. They gave me a couple of turns for traffic and told me to
> stand by. Then a series of problems started.
> 1) My mind was focused on the ice.
> 2) my mind was focused on my nervous px.
> 3) I'm giving instructions to her to get the approach charts for N14 out of
> my flight bag and she's having problems finding it and I'm getting
> frustrated
> 4)atc now changes my clearance to return to N14 and tells me to intercept
> the RBV 232 radial and descend to 2000
>
> As I am setting the freq. I notice that the airspeed in 55 mph!! I
> instinctively pitch down and this scares my px and she lets out a scream. I
> check the other gauges and when I realize I am not in a climb and the power
> is set right I suddenly realize the pitot is just frozen. I turn on the
> pitot heat. DUH!! I start to ID the nav aid and spin the OBS to 232 when I
> hear a loud sound of air rushing!! Getting louder!! I feel some G forces!!
> I look at the AI and I am in a descending, right wing low attitude!! I pick
> up the wing and notice that the ap cut out! Hmmm or did I forget to turn it
> back on?! On my plane there is no audible warning if the ap is turned off
> (is that required? If not it should be!)
> 5) atc comes on and wants to know why I'm not turning to intercept the 232
> radial. I re-set the ap and advise that I am turning now. This frustrates
> me more and I'm starting to sweat and wonder what I got myself into.
> 6) I'm now a bit disoriented now and I look down at my GPS and somehow it
> got zoomed all the way out to the continental US!! WTF!! I zoom back in
> cursing that I don't need this or any more distractions. ATC clears me for
> the vor-a approach but had me maintain 2000 until PONDE (the FAF) and gives
> me a modified missed for some reason. This adds more work. I set the
> approach into the GPS.
>
> The pitot finally cleared and at 2000 I was not picking up any more ice.
> AAMOF the ice began melting off the windshield and when I finally got to the
> FAF I blew a sigh of relief and descended out of the clouds at 1800'.
>
> When I landed and watched all that ice sliding off my wings, tail, cowling,
> windscreen and thought about the unusual attitude I allowed myself to get
> in, I vowed that I will learn many lessons from this flight.
>
> Most of all I should have realized that the freezing level was right inside
> my assigned altitude and I should have never launched. Second, needed to
> add pitot heat to my IFR Before Takeoff checklist section, to have all the
> approaches out for the DEPARTURE ap, as well as, the destination in case you
> find yourself coming back sooner than planned. And lastly, I called my A&P
> and said I had to have an alarm on the ap disconnect.
>
> I really found myself with my shorts around my ankles. I hope you too can
> learn something from my mistakes, idoticy and short-sightedness.
>
> Kobra
>
>
>

Thanks for the post... I'm sure that you learned from your mistakes and
I'm glad you lived to tell us about them... You probably won't get your
girlfriend up any time soon though... I had an incident on New Years day
while flying in IMC and my vacuum pump flaked out so I can relate to the
pucker-factor (although your incident sounds more "puckery" than mine).

I was just in IMC on Saturday and we picked up light icing on the
climb. I knew that the tops were below our assigned altitude and once we
were in the clear the ice melted off. Could you have climbed and got on
top? Did you know where the tops were? What about the winds/temps aloft,
did you know those too? Not to sound critical but I am just curious.

One thing I did once I was in trouble was confess to ATC that I
"required assistance". This helped me in a couple of ways. First and
most important was that the were great at giving me preferential
treatment all the way through turning me around and then getting me
established on the ILS I was making. Second and important too (I thought
anyway) was that I knew that I had another set of eyes on me. That gave
me a good feeling. My hats are off to the ATC folks who do their job
most excellently!!

Note to self: ALWAYS have a instrument approach from your depature
airport not only available but set up in the standby NAV and COM.

Again great job keeping your composure!!! You became a better pilot
because of it...

Jon Kraus
PP-ASEL-IA
Student Money Owner


Kobra wrote:

> I thought I would share my most recent IFR flight so that some of you can
> learn from my mistakes. This was quite a humbling experience.
>
> I took off in my Cardinal RG with my girlfriend from N14 in NJ for a flight
> to Reading (RDG) in PA. The weather was reported as 2600 overcast, 7 miles
> vis, wind 040 at 5. I filed IFR and received the simple clearance: RBV,
> ARD, PTW, direct, maintain 2000, expect 4000 5 mins after departure.
>
> I took off and climbed to 2000, headed for RBV and contacted departure.
> They told me to go up to 4000 and go direct ARD. That would be the end of
> what started as a routine flight. At about 3800' I started looking for ice.
> By the time I got to 4000 I had about an 1/8 of an inch. I contacted ATC
> and explained the problem and they descended me to 3000. By time I got to
> 3000 I had a 1/4 inch and it appeared that it was no longer accumulating
> rapidly. I couldn't determine if it was continuing, but at a much slower
> pace. My px was getting nervous. The windscreen was frozen over. That
> made me nervous. I put the heat on and put the defroster on and within a
> minute I had a baseball-sized hole to look out of.
>
> I set the ap and asked atc if I could go lower. Answer, "no". I requested
> to return to N14. They gave me a couple of turns for traffic and told me to
> stand by. Then a series of problems started.
> 1) My mind was focused on the ice.
> 2) my mind was focused on my nervous px.
> 3) I'm giving instructions to her to get the approach charts for N14 out of
> my flight bag and she's having problems finding it and I'm getting
> frustrated
> 4)atc now changes my clearance to return to N14 and tells me to intercept
> the RBV 232 radial and descend to 2000
>
> As I am setting the freq. I notice that the airspeed in 55 mph!! I
> instinctively pitch down and this scares my px and she lets out a scream. I
> check the other gauges and when I realize I am not in a climb and the power
> is set right I suddenly realize the pitot is just frozen. I turn on the
> pitot heat. DUH!! I start to ID the nav aid and spin the OBS to 232 when I
> hear a loud sound of air rushing!! Getting louder!! I feel some G forces!!
> I look at the AI and I am in a descending, right wing low attitude!! I pick
> up the wing and notice that the ap cut out! Hmmm or did I forget to turn it
> back on?! On my plane there is no audible warning if the ap is turned off
> (is that required? If not it should be!)
> 5) atc comes on and wants to know why I'm not turning to intercept the 232
> radial. I re-set the ap and advise that I am turning now. This frustrates
> me more and I'm starting to sweat and wonder what I got myself into.
> 6) I'm now a bit disoriented now and I look down at my GPS and somehow it
> got zoomed all the way out to the continental US!! WTF!! I zoom back in
> cursing that I don't need this or any more distractions. ATC clears me for
> the vor-a approach but had me maintain 2000 until PONDE (the FAF) and gives
> me a modified missed for some reason. This adds more work. I set the
> approach into the GPS.
>
> The pitot finally cleared and at 2000 I was not picking up any more ice.
> AAMOF the ice began melting off the windshield and when I finally got to the
> FAF I blew a sigh of relief and descended out of the clouds at 1800'.
>
> When I landed and watched all that ice sliding off my wings, tail, cowling,
> windscreen and thought about the unusual attitude I allowed myself to get
> in, I vowed that I will learn many lessons from this flight.
>
> Most of all I should have realized that the freezing level was right inside
> my assigned altitude and I should have never launched. Second, needed to
> add pitot heat to my IFR Before Takeoff checklist section, to have all the
> approaches out for the DEPARTURE ap, as well as, the destination in case you
> find yourself coming back sooner than planned. And lastly, I called my A&P
> and said I had to have an alarm on the ap disconnect.
>
> I really found myself with my shorts around my ankles. I hope you too can
> learn something from my mistakes, idoticy and short-sightedness.
>
> Kobra
>
>
>

In article >,
"Kobra" > wrote:

> I thought I would share my most recent IFR flight so that some of you can
> learn from my mistakes. This was quite a humbling experience.

