Whew - ASI died in flight

[Marc CYBW]

Had my first "incident" in flying after some 175 hours in 172s mostly but
also Warriors and Arrows.

After 4 hours dual and solo learning how to fly my new fractional
ownership 182S, I decided I needed some solo practice and went out for an
hour of flying the circuit. Started my takeoff run and did the usual checks
(power, engine, airspeed) and after I got up to a little over 50 KIAS,
noticed that the plane wanted to fly off. Odd I thought, seemed a little
low, but up we went and once off the ground (maybe 50') noticed the ASI
going DOWN from 50 to 40 to 30 to ZERO. Great - 4 hours into a plane I have
just learned to land and no ASI.

Fortunately the tower (CYBW) was most helpful and called out my ground speed
(no wind today thank goodness) and I carefully stabilized my full flaps
descent at 60 Kts (by the Tower) and landed uneventfully.

Looks like a bug in the pitot tube was just far enough in that I did not
notice it on my pre-flight but the forward motion forced it to completely
block the airflow.

Certainly caught my attention!





--

[[email protected]]

"Marc CYBW" > wrote:
> After 4 hours dual and solo learning how to fly my new fractional
> ownership 182S, I decided I needed some solo practice and went out for an
> hour of flying the circuit. Started my takeoff run and did the usual checks
> (power, engine, airspeed) and after I got up to a little over 50 KIAS,
> noticed that the plane wanted to fly off. Odd I thought, seemed a little
> low, but up we went and once off the ground (maybe 50') noticed the ASI
> going DOWN from 50 to 40 to 30 to ZERO. Great - 4 hours into a plane I have
> just learned to land and no ASI.

Same thing happened to me in one of my first flights after soloing
before PPL (bug in tube). My ASI worked fine until I rotated and then
stuck there. All other instruments were green, it was climbing like it
always did, and sounded and felt fine. I had asked for closed traffic,
but radioed that I needed a full stop with no ASI. They cleared me to
land and asked if I'd need help on the runway ... I know they have to
ask that, but my funny first thought was to say, "I'll let you know when
I get there!" Instantly, the glider training kicked in: "don't chase the
airspeed," "fly the pitch", and *listen* to the airspeed. It went fine.

They had covered up the airspeed indicator during training prior to solo
anyway, it's just different mentally when you *know* there's no use in
trying to peek!

[Vaughn Simon]

"Marc CYBW" > wrote in message
news:tCxpg.85912$I61.77082@clgrps13...
>
> Fortunately the tower (CYBW) was most helpful and called out my ground speed
> (no wind today thank goodness) and I carefully stabilized my full flaps
> descent at 60 Kts (by the Tower) and landed uneventfully.
>

Neat! I didn't know that they could do that. In that situation, trim is
your friend. Set the trim where it is supposed to be and fly the trimmed speed
by feel, and you won't go far wrong. The view out the front is also important,
keep the horizon in the right place and your airspeed will be correct.

Did your CFI ever have you land with a covered ASI? My primary CFI was
always covering something.

Vaughn

[Dale]

In article >,
"Vaughn Simon" > wrote:


>
> Neat! I didn't know that they could do that. In that situation, trim
> is
> your friend. Set the trim where it is supposed to be and fly the trimmed
> speed
> by feel, and you won't go far wrong. The view out the front is also
> important,
> keep the horizon in the right place and your airspeed will be correct.
>
> Did your CFI ever have you land with a covered ASI? My primary CFI was
> always covering something.

I wouldn't use your trim procedure. There is a big difference in trim
settings with the 182 depending on loading. Solo you may need almost
full up trim for a normal approach...with the folks in the rear seat a
neutral trim setting will work pretty well.

Just put the nose where it's supposed to be...that works regardless of
load.

[birdog]

"Vaughn Simon" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Marc CYBW" > wrote in message
> news:tCxpg.85912$I61.77082@clgrps13...
>>
>> Fortunately the tower (CYBW) was most helpful and called out my ground
>> speed (no wind today thank goodness) and I carefully stabilized my full
>> flaps descent at 60 Kts (by the Tower) and landed uneventfully.
>>
>
> Neat! I didn't know that they could do that. In that situation, trim
> is your friend. Set the trim where it is supposed to be and fly the
> trimmed speed by feel, and you won't go far wrong. The view out the front
> is also important, keep the horizon in the right place and your airspeed
> will be correct.
>
> Did your CFI ever have you land with a covered ASI? My primary CFI
> was always covering something.
>
> Vaughn

Took off one bright and beautiful morning after an uneventual runup -
glanced at the oil pressure at about 50' and the little devil was setting on
zero - a lot more effective than a cup of coffee to wake you up. Did a wrap
around and landed downwind. Our A&P found that the indicator tube was
clogged. (This was years ago in an old 7AC).

