control/performance method of instrument flying

[Bob Gardner]

My guess, and it is a guess, that virtually all instrument pilots have been
taught both control/performance and primary/secondary, because in real life
we use a combination of both. Most, if not all, military pilots learned the
c/p method. The index for my copy of the Air Force Instrument Flying Manual
does not even contain an entry for primary/secondary.

Bob Gardner

"Tony Woolner" > wrote in message
...
> Has anyone out there been taught this method of instrument flying?
>

[Jim]

I'll agree. My experience and the way I am teaching is that
primary/secondary is mainly used enroute and maneuvering but when climbs and
descents are needed that control/performance is mainly used, for example
approach power settings. I think instrument flying is a combination of
both, using the method required for the immediate task. As Bob says, the
military almost exclusively uses control/performance but their equipment is
larger and faster and their instruments are more exact, i.e. larger AI,
angle of attack indicator, more accurate airspeed indicator.
--
Jim Burns III

Remove "nospam" to reply


"Bob Gardner" > wrote in message
news:S2wwb.296338$Fm2.313288@attbi_s04...
> My guess, and it is a guess, that virtually all instrument pilots have
been
> taught both control/performance and primary/secondary, because in real
life
> we use a combination of both. Most, if not all, military pilots learned
the
> c/p method. The index for my copy of the Air Force Instrument Flying
Manual
> does not even contain an entry for primary/secondary.
>
> Bob Gardner
>
> "Tony Woolner" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Has anyone out there been taught this method of instrument flying?
> >
>
>

[Greg Esres]

<<Has anyone out there been taught this method of instrument flying?>>

I do. Primary/Supporting is ridiculously complicated. PIC 10-day
instrument courses do control/performance. Bill Kershner is also on
record as endorsing this method. I'm inclined to think that most
forward-thinking CFI's will teach this method. In other words, only a
minority do. ;-)

Like the others, I'm skeptical that anyone's real world scan closely
resembles either theory.

[Teacherjh]

What is "control performance" in the context of an instrument scan? I don't
know if I've been taught one or the other, I am familiar with primary secondary
but originally was taught something else.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[Tony Woolner]

Has anyone out there been taught this method of instrument flying?

[Robert Moore]

(Teacherjh) wrote

> What is "control performance" in the context of an instrument
> scan? I don't know if I've been taught one or the other, I am
> familiar with primary secondary but originally was taught
> something else.

In Kershner's Flight Instructor's Manual, he calls it "Attitude
plus Power equals Performance". I have always used the phrase
"Pitch plus Power equals Performance", the 3P's. :-)
In either case, it is the military and airline method of flying
by instruments.
It involves knowing (ahead of time) what combination of pitch
and power will cause the airplane to do what you want it to do.
For example, in climbing, set climb power and set the pitch
attitude to five degrees nose up...don't bother with the airspeed
indicator, IT WILL settle on the correct airspeed. No chasing the
airspeed as would occur in the "primary/secondary" method.
Remember the "watching the airspeed during the landing approach"
thread of a few days ago? Pitch + Power is equally applicable
there. In a Cessna 172, if one flys downwind at about 2100rpm,
(100kts) and abeam the touchdown spot, sets 1500rpm/flaps 10 and
the appropriate VISUAL pitch down attitude and maintains that same
combination of pitch+power while using flaps 20 on base and flaps
30 on final, there is no need to ever look at the airspeed
indicator because you WILL cross the end of the runway at 60-65
kts.
It sure beats the old "I'm slow, let me add some power....whoops
now I'm fast, let's pull some of that power off" routine, which is
what many of the pilots that I do IPCs and Flight Reviews for are
doing.

Bob Moore

[Teacherjh]

>> "control performance"
>It involves knowing (ahead of time) what combination of pitch
>and power will cause the airplane to do what you want it to do.

Ok. That's the way I was taught at first. I think it's better. But you do
need more than that to deal with other circumstances.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)