Did you advise ATC that you were in icing? and that icing was the reason
for the return?

As another poster noted asking for vectors will lighten the workload.
Good job sorting things out.

--
Dale L. Falk

There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing
as simply messing around with airplanes.

http://home.gci.net/~sncdfalk/flying.html

Kobra ) wrote:

> I thought I would share my most recent IFR flight so that some of you can
> learn from my mistakes. This was quite a humbling experience.

I am echoing the others by also thanking you for having the courage to
post this experience. These types of anecdotes are very valuable to all
of us low-timers.

Now that you are safely on the ground, I have to admit that I let out a
little laugh at your description of the GPS being zoomed all the way out
at the most inopportune moment.

--
Peter

Thanks for sharing your tale.

I'll raise another vote for asking for vectors. Also, in a high workload
environment, prioritization of tasks is key. In other words, ID'ing the
navaid is a task you can defer until you've got things situated. Keep up
your scan: Keep the wings level, hold your altitude (or rate of
climb/descent) and maintain sufficient airspeed. Take a deep breath, relax,
and listen to your training. Keeping a chart for the departure airport out
is a good idea as well, especially since it contains relevent frequencies,
airport diagram, etc. I hope your girlfriend will overlook that flight and
fly with you again.


"Kobra" > wrote in message
...
> I thought I would share my most recent IFR flight so that some of you can
> learn from my mistakes. This was quite a humbling experience.
>
> I took off in my Cardinal RG with my girlfriend from N14 in NJ for a
flight
> to Reading (RDG) in PA. The weather was reported as 2600 overcast, 7
miles
> vis, wind 040 at 5. I filed IFR and received the simple clearance: RBV,
> ARD, PTW, direct, maintain 2000, expect 4000 5 mins after departure.
>
> I took off and climbed to 2000, headed for RBV and contacted departure.
> They told me to go up to 4000 and go direct ARD. That would be the end of
> what started as a routine flight. At about 3800' I started looking for
ice.
> By the time I got to 4000 I had about an 1/8 of an inch. I contacted ATC
> and explained the problem and they descended me to 3000. By time I got to
> 3000 I had a 1/4 inch and it appeared that it was no longer accumulating
> rapidly. I couldn't determine if it was continuing, but at a much slower
> pace. My px was getting nervous. The windscreen was frozen over. That
> made me nervous. I put the heat on and put the defroster on and within a
> minute I had a baseball-sized hole to look out of.
>
> I set the ap and asked atc if I could go lower. Answer, "no". I
requested
> to return to N14. They gave me a couple of turns for traffic and told me
to
> stand by. Then a series of problems started.
> 1) My mind was focused on the ice.
> 2) my mind was focused on my nervous px.
> 3) I'm giving instructions to her to get the approach charts for N14 out
of
> my flight bag and she's having problems finding it and I'm getting
> frustrated
> 4)atc now changes my clearance to return to N14 and tells me to intercept
> the RBV 232 radial and descend to 2000
>
> As I am setting the freq. I notice that the airspeed in 55 mph!! I
> instinctively pitch down and this scares my px and she lets out a scream.
I
> check the other gauges and when I realize I am not in a climb and the
power
> is set right I suddenly realize the pitot is just frozen. I turn on the
> pitot heat. DUH!! I start to ID the nav aid and spin the OBS to 232 when
I
> hear a loud sound of air rushing!! Getting louder!! I feel some G
forces!!
> I look at the AI and I am in a descending, right wing low attitude!! I
pick
> up the wing and notice that the ap cut out! Hmmm or did I forget to turn
it
> back on?! On my plane there is no audible warning if the ap is turned off
> (is that required? If not it should be!)
> 5) atc comes on and wants to know why I'm not turning to intercept the 232
> radial. I re-set the ap and advise that I am turning now. This frustrates
> me more and I'm starting to sweat and wonder what I got myself into.
> 6) I'm now a bit disoriented now and I look down at my GPS and somehow it
> got zoomed all the way out to the continental US!! WTF!! I zoom back in
> cursing that I don't need this or any more distractions. ATC clears me
for
> the vor-a approach but had me maintain 2000 until PONDE (the FAF) and
gives
> me a modified missed for some reason. This adds more work. I set the
> approach into the GPS.
>
> The pitot finally cleared and at 2000 I was not picking up any more ice.
> AAMOF the ice began melting off the windshield and when I finally got to
the
> FAF I blew a sigh of relief and descended out of the clouds at 1800'.
>
> When I landed and watched all that ice sliding off my wings, tail,
cowling,
> windscreen and thought about the unusual attitude I allowed myself to get
> in, I vowed that I will learn many lessons from this flight.
>
> Most of all I should have realized that the freezing level was right
inside
> my assigned altitude and I should have never launched. Second, needed to
> add pitot heat to my IFR Before Takeoff checklist section, to have all the
> approaches out for the DEPARTURE ap, as well as, the destination in case
you
> find yourself coming back sooner than planned. And lastly, I called my
A&P
> and said I had to have an alarm on the ap disconnect.
>
> I really found myself with my shorts around my ankles. I hope you too can
> learn something from my mistakes, idoticy and short-sightedness.
>
> Kobra
>
>
>

Thanks for the report, hopefully it will help others avoid the same or
similar circumstances. I'm glad everything worked out for you. Here are a
couple of links to sites that I have found interesting during the past
couple of weeks.

http://aircrafticing.grc.nasa.gov/courses.html

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2005/050103ice.html

The AOPA site has a link to a 45 minute video that can be downloaded, it's
also available from Sportys. It's been recommended highly in the news
groups by Bob Gardner and other CFIIs and is absolutely one of the best
icing video's that I have seen. Definitely worth a look. Lots of emphasis
on preflight planning for possible "outs" if you should encounter icing.
Can/should you climb? descend? continue? divert? delare an emergency?

Jim

In article >, "Kobra"
> writes:

>I thought I would share my most recent IFR flight so that some of you can
>learn from my mistakes. This was quite a humbling experience.
>

Thanks for sharing so we all will be reminded and learn. It's not easy to
share a story when we are not the hero. My last incounter with ice in my
Archer was four years ago in a decent to land at a gas stop on the way home.
We got a motel and had a clear flight home the next day.