Did I miss it on runup? Or did it clog on lift-off (probably not!)? Anyhow,
I never missed a gage check in many of years of flying thereafter.

Moral of the story: A CFI telling you something and staring at a crisis at a
critical time is more likely to attract attention and is sometimes necessary
for some of us dumbasses to get the message. But it sure ain't good
airmanship.



I shouldn't tell this, but it was many years ago, and I don't know any of
you folks, I hope.

My home base was a grass strip about 2500'. Half way down the runway was the
turnoff to the hanger area. Hitting the numbers and turning off at the exit
was somehow a macho thing among the locals, and if I floated too far, a go
around was habitual. Additionally, the local CFI was a P-51 pilot who could
land on a dime, and his humorous comments were to be avoided. Anyway, after
a long flight, I was coming into the VPI strip in Blacksberg airport, with
passengers, - a strip of at least 6000' - can't remember exactly - and being
kind of numb I crossed the threshold at 30-40' elevation---and automatically
did a go-around! After landing, the operations man came to help me with the
tie-down, etc., and asked if I had encountered a problem. All I could think
of - Naw, just checking the runway.

Old habits are sometimes embarrassing.

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN[_1_]]

Dale wrote:
> I wouldn't use your trim procedure. There is a big difference in trim
> settings with the 182 depending on loading. Solo you may need almost
> full up trim for a normal approach...with the folks in the rear seat a
> neutral trim setting will work pretty well.
>
> Just put the nose where it's supposed to be...that works regardless of
> load.


You may find it educational to look at where the trim is in cruise flight vs
where it is with full flaps and proper approach speed. I've lost ASI three
times over the years and each time was after flying through a deluge. If you
start getting slow you'll know it by the way the plane feels. Sloppy handling
close to the ground is not good for your continued health and wellbeing.

But I digress. Look at where the trim wheel is for cruise and for approach.
This is information that is good to have.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

[Stefan]

Where I fly, flying with all instruments covered is a pre-solo exercise.
No whew-factor.

Stefan

[Peter Duniho]

"Dale" > wrote in message
...
> [...]
> Just put the nose where it's supposed to be...that works regardless of
> load.

That has the same "problems" as using the trim. For a given airspeed, the
pitch angle will be higher for higher weights.

That said, IMHO either technique is reasonable as a rough guide if the ASI
fails. You may be as much as five or more knots off from where you expect
to be, but assuming a normal procedure (not short-field, for example) that
shouldn't be a problem.

Pete

[Robert M. Gary]

Marc CYBW wrote:
> Had my first "incident" in flying after some 175 hours in 172s mostly but
> also Warriors and Arrows.

Do you have the old plumbed pitot system or the Air Data Computer LRU?

-Robert

[Robert M. Gary]

When I bought my Mooney the first fuel stop on my way home I departed
some remote airport in Texas and the ASI stuck at 50mph (not flying
speed) and then went down to zero. I was seconds away from enter the
clouds. I decided to use the 295 to turn back to land at 400 feet.
Seemed safer in that flat part of the country vs. enter IMC (I had a
clearance void time but wouldn't get radar contact for some time).

-Robert


Marc CYBW wrote:
> Had my first "incident" in flying after some 175 hours in 172s mostly but
> also Warriors and Arrows.

[zatatime]

On Sat, 01 Jul 2006 16:43:05 GMT, "Marc CYBW"
> wrote:

>Had my first "incident" in flying after some 175 hours in 172s mostly but
>also Warriors and Arrows.
>
>After 4 hours dual and solo learning how to fly my new fractional
>ownership 182S, I decided I needed some solo practice and went out for an
>hour of flying the circuit. Started my takeoff run and did the usual checks
>(power, engine, airspeed) and after I got up to a little over 50 KIAS,
>noticed that the plane wanted to fly off. Odd I thought, seemed a little
>low, but up we went and once off the ground (maybe 50') noticed the ASI
>going DOWN from 50 to 40 to 30 to ZERO. Great - 4 hours into a plane I have
>just learned to land and no ASI.
>
>Fortunately the tower (CYBW) was most helpful and called out my ground speed
>(no wind today thank goodness) and I carefully stabilized my full flaps
>descent at 60 Kts (by the Tower) and landed uneventfully.
>
>Looks like a bug in the pitot tube was just far enough in that I did not
>notice it on my pre-flight but the forward motion forced it to completely
>block the airflow.
>
>Certainly caught my attention!