Chuck

Thanks for the valuable narrative. Glad it had a happy ending.

--Gary

Brad Zeigler wrote:

> Thanks for sharing your tale.
>
> I'll raise another vote for asking for vectors. Also, in a high workload
> environment, prioritization of tasks is key. In other words, ID'ing the
> navaid is a task you can defer until you've got things situated. Keep up
> your scan: Keep the wings level, hold your altitude (or rate of
> climb/descent) and maintain sufficient airspeed. Take a deep breath, relax,
> and listen to your training. Keeping a chart for the departure airport out
> is a good idea as well, especially since it contains relevent frequencies,
> airport diagram, etc. I hope your girlfriend will overlook that flight and
> fly with you again.

Yes, I concur with keeping out the charts. I always put the approach in
use at my departure airport when departing IFR (whether it is IMC or
not) into the yoke clip. I don't remove it until well underway. I also
flag the destination and alternate airport approach plates in my binder
using Post-Its. That way I can find at least three airports fairly
quickly in a pinch. It is hard for a non-pilot who hasn't done it
before to find approach plates for you. It is even hard for me
sometimes given that I think of flying into Grand Canyon airport (N38)
and not always Wellsboro, which is where the approach plates are
indexed. I usually use a red flag for the departure airport plate
location (in addition to the plate on my yoke), a yellow flag for my
alternate and green for my destination. It is pretty easy for a
passenger to find the "red" approach plate section in the binder and
then they just have to find the appropriate plate from that section.


Matt

Again, thx for sharing. Never stop flying the plane!
That lesson still comes thru every time I read of a successful outcome of a
bad or less than perfect situation.

Victor J. (Jim) Osborne, Jr.

Great story, and a valuable insight into how people become statistics.
You've laid out your train of thought for other people to examine, and
this is very useful. A couple of things you should be aware of.

There is NO autopilot for GA use that you can 'count on.' Disconnect
annunciator or not, ALL of them can cause problems up to and including
smooth but fast control deflection to the stops with no annunciation.
An unannounced disengage is a relatively benign failure. You need to
be prepared for the autopilot to do that at any time. Thus you need an
autopilot scan. This is a limited scan that includes only the most
critical instruments, none of which are being used by the autopilot.

For example, if you have an STEC, you need to be monitoring the AI.
The AI will usually be vacuum in such an installation, and the STEC
electric. As long as the AI is showing straight and level flight, no
other scan is necessary while the autopilot flies the plane -
simultaneous AI and A/P failure is extremely unlikely. On the other
hand, if you have an A/P that uses the AI, monitor the TC and
altimeter. Get the idea?

You need to realize than an A/P is only a way for you to take your
hands off the controls and narrow your scan, not a way to stop looking
at the panel - regardless of what sort of annunciators it is equipped
with. Multigyro redundant autopilots are possible, but not in GA. An
autopilot is not a copilot.

Having said that, a disconnect annunciator is not a bad thing to have.
However, I would balance the cost of that against other things that
might give you more bang for the buck, unless money is unlimited.

Second, if you are flying in IMC in subfreezing temperatures, you are
flying in known icing conditions. Period. This isn't legal unles
you're in a very old airplane or a very expensive one, and given your
reaction I know it's not the latter.

This regulation is pretty routinely broken - sort of like speeding -
and I'm not telling you that you shouldn't ever break it - but I am
telling you that you should always have a plan of escape. If you've
picked up some ice, that's not necessarily a sign that you've screwed
up - that can be a calculated risk - but if you've picked up ice by
surprise, that's a sign that you've either not done a proper job of
preflight planning or not understood the weather picture. Usually,
it's the latter since few pilots will ignore the hazard intentionally.

Whenever I plan an IFR flight, I ALWAYS ask for the freezing level.
Unless it's so far above me that I can comfortably remain well above
OROCA or so far underground that it's too dry for any serious icing, it
is a factor. Not necessarily a no-go, but always something to
consider. Can you count on getting below the freezing level if you
need to? Over all your route? How fast? Do you have enough excess
power to climb out of icing conditions? Where are the tops? These are
all questions to ask yourself.

In professional aviation there is the concept of a takeoff alternate.
The idea is this - if you have a problem, where are you going to go?
If your departure is well above mins and there are no other issues,
then you return. What if it is not? What if the only approach will
require you to circle - can you do that with a windshield covered in
ice?

You don't necessarily need to have plates out for your departure
airport, but you DO need to be prepared with a takeoff alternate - be
it your departure airport or something else. Just something to think
about.

Michael

Thanks for all your kind words.

I received an email from a member who asked some questions and I thought I'd
post the questions and my answers:

>Why didn't you notify ATC as soon as you noticed ice building up?

Perhaps my post was not clear, but I didn't notice ice until about 3800' and
when I leveled off at 4000' it was massively clear I was picking up ice at
an alarming rate. I did indeed call up ATC immediately and told them,
"Philly approach, NxxxxG, I'm picking up ice at this altitude. I can't stay
here." They immediately lowered me to 3000'. By the time I got to 3000' I
had 1/4 inch or more. My next thought was, "am I still accumulating ice at
3000'?" The answer was not clear. It appeared that I was not, but maybe I
was slowly. I was looking VERY closely and I could not detect any more ice
build up. BUT...
1) my px was very very nervous as we both just saw a video on ice just two
days eariler. The video scared her and here we are 48 hours later in ice!
2) Even if I wasn't picking any more ice up now, it didn't mean I wouldn't
pick ice up later in the flight.
3) I was headed toward higher terrain and a higher MEA.

That reduced another "out". So after thinking that through I asked if I
could go lower (I really knew the answer). They said, "no, say intentions."
I immediately stated that I wanted to turn back to N14.

Next problem is they dicked around with me for a while before turning me
back and I didn't say anything. This is also when all hell was breaking
loose with the pitot freeze, the unusual attitude, the GPS zoom out, the
"lost" approach chart, the nervous px, the ice, the new clearance, the new
missed, turn to intercept the 232 radial..."radial?, OBS? 232? 232 set on
the bottom? no on the top! bottom? No TOP!, To Flag?, From Flag?, what's my
heading?, what my name...?"

My worst mistake was that I should have "demanded" a lower altitude and
accepted any heading change. I should have said, "No! I need an immediate
decent, I'll take any heading!" My next worst mistake was not admitting
that I was over-whelmed and needed a vector as other posters suggested.

>Did you file a pilot report?

No. Only because I was so busy that I couldn't handle it. Maybe I could
have done that on the ground, but I didn't think of it.

>Were you concerned that you might get a violation?

No. That was the last thing on my mind. I just wanted ATC to get me to an
ice free altitude or in VFR conditions. I remember saying to the controller
that I wanted to decend to VFR and cancel IFR when clear of clouds. But I
didn't get that. I did not want them to clear me for the VOR-A approach and
keep me in icing conditions on the way. I wanted to hear, "...turn left
230, decend at pilots descression to VFR and cancel IFR when able. That was
always my "out". I'm in flat land here in NJ. The ceiling was reported at
2600. I knew I could always decend. But I let ATC vector me around at
3000' for an approach I did not want. I have now learned to be more
assertive with ATC and will learn to say, "unable...I need an
immediate...blah, blah, blah..."

Did everyone see the Icing video put out by NASA and AOPA? I watched it
very closely after this incident and wish I watched it MORE closely the
first time.

Kobra

> I'm in flat land here in NJ.

antennas

Jose
--
Money: What you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

There was a Cessna single that crashed on a flight from Colorado
Springs to Denver some 4 years ago (or so) due to icing. The MEA is
10,000' (as I recall) and MOST of the terrain is well below that. They
wouldn't vector him any lower. He kept saying he needed lower, and
couldn't hold altitude etc. If he wanted to go lower, he needed to say
"cancel IFR" or "I declare an emergency and am descending" and then
descend. Don't expect ATC to try and vector you below their MEA (MVA,
MIA) towards "safe" terrain. They have tried that and it doesn't work.
They wont do it. Nor should they.

I'd HATE to be faced with the choice of descending below where ATC
could vector me. But if it's that or stall the aircraft in IMC, I guess
it would be better to go lower towards lower terrain, and take my
chances.

It's stuff like this why I don't fly with low ceilings when it's below
freezing or there is an airmet for icing. Better to get a hotel.

In article >, "Kobra" >
writes:

>Thanks for all your kind words.
>
>I received an email from a member who asked some questions and I thought I'd
>post the questions and my answers:

I sent your email to a 737 pilot friend and got this reply:

*Chuck

A interesting story, thanks for sharing.

FYI, the 737 - and every other "big" airplane I know of - DOES have a rather
obnoxious aural warning when the autopilot disconnects. I believe that
requirement came out of an accident where an L-1011 descended into the Florida
Everglades at night while the crew was fixated on a landing gear abnormal.
They had the autopilot on, but it disconnected and no one noticed since all
three pilots were concerned with the gear problem. Moral of that story ( and
many others): let's always have SOMEBODY flying the plane.

There was also an accident in a large turbojet aircraft (727?) years ago (as I
recall it was a freighter) where the crew forgot to turn on the pitot heat
before takeoff. They were climbing when the pitot tubes iced up, and crew
responded to the increasing indicated airspeed by pitching up more and more
until they entered a stall/spin. Not good. Needless to say, the crew
perished.

Seems like it's been a long time since anyone's thought of a new way to kill
themselves in an airplane; we just stick to the tried and ture ways.

Cheers,

Stan
*

Kobra wrote:

> My worst mistake was that I should have "demanded" a lower altitude and
> accepted any heading change. I should have said, "No! I need an immediate
> decent, I'll take any heading!" My next worst mistake was not admitting
> that I was over-whelmed and needed a vector as other posters suggested.

In an emergency, you don't need permission from ATC to do whatever is
necessary to respond to the emergency. It is good form to let them know
as soon as you can what you are doing, but if you encounter ice, a
thunderstorm, etc., do what you need to do and sort things out with ATC
later.


Matt

> There was also an accident in a large turbojet aircraft (727?) years ago (as I
> recall it was a freighter) where the crew forgot to turn on the pitot heat
> before takeoff. They were climbing when the pitot tubes iced up, and crew
> responded to the increasing indicated airspeed by pitching up more and more
> until they entered a stall/spin. Not good. Needless to say, the crew
> perished.

I went to a (as in one) IFR ground class. The instructor was very good
but I simply decided to do it on my own. Nevertheless the one thing
i got out of the class was possibly the story above. He showed a clip
on a south american passenger transport jet (type?) where they just
repainted the plane and they left some kind of tape over the pitot
tubes. I would hope a ATP pilot flying jets could at least figure out
what is happening when they have a single point failure.

Gerald

I recently had a pitot/static system failure on climbout, and found it was
helpful to turn the Garmin 430 to crosscheck the altimeter and airspeed
against the GPS altitude and groundspeed. I have a Garmin 196 also which I
mount on the yoke if flying IMC, which can also be used for this purpose.

"G. Sylvester" > wrote in message
. ..
> > There was also an accident in a large turbojet aircraft (727?) years ago
(as I
> > recall it was a freighter) where the crew forgot to turn on the pitot
heat
> > before takeoff. They were climbing when the pitot tubes iced up, and
crew
> > responded to the increasing indicated airspeed by pitching up more and
more
> > until they entered a stall/spin. Not good. Needless to say, the crew
> > perished.
>
> I went to a (as in one) IFR ground class. The instructor was very good
> but I simply decided to do it on my own. Nevertheless the one thing
> i got out of the class was possibly the story above. He showed a clip
> on a south american passenger transport jet (type?) where they just
> repainted the plane and they left some kind of tape over the pitot
> tubes. I would hope a ATP pilot flying jets could at least figure out
> what is happening when they have a single point failure.
>
> Gerald

"Jeremy Lew" > wrote in message
...
>I recently had a pitot/static system failure on climbout,

Wow. What were the symptoms, and what turned out to be the cause?

--Gary

I had a pitot/static problem as a new PPL (clear weather) that was very
exciting. Airspeed was fine till about 20 feet off the ground. At that
point airspeed would start dropping. I kept pushing the nose over and
airspeed kept dropping. I then realized rpm's were normal, the propellor
was attached, and everything sounded right. It scared the bejezus outta me.
Turned out to be water in the static line. Afterwards, I realized I was way
too dependant on that one indicator. Had it been IMC, it could have been
very ugly.

As someone else posted, I now keep an eye on gps ground speed on takeoff....
and I'm not even instrument rated yet.

"Gary Drescher" > wrote in message
...
> "Jeremy Lew" > wrote in message
> ...
>>I recently had a pitot/static system failure on climbout,
>
> Wow. What were the symptoms, and what turned out to be the cause?
>
> --Gary
>
>

"dlevy" > wrote in message
...

> As someone else posted, I now keep an eye on gps ground speed on
takeoff....
> and I'm not even instrument rated yet.

If you know your plane well the ASI should be one of the least-critical
instruments to lose, at least on anything Skyhawk-class. Set power and
pitch, and your airspeed will follow. As close to foolproof as anything gets
in aviation. That's why if you look at an ultralight with only one
instrument, it's probably a tach. Go up with a CFI sometime and tell him to
cover the ASI while you do some pattern work. Of course every kind of
failure can be distracting, that's why experienced pilots crash after having
doors open in flight.

GPS groundspeed is useless for flying the plane. What do you think you're
getting by watching it?

-cwk.