Get some dual covering various instruments until you are really
comfortable not needing them. Someone posted they had to do this
before solo, and I totally agree with this approach. Also good to do
on a BFR. I'll probably get flamed for this, but looking inside to
solve a problem when everything you need is available out the window
is completely beyond me. Trim wheels from one airplane to another can
have different indicator positions for the same trim condition, and
(as someone else also said) depending on the loading what you think is
right could be very wrong when only looking at the wheel inside
instead of looking at the flight attitude of the airplane by seeing
the position of the wings and nose relative to the horizon.

With 175 hours I can understand this would get your attention
especially being low time in make and model, and I'm glad it all
worked out well. Do yourself a favor though, and use this experience
to understand what you learn for your private are Minimums. Go find a
good instructor to teach you how to fly VFR without needing any inside
references. It sounds like you spend more time inside than out, and
the fact that you were looking at the VSI 50' off the ground is
disturbing to me.

Good luck!
z

[[email protected]]

zatatime > wrote:
> With 175 hours I can understand this would get your attention
> especially being low time in make and model, and I'm glad it all
> worked out well. Do yourself a favor though, and use this experience
> to understand what you learn for your private are Minimums. Go find a
> good instructor to teach you how to fly VFR without needing any inside
> references. It sounds like you spend more time inside than out, and
> the fact that you were looking at the VSI 50' off the ground is
> disturbing to me.

I think flying VFR w/o instruments is a great exercise, and agree about
looking outside.

But I don't see what's disturbing about what he said, and nothing
indicated that he's spending "more time inside than out". He didn't say
he was looking at the VSI, he said: "[...] and once off the ground
(maybe 50') noticed the ASI going DOWN from 50 to 40 to 30 to ZERO." He
guesstimated his altitude as he noticed the ASI going back down to zero.
It is possible to take off, climb out, watch where you are going
(outside), and still check instruments.

I can't speak for anyone else's training, but I was *taught* to make
quick visual checks of instruments during takeoff and climb-out.
Obviously "FLY THE AIRPLANE" is the first priority, but if the ASI fails
and you are in the air, as long as the airplane still feels, looks,
sounds and is flying the way it normally does, what's wrong with a
*brief* visual check of other instruments? Why is eliminating an ENTIRE
set of tools from the toolbox just because one isn't working the best
action to take in the situation he described?

I want as much information as is available in order to make ongoing,
in-flight decisions if one instrument fails. If something is wrong or
"disturbing" about this thinking, please tell me what it is.

[A Lieberman]

On Sun, 02 Jul 2006 10:04:51 -0400, zatatime wrote:

> It sounds like you spend more time inside than out, and
> the fact that you were looking at the VSI 50' off the ground is
> disturbing to me.

Why?

Original poster didn't give his airport. Maybe he was doing a short field
takeoff?

In otherwords, lets not assume that he didn't have to try to get Vx speed
to get out.

He did say he was doing some solo practice which doesn't necessarily
warrant a normal takeoff..

Allen

[zatatime]

On Sun, 02 Jul 2006 08:29:24 -0700,
wrote:

>zatatime > wrote:
>> With 175 hours I can understand this would get your attention
>> especially being low time in make and model, and I'm glad it all
>> worked out well. Do yourself a favor though, and use this experience
>> to understand what you learn for your private are Minimums. Go find a
>> good instructor to teach you how to fly VFR without needing any inside
>> references. It sounds like you spend more time inside than out, and
>> the fact that you were looking at the VSI 50' off the ground is
>> disturbing to me.
>
>I think flying VFR w/o instruments is a great exercise, and agree about
>looking outside.
>
>But I don't see what's disturbing about what he said, and nothing
>indicated that he's spending "more time inside than out". He didn't say
>he was looking at the VSI, he said: "[...] and once off the ground
>(maybe 50') noticed the ASI going DOWN from 50 to 40 to 30 to ZERO." He
>guesstimated his altitude as he noticed the ASI going back down to zero.
>It is possible to take off, climb out, watch where you are going
>(outside), and still check instruments.
>
>I can't speak for anyone else's training, but I was *taught* to make
>quick visual checks of instruments during takeoff and climb-out.
>Obviously "FLY THE AIRPLANE" is the first priority, but if the ASI fails
>and you are in the air, as long as the airplane still feels, looks,
>sounds and is flying the way it normally does, what's wrong with a
>*brief* visual check of other instruments? Why is eliminating an ENTIRE
>set of tools from the toolbox just because one isn't working the best
>action to take in the situation he described?
>
>I want as much information as is available in order to make ongoing,
>in-flight decisions if one instrument fails. If something is wrong or
>"disturbing" about this thinking, please tell me what it is.