I had water in the static lines one time in solid IMC. One pull of the
Alternate Static Source took care of it. That's what it is there for. :-)

Jon Kraus
PP-ASEL-IA
'79 Mooney 201 Triple43Hotel

dlevy wrote:
> I had a pitot/static problem as a new PPL (clear weather) that was very
> exciting. Airspeed was fine till about 20 feet off the ground. At that
> point airspeed would start dropping. I kept pushing the nose over and
> airspeed kept dropping. I then realized rpm's were normal, the propellor
> was attached, and everything sounded right. It scared the bejezus outta me.
> Turned out to be water in the static line. Afterwards, I realized I was way
> too dependant on that one indicator. Had it been IMC, it could have been
> very ugly.
>
> As someone else posted, I now keep an eye on gps ground speed on takeoff....
> and I'm not even instrument rated yet.
>
> "Gary Drescher" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>"Jeremy Lew" > wrote in message
...
>>
>>>I recently had a pitot/static system failure on climbout,
>>
>>Wow. What were the symptoms, and what turned out to be the cause?
>>
>>--Gary
>>
>>
>
>
>

GPS groundspeed implies airspeed. If the airspeed indicator is zero, rpm's
2500, the nose pitched up, and gps groundspeed holding at 80 knots......
which is wrong?

"Colin W Kingsbury" > wrote in message
ink.net...
><snip>
> GPS groundspeed is useless for flying the plane. What do you think you're
> getting by watching it?
>
> -cwk.
>
>

"dlevy" > wrote in message
...
>I had a pitot/static problem as a new PPL (clear weather) that was very
>exciting. Airspeed was fine till about 20 feet off the ground. At that
>point airspeed would start dropping. I kept pushing the nose over and
>airspeed kept dropping. I then realized rpm's were normal, the propellor
>was attached, and everything sounded right. It scared the bejezus outta
>me. Turned out to be water in the static line. Afterwards, I realized I
>was way too dependant on that one indicator. Had it been IMC, it could
>have been very ugly.

Hm, shouldn't a blocked static line cause the airspeed indicator to show an
increase in airspeed, rather than a decrease, with increasing altitude?

--Gary

If the static line were blocked but not the pitot then the
airspeed indication would decrease with increasing altitude.

On 2005-01-12, dlevy > wrote:
> I had a pitot/static problem as a new PPL (clear weather) that was very
> exciting. Airspeed was fine till about 20 feet off the ground. At that
> point airspeed would start dropping.

My first solo XC was my first time in a C-172 with an airspeed indicator
in MPH. It took me about half of the first leg to figure out what was
going on.

My brain is really screwed up now: I fly a plane marked in MPH (with
knots on the inner ring) and I tend to think about cruise and approach
in knots and critical airspeeds in MPH.

--
Ben Jackson
>
http://www.ben.com/

but would still be accurate at the altitude where it became blocked, and
would still increase and decrease with airspeed changes when level, the
numbers would just be meaningless, right?

kontiki wrote:
> If the static line were blocked but not the pitot then the
> airspeed indication would decrease with increasing altitude.
>

"Gary Drescher" > wrote in message
...
> "dlevy" > wrote in message
> ...
> >I had a pitot/static problem as a new PPL (clear weather) that was very
> >exciting. Airspeed was fine till about 20 feet off the ground. At that
> >point airspeed would start dropping. I kept pushing the nose over and
> >airspeed kept dropping. I then realized rpm's were normal, the propellor
> >was attached, and everything sounded right. It scared the bejezus outta
> >me. Turned out to be water in the static line. Afterwards, I realized I
> >was way too dependant on that one indicator. Had it been IMC, it could
> >have been very ugly.
>
> Hm, shouldn't a blocked static line cause the airspeed indicator to show
an
> increase in airspeed, rather than a decrease, with increasing altitude?
>
>
It would indicate a lower airspeed.

The pitot ram air pressure for a given airspeed decreases with higher
altitude. If the static port were blocked (at say, the takeoff altitude),
the airspeed would "indicate" a lower airspeed since the pitot pressure has
dropped for that airspeed as the plane gains altitude. As another poster
commented, the only altitude where the ASI is accurate is at the altitude
where the blockage occurred.

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 22:52:20 GMT, Matt Young >
wrote:

>but would still be accurate at the altitude where it became blocked, and
>would still increase and decrease with airspeed changes when level, the
>numbers would just be meaningless, right?
>

Yes! Remember, if you break the glass of the altimeter, it won't be
sealed anymore, and despite a small static error, all instruments
using static pressure will be working again (except ASI in case of
pitot failure) (doesn't work with pressurized A/C, of course!)

>The pitot ram air pressure for a given airspeed decreases with higher
>altitude. If the static port were blocked (at say, the takeoff altitude),
>the airspeed would "indicate" a lower airspeed since the pitot pressure has
>dropped for that airspeed as the plane gains altitude. As another poster
>commented, the only altitude where the ASI is accurate is at the altitude
>where the blockage occurred.
>

Not really. You should remain at the same pressure altitude. If you
travel to an area with higher or lower pressure, you would be
surprised.

"dlevy" > wrote in message
...
> GPS groundspeed implies airspeed. If the airspeed indicator is zero,
rpm's
> 2500, the nose pitched up, and gps groundspeed holding at 80 knots......
> which is wrong?

You see the ground moving and the altitude isn't dropping- no GPS needed :)

GPS groundspeed isn't really useful for aviating, since you've got to factor
wind in. 20 knots is the difference between too fast and too slow in
approach. OTOH, if you fly pitch and power settings, you won't come to grief
no matter what the wind is doing. Even IFR the GPS groundspeed isn't
necessary. If your power is too low you'll lose altitude, too high you'll
climb. I've flown complete approaches in actual IFR with a post-it over the
ASI, and never once looked at the GPS groundspeed.

So, you don't need the GPS to tell you you're moving, and it can't tell you
what your airspeed is, while pitch/power will let you fly the plane all day
long. What does GPS buy me again in this situation?

> "Colin W Kingsbury" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
> ><snip>
> > GPS groundspeed is useless for flying the plane. What do you think
you're
> > getting by watching it?
> >
> > -cwk.

"Sriram Narayan" > wrote in message
news:1105574315.223629d9c9b6178c7b6b555f5ecac8c3@t eranews...
>
> "Gary Drescher" > wrote in message

>> Hm, shouldn't a blocked static line cause the airspeed indicator to show
> an
>> increase in airspeed, rather than a decrease, with increasing altitude?
>>
>>
> It would indicate a lower airspeed.
>
> The pitot ram air pressure for a given airspeed decreases with higher
> altitude. If the static port were blocked (at say, the takeoff altitude),
> the airspeed would "indicate" a lower airspeed since the pitot pressure
> has
> dropped for that airspeed as the plane gains altitude. As another poster
> commented, the only altitude where the ASI is accurate is at the altitude
> where the blockage occurred.

Oops. Yes, of course. Thanks.

--Gary

GPS groundspeed is indeed useful for aviating. You are straight and
level in IMC flying along into a 20 knot headwind at full power. Your
indicated airspeed is 70knots (80 knots true at your altitude and
pressure etc). You notice the groundspeed is 80 knots. All is well. You
get ice, and note your indicated airspeed has dropped to 50 knots. But
you note your groundspeed is 75 knots. Are you on the verge of a stall
that 50 knots indicated would tell you? Or are you still flying as
close to normal cruise?

"Doug" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> GPS groundspeed is indeed useful for aviating. You are straight and
> level in IMC flying along into a 20 knot headwind at full power. Your
> indicated airspeed is 70knots (80 knots true at your altitude and
> pressure etc). You notice the groundspeed is 80 knots. All is well. You
> get ice, and note your indicated airspeed has dropped to 50 knots. But
> you note your groundspeed is 75 knots. Are you on the verge of a stall
> that 50 knots indicated would tell you? Or are you still flying as

IIRC, the point ws in FLYING THE PLANE DURING AN EMERGENCY.

Navigating is secondary (way secondary) during the incident in question.
--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

On 12 Jan 2005 19:21:10 -0800, "Doug" >
wrote:

>GPS groundspeed is indeed useful for aviating. You are straight and
>level in IMC flying along into a 20 knot headwind at full power. Your
>indicated airspeed is 70knots (80 knots true at your altitude and
>pressure etc). You notice the groundspeed is 80 knots. All is well. You
>get ice, and note your indicated airspeed has dropped to 50 knots. But
>you note your groundspeed is 75 knots. Are you on the verge of a stall
>that 50 knots indicated would tell you? Or are you still flying as
>close to normal cruise?


Or has the wind sheared?

"Sriram Narayan" > wrote in message
news:1105574315.223629d9c9b6178c7b6b555f5ecac8c3@t eranews...
>
> "Gary Drescher" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "dlevy" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >I had a pitot/static problem as a new PPL (clear weather) that was very
>> >exciting. Airspeed was fine till about 20 feet off the ground. At that
>> >point airspeed would start dropping. I kept pushing the nose over and
>> >airspeed kept dropping. I then realized rpm's were normal, the
>> >propellor
>> >was attached, and everything sounded right. It scared the bejezus outta
>> >me. Turned out to be water in the static line. Afterwards, I realized I
>> >was way too dependant on that one indicator. Had it been IMC, it could
>> >have been very ugly.
>>
>> Hm, shouldn't a blocked static line cause the airspeed indicator to show
> an
>> increase in airspeed, rather than a decrease, with increasing altitude?
>>
>>
> It would indicate a lower airspeed.
>
> The pitot ram air pressure for a given airspeed decreases with higher
> altitude. If the static port were blocked (at say, the takeoff altitude),
> the airspeed would "indicate" a lower airspeed since the pitot pressure
> has
> dropped for that airspeed as the plane gains altitude. As another poster
> commented, the only altitude where the ASI is accurate is at the altitude
> where the blockage occurred.
>
>

Actually, the OP didn't say anything about the static line being blocked, he
said that it had water in it. The static pressure availilble at the
instruments still changes in the proper direction if the static (or pitot)
line has water in it, it just changes at a different (usually lower) rate.

Mike
MU-2
Helio Courier

"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "Sriram Narayan" > wrote in message
> news:1105574315.223629d9c9b6178c7b6b555f5ecac8c3@t eranews...
> >
> > "Gary Drescher" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> "dlevy" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >I had a pitot/static problem as a new PPL (clear weather) that was
very
> >> >exciting. Airspeed was fine till about 20 feet off the ground. At
that
> >> >point airspeed would start dropping. I kept pushing the nose over and
> >> >airspeed kept dropping. I then realized rpm's were normal, the
> >> >propellor
> >> >was attached, and everything sounded right. It scared the bejezus
outta
> >> >me. Turned out to be water in the static line. Afterwards, I realized
I
> >> >was way too dependant on that one indicator. Had it been IMC, it
could
> >> >have been very ugly.
> >>
> >> Hm, shouldn't a blocked static line cause the airspeed indicator to
show
> > an
> >> increase in airspeed, rather than a decrease, with increasing altitude?
> >>
> >>
> > It would indicate a lower airspeed.
> >
> > The pitot ram air pressure for a given airspeed decreases with higher
> > altitude. If the static port were blocked (at say, the takeoff
altitude),
> > the airspeed would "indicate" a lower airspeed since the pitot pressure
> > has
> > dropped for that airspeed as the plane gains altitude. As another poster
> > commented, the only altitude where the ASI is accurate is at the
altitude
> > where the blockage occurred.
> >
> >
>
> Actually, the OP didn't say anything about the static line being blocked,
he
> said that it had water in it. The static pressure availilble at the
> instruments still changes in the proper direction if the static (or pitot)
> line has water in it, it just changes at a different (usually lower) rate.

>
> Mike
> MU-2
> Helio Courier
>
>

I don't disagree. I was responding to Gary Drescher's post (not the OP)
where he talked about a blocked static port, not one which may have water in
it, which like you say behaves like a partially blocked port but could be
even more erratic.

In my case, it was a CAVU day but extremely windy and quite turbulent. It
was 25G35 blowing straight down the runway with a 10-15kt shear every now
and then. I was bouncing all over the place on final, and the ground was
going by much more slowly than in a normal 0-15kt headwind. My ASI, VSI, and
altimeter were all not working, the sight picture was constantly changing
due to turbulence, and the rate of ground passage was much slower than on a
normal day, making it difficult to guage anything accurately by sight. It
was nice to be able to know I was nowhere near the stall by adding 25 to my
GPS groundspeed.

The cause of this remains unknown, as it cleared itself up while I was still
about 500'. The symptoms were a non-zero but clearly wrong airspeed (it was
stuck at about 60 kts for a while), a VSI pegged at 1000fpm climb, and a
frozen altimeter.

"Colin W Kingsbury" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "dlevy" > wrote in message
> ...
> > GPS groundspeed implies airspeed. If the airspeed indicator is zero,
> rpm's
> > 2500, the nose pitched up, and gps groundspeed holding at 80 knots......
> > which is wrong?
>
> You see the ground moving and the altitude isn't dropping- no GPS needed
:)
>
> GPS groundspeed isn't really useful for aviating, since you've got to
factor
> wind in. 20 knots is the difference between too fast and too slow in
> approach. OTOH, if you fly pitch and power settings, you won't come to
grief
> no matter what the wind is doing. Even IFR the GPS groundspeed isn't
> necessary. If your power is too low you'll lose altitude, too high you'll
> climb. I've flown complete approaches in actual IFR with a post-it over
the
> ASI, and never once looked at the GPS groundspeed.
>
> So, you don't need the GPS to tell you you're moving, and it can't tell
you
> what your airspeed is, while pitch/power will let you fly the plane all
day
> long. What does GPS buy me again in this situation?
>
> > "Colin W Kingsbury" > wrote in message
> > ink.net...
> > ><snip>
> > > GPS groundspeed is useless for flying the plane. What do you think
> you're
> > > getting by watching it?
> > >
> > > -cwk.
>
>

I thought so too. Apparently, the instrument knew better. That's one of
the reasons it was an exciting event!