I was going to change "disturbing" to something else, but couldn't
think of a different word quickly so I posted it. Probably a little
strong, especially since when I re-read the OP it said ASI not VSI. I
made a mistake and read VSI when ASI was posted. I also take a quick
gander at the ASI during takeoff.

The main point is to learn to fly outside the airplane. Too many
people I come across don't do this and I believe it makes a safer
pilot. I think besides my mis-read and hard word we are in agreement.

z

[zatatime]

On Sun, 2 Jul 2006 10:58:00 -0500, A Lieberman >
wrote:

>On Sun, 02 Jul 2006 10:04:51 -0400, zatatime wrote:
>
>> It sounds like you spend more time inside than out, and
>> the fact that you were looking at the VSI 50' off the ground is
>> disturbing to me.
>
>Why?
>
See my other post. I read VSI when ASI was stated by the OP.

>Original poster didn't give his airport. Maybe he was doing a short field
>takeoff?
He did give his airport, (CYBW) which has a control tower that gave
him GS info.

>In otherwords, lets not assume that he didn't have to try to get Vx speed
>to get out.
Given the fact he was at a towered field, I belive I made a safe
assumption.

z

[chixfly2]

Marc CYBW wrote:
> Had my first "incident" in flying after some 175 hours in 172s mostly but
> also Warriors and Arrows.
>
> After 4 hours dual and solo learning how to fly my new fractional
> ownership 182S, I decided I needed some solo practice and went out for an
> hour of flying the circuit. Started my takeoff run and did the usual checks
> (power, engine, airspeed) and after I got up to a little over 50 KIAS,
> noticed that the plane wanted to fly off. Odd I thought, seemed a little
> low, but up we went and once off the ground (maybe 50') noticed the ASI
> going DOWN from 50 to 40 to 30 to ZERO. Great - 4 hours into a plane I have
> just learned to land and no ASI.
>
> Fortunately the tower (CYBW) was most helpful and called out my ground speed
> (no wind today thank goodness) and I carefully stabilized my full flaps
> descent at 60 Kts (by the Tower) and landed uneventfully.
>
> Looks like a bug in the pitot tube was just far enough in that I did not
> notice it on my pre-flight but the forward motion forced it to completely
> block the airflow.
>
> Certainly caught my attention!
>
>
>
>
>
> --

If that's the worst thing that ever happens to you - you are a lucky
guy.
I flew four legs the other day with a failing ASI. You learn to know
your airplane.

[Brian[_1_]]

Actualy one of my ASI incidents (had the bug one too) was caused by the
pitot cover. Preflighted the Warrior that had sat outside during the
previous nights thunder storm and removed the Pitot cover from the
underwing Pitot/Static. Actually the ASI came up just fine on take off
but he altimeter remained at field elevation and the VSI showed Zero
climb. At about 500 feet the VSI jumped and the Altimeter jumped about
200 feet up and the ASI jumped about 5 kts as well. after that the VSI
would jump about every 200 feet. I think I was giving a Flight Review
at the time so figured it was a good time to talk about attitude
flying. We did about 3 take offs and landings and after that everything
worked fine. I figured that the storm the night before had blown water
into there Pitot/Static cover and it had puddled in the bottom of the
cover and worked its way into the static System. Once we gained enough
altitude the pressure difference was great enough to force a bubble of
air through the static tube. After doing this a few times the static
line cleared itself.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

wrote:
> Been there, done that. Likewise a bug in the pitot tube. In my case,
> the ASI seemed to come up normally as I accelerated, then started to
> gyrate wildly when I lifted off.
>
> I made an uneventful landing - without difficulty, as I recall.
> Cleaned out the remains of the bug with some safety wire and continued
> on my way.
>
> Since then I have been careful to put a cover on the pitot tube as part
> of the after flight routine.
>
> David Johnson