BTW, it was water in the static line. Maybe that is different from a
complete blockage?

I made my instructor go up with me to prove to someone else what was
happening.


"Gary Drescher" > wrote in message
...
> "dlevy" > wrote in message
> ...
>>I had a pitot/static problem as a new PPL (clear weather) that was very
>>exciting. Airspeed was fine till about 20 feet off the ground. At that
>>point airspeed would start dropping. I kept pushing the nose over and
>>airspeed kept dropping. I then realized rpm's were normal, the propellor
>>was attached, and everything sounded right. It scared the bejezus outta
>>me. Turned out to be water in the static line. Afterwards, I realized I
>>was way too dependant on that one indicator. Had it been IMC, it could
>>have been very ugly.
>
> Hm, shouldn't a blocked static line cause the airspeed indicator to show
> an increase in airspeed, rather than a decrease, with increasing altitude?
>
> --Gary
>
>

"Jeremy Lew" > wrote in message
...
> In my case, it was a CAVU day but extremely windy and quite turbulent. It
<snip>
> was nice to be able to know I was nowhere near the stall by adding 25 to
my
> GPS groundspeed.

I'm still not sold. Here's my thinking. You've got squirrely winds changing
direction and speed with altitude. So, at best you have to bracket that
GPS-derived airspeed by +/- 10kts just to be sure. If we're talking about
approach speeds this is quite a difference. So, broken record again, it's
not fundamentally useful since it can't be considered accurate for flying
the plane.

OTOH, here comes the broken record again, trimming for pitch attitude and
setting power for the chosen regime of flight *will* produce a known
airspeed. In my Skyhawk if you set one notch of flaps and 1900rpm and trim
for level flight, the speed will stabilize around 72kts. Pull 500rpm and
trim nose up one full turn and you'll descend at just about 500fpm at 72
kts. 2350 and level will always indicate 95-100kts. Climb is of course
whatever you can get with full throttle and 10deg nose up. This is the Law
of the Wing: it has ever been thus, and thus it ever shall be.

Also, if you fly the same plane regularly, or even just the same type, you
should be able to "feel" the airspeed reasonably well without any
instruments at all. Obviously this is easier in a pussycat like a 172
compared to a Mooney or Bo, but its still possible. Most pilots today just
don't get enough practice in slow flight because our instinct has become to
avoid it. Instrument pilots get a double whammy because we tend to focus our
proficiency activities on IFR skills, which expressly avoid true slow-flight
for good reason, but this compounds the problem. Of course, I'm speaking
about myself here as well, but all this is the way my CFII trained me, and I
try to live up to it.

Best,
-cwk.

Colin, you adopt quite the air of authority for someone who has had their
ASEL for less than 2.5 years. In this case I wanted to come in at about
80kts and one notch because of the wind shear, which is not a normal
approach speed or flap configuration for me. Are you telling me you have
memorized every permutation of pitch/power/flaps/airspeed for all possible
gust conditions on approach?

"Colin W Kingsbury" > wrote in message
nk.net...
>
> "Jeremy Lew" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In my case, it was a CAVU day but extremely windy and quite turbulent.
It
> <snip>
> > was nice to be able to know I was nowhere near the stall by adding 25 to
> my
> > GPS groundspeed.

> OTOH, here comes the broken record again, trimming for pitch attitude and
> setting power for the chosen regime of flight *will* produce a known
> airspeed. In my Skyhawk if you set one notch of flaps and 1900rpm and trim
> for level flight, the speed will stabilize around 72kts. Pull 500rpm and
> trim nose up one full turn and you'll descend at just about 500fpm at 72
> kts. 2350 and level will always indicate 95-100kts. Climb is of course
> whatever you can get with full throttle and 10deg nose up. This is the Law
> of the Wing: it has ever been thus, and thus it ever shall be.
>

"Jeremy Lew" > wrote in message
...
> Colin, you adopt quite the air of authority for someone who has had their
> ASEL for less than 2.5 years. In this case I wanted to come in at about
> 80kts and one notch because of the wind shear, which is not a normal
> approach speed or flap configuration for me. Are you telling me you have
> memorized every permutation of pitch/power/flaps/airspeed for all possible
> gust conditions on approach?

Depending on how and what you fly, 1 notch and 80 kts sounds awfully close
to approach configuration in either level flight or descending on the ILS.
Some people fly a little slower, others a little faster, but it's in the
ballpark. If you told me to climb at 100FPM and 90 knots, no, I have no idea
what the setting for that is off the top of my head. But that's not the
situation.

If my normal approach speed is 65 knots, and I want to fly 75 for gusty
conditions, I'm not using the GPS groundspeed to do it. It's too coarse a
measure to be used with real precision. I'm setting up for an ILS-type
configuration which normally settles right in at 72 knots, and adding
another 50-100rpm and trim to hold the descent rate around 500rpm. I bet
that'll get me pretty darn close, at least on the right side of things. I
contend that you're better off setting pre-determined power/pitch settings
and understanding control feel than looking at the GPS groundspeed expecting
to learn too much from it.

This all got started because someone who sounded even greener than me said
they were going to keep an eye on their GPS groundspeed during takeoff, and
it didn't strike me as such a great idea, for all the reasons I've laid out.
A reasonable (i.e. can be formed in one good lesson) understanding of
pitch/power settings will allow you to fly the plane safely all day long
without an ASI, in any kind of conditions. I don't think this is
particularly controversial and it's the way I was taught when I got my
private, instrument, and seaplane ratings.

Of course we all use everything available to us to form the most complete
picture possible, and GPS groundspeed can be included in that, so long as we
account for its limitations. It can tell you magnitude of change (i.e. a
change in groundspeed of 10kts at constant power/pitch means the wind has
changed 10kts) for instance and that is useful. More importantly, it can
tell us how much longer we have to go before we can empty our tanks, or fill
our plane's.

Forget my authority or lack thereof. What is wrong with my reasoning here?

best,
-cwk.

There's nothing wrong with your reasoning in general, but it *was* your
original assertion that the groundspeed is "useless for flying the plane."
Again, in my case, I had no ASI, VSI or altimeter to work with, so how am I
supposed to trim to hold a 500fpm descent? What if the pitch indication
was slightly off? I set it up by sight and feel as best I could and used
the groundspeed as a crosscheck, which I maintain was useful for flying the
plane. You're right about takeoff, I don't see the value there.

BTW, I'm only 3 months less green than you chronologically, and probably
greener in flight-hours
;)

Jeremy
"Colin W Kingsbury" > wrote in message
nk.net...
>
> "Jeremy Lew" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Colin, you adopt quite the air of authority for someone who has had their
>> ASEL for less than 2.5 years. In this case I wanted to come in at about
>> 80kts and one notch because of the wind shear, which is not a normal
>> approach speed or flap configuration for me. Are you telling me you have
>> memorized every permutation of pitch/power/flaps/airspeed for all
>> possible
>> gust conditions on approach?
>
> Depending on how and what you fly, 1 notch and 80 kts sounds awfully close
> to approach configuration in either level flight or descending on the ILS.
> Some people fly a little slower, others a little faster, but it's in the
> ballpark. If you told me to climb at 100FPM and 90 knots, no, I have no
> idea
> what the setting for that is off the top of my head. But that's not the
> situation.
>
> If my normal approach speed is 65 knots, and I want to fly 75 for gusty
> conditions, I'm not using the GPS groundspeed to do it. It's too coarse a
> measure to be used with real precision. I'm setting up for an ILS-type
> configuration which normally settles right in at 72 knots, and adding
> another 50-100rpm and trim to hold the descent rate around 500rpm. I bet
> that'll get me pretty darn close, at least on the right side of things. I
> contend that you're better off setting pre-determined power/pitch settings
> and understanding control feel than looking at the GPS groundspeed
> expecting
> to learn too much from it.
>
> This all got started because someone who sounded even greener than me said
> they were going to keep an eye on their GPS groundspeed during takeoff,
> and
> it didn't strike me as such a great idea, for all the reasons I've laid
> out.
> A reasonable (i.e. can be formed in one good lesson) understanding of
> pitch/power settings will allow you to fly the plane safely all day long
> without an ASI, in any kind of conditions. I don't think this is
> particularly controversial and it's the way I was taught when I got my
> private, instrument, and seaplane ratings.
>
> Of course we all use everything available to us to form the most complete
> picture possible, and GPS groundspeed can be included in that, so long as
> we
> account for its limitations. It can tell you magnitude of change (i.e. a
> change in groundspeed of 10kts at constant power/pitch means the wind has
> changed 10kts) for instance and that is useful. More importantly, it can
> tell us how much longer we have to go before we can empty our tanks, or
> fill
> our plane's.
>
> Forget my authority or lack thereof. What is wrong with my reasoning here?
>
> best,
> -cwk.
>
>

Jeremy,

Chalk it up to typical Usenet hyperbole. I like to write with a little zip
which sometimes interferes with the message. I agree that used as a
cross-check the groundspeed can be useful, and you obviously understand what
it's really telling you. As usual I suspected you and I were pretty much on
the same page but the debate club geek inside of me got out and argued the
point for the sake of it. As someone who's still quite green I remember all
too well the temptation to get lost staring at the instruments. I had this
picture in my head of this new pilot watching the GPS groundspeed and not
fully comprehending what it meant. A new pilot should focus on learning to
fly the plane by feel and become comfortable with high-performance takeoffs
and landings, crosswinds, and cross-country navigation. Unfortunately, this
is typically the last thing that happens once you get out of the structured
training environment, especially if like me you are located at a big field
where the crosswind runway is 5000' long.

One of the best things I did as a new pilot was to get my floatplane rating
up in Alaska (I live in Boston). It wasn't meant to happen the way it did,
but I literally left to go there two days after I passed my checkride. They
(Alaska Float Ratings, highly recommended) gave instruction in a Super Cub
which was quite a different critter than the Warriors I got my ticket in.
The instructors were working 135 pilots and knew how to wring every drop of
performance out of the plane. Plus, flying patterns at 400AGL and being
surrounded by the Chugach mountains was a whole new experience for this
flatlander. Being as green as I was (am) I think my bad habits were a little
less ingrained and I was able to absorb things better than I would a few
hundred hours later.

It's actually getting to be time to do another check on my slow
flight/crosswind skills. I try to do a ride every six months or so to keep
me on my toes. I think what I really need to do is take some trips to some
smaller fields where I *have* to land in a thousand feet or so. I've been
busy starting a new business lately so it's getting real sloppy and all of
my practice has focused on instrument approaches.

Been fun chatting,
-cwk.

"Jeremy Lew" > wrote in message
...
> There's nothing wrong with your reasoning in general, but it *was* your
> original assertion that the groundspeed is "useless for flying the plane."
> Again, in my case, I had no ASI, VSI or altimeter to work with, so how am
I
> supposed to trim to hold a 500fpm descent? What if the pitch indication
> was slightly off? I set it up by sight and feel as best I could and used
> the groundspeed as a crosscheck, which I maintain was useful for flying
the
> plane. You're right about takeoff, I don't see the value there.
>
> BTW, I'm only 3 months less green than you chronologically, and probably
> greener in flight-hours
> ;)
>
> Jeremy
> "Colin W Kingsbury" > wrote in message
> nk.net...
> >
> > "Jeremy Lew" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> Colin, you adopt quite the air of authority for someone who has had
their
> >> ASEL for less than 2.5 years. In this case I wanted to come in at
about
> >> 80kts and one notch because of the wind shear, which is not a normal
> >> approach speed or flap configuration for me. Are you telling me you
have
> >> memorized every permutation of pitch/power/flaps/airspeed for all
> >> possible
> >> gust conditions on approach?
> >
> > Depending on how and what you fly, 1 notch and 80 kts sounds awfully
close
> > to approach configuration in either level flight or descending on the
ILS.
> > Some people fly a little slower, others a little faster, but it's in the
> > ballpark. If you told me to climb at 100FPM and 90 knots, no, I have no
> > idea
> > what the setting for that is off the top of my head. But that's not the
> > situation.
> >
> > If my normal approach speed is 65 knots, and I want to fly 75 for gusty
> > conditions, I'm not using the GPS groundspeed to do it. It's too coarse
a
> > measure to be used with real precision. I'm setting up for an ILS-type
> > configuration which normally settles right in at 72 knots, and adding
> > another 50-100rpm and trim to hold the descent rate around 500rpm. I bet
> > that'll get me pretty darn close, at least on the right side of things.
I
> > contend that you're better off setting pre-determined power/pitch
settings
> > and understanding control feel than looking at the GPS groundspeed
> > expecting
> > to learn too much from it.
> >
> > This all got started because someone who sounded even greener than me
said
> > they were going to keep an eye on their GPS groundspeed during takeoff,
> > and
> > it didn't strike me as such a great idea, for all the reasons I've laid
> > out.
> > A reasonable (i.e. can be formed in one good lesson) understanding of
> > pitch/power settings will allow you to fly the plane safely all day long
> > without an ASI, in any kind of conditions. I don't think this is
> > particularly controversial and it's the way I was taught when I got my
> > private, instrument, and seaplane ratings.
> >
> > Of course we all use everything available to us to form the most
complete
> > picture possible, and GPS groundspeed can be included in that, so long
as
> > we
> > account for its limitations. It can tell you magnitude of change (i.e. a
> > change in groundspeed of 10kts at constant power/pitch means the wind
has
> > changed 10kts) for instance and that is useful. More importantly, it can
> > tell us how much longer we have to go before we can empty our tanks, or
> > fill
> > our plane's.
> >
> > Forget my authority or lack thereof. What is wrong with my reasoning
here?
> >
> > best,
> > -cwk.
> >
> >
>
>

That's all I meant.....

"Colin W Kingsbury" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
><snip>
> I agree that used as a cross-check the groundspeed can be useful,
><snip>