[rocky]

chixfly2 wrote:
> Marc CYBW wrote:
>
>>Had my first "incident" in flying after some 175 hours in 172s mostly but
>>also Warriors and Arrows.
>>
>>After 4 hours dual and solo learning how to fly my new fractional
>>ownership 182S, I decided I needed some solo practice and went out for an
>>hour of flying the circuit. Started my takeoff run and did the usual checks
>>(power, engine, airspeed) and after I got up to a little over 50 KIAS,
>>noticed that the plane wanted to fly off. Odd I thought, seemed a little
>>low, but up we went and once off the ground (maybe 50') noticed the ASI
>>going DOWN from 50 to 40 to 30 to ZERO. Great - 4 hours into a plane I have
>>just learned to land and no ASI.
>>
>>Fortunately the tower (CYBW) was most helpful and called out my ground speed
>>(no wind today thank goodness) and I carefully stabilized my full flaps
>>descent at 60 Kts (by the Tower) and landed uneventfully.
>>
>>Looks like a bug in the pitot tube was just far enough in that I did not
>>notice it on my pre-flight but the forward motion forced it to completely
>>block the airflow.
>>
>>Certainly caught my attention!
>>
How about a tach needle that begins to spin at engine RPM's. Like so
fast you cant see the needle. No big problem, just fly the rest of the
trip by feel unless its a new plane you haven't flown before
Rocky

[B A R R Y[_1_]]

Vaughn Simon wrote:
>
> Did your CFI ever have you land with a covered ASI? My primary CFI was
> always covering something.

In my case, not only did my CFI do it, the DE covered it as well.

It's good to hear all worked out for the OP!.

[B A R R Y[_1_]]

zatatime wrote:
>
> Get some dual covering various instruments until you are really
> comfortable not needing them. Someone posted they had to do this
> before solo, and I totally agree with this approach.

I think it may be part of the Jeppesen air work syllabus. I seem to
remember my CFI checking things off in my little lesson flip book while
he covered my instruments. Sometimes, he even did it while I was under
the hood.

When my DE did it, his Post-Its kept falling off. I was proud of my
no-instrument comfort, so I loaned him _my_ Sporty's failed instrument
covers so we could complete the task.

The bottom line was that I was taught that if we're missing one number,
such as airspeed, there are others to help, such as RPM and vertical
speed. Straight and level at a given setup will always equal the
missing data. Once you're stabilized, other procedures, like approach
and landing should simply snap together.

[Stefano]

Marc CYBW wrote:

> Had my first "incident" in flying after some 175 hours in 172s mostly but
> also Warriors and Arrows.
>
> After 4 hours dual and solo learning how to fly my new fractional
> ownership 182S, I decided I needed some solo practice and went out for an
> hour of flying the circuit. Started my takeoff run and did the usual
> checks (power, engine, airspeed) and after I got up to a little over 50
> KIAS, noticed that the plane wanted to fly off. Odd I thought, seemed a
> little
> low, but up we went and once off the ground (maybe 50') noticed the ASI
> going DOWN from 50 to 40 to 30 to ZERO. Great - 4 hours into a plane I
> have just learned to land and no ASI.
>
> Fortunately the tower (CYBW) was most helpful and called out my ground
> speed (no wind today thank goodness) and I carefully stabilized my full
> flaps
> descent at 60 Kts (by the Tower) and landed uneventfully.
>
> Looks like a bug in the pitot tube was just far enough in that I did not
> notice it on my pre-flight but the forward motion forced it to completely
> block the airflow.
>
> Certainly caught my attention!

When I fly very seldom watch the ASI indicator.
The first time is when I rise flaps on takeoff.
Very often the second and last is on final.
The rest of the time I watch RPM and MAP together with attitude because I
was taught to do so.
(readers, don't take this as a rule since I may be plain wrong and with 90
hours I don't have much experience to share).

Steve
(from Italy)

[Morgans[_1_]]

"Stefano" > wrote

> When I fly very seldom watch the ASI indicator.
> The first time is when I rise flaps on takeoff.
> Very often the second and last is on final.
> The rest of the time I watch RPM and MAP together with attitude because I
> was taught to do so.
> (readers, don't take this as a rule since I may be plain wrong and with 90
> hours I don't have much experience to share).

That is all well and good, if you are just flying around local, but if you
are stretching range on a cross country, you had better be keeping track of
time in the air, speed flown, and fuel burn, lest ye run the engine to where
it sucks air! <g>
--
Jim in NC

[chixfly2]

> How about a tach needle that begins to spin at engine RPM's. Like so
> fast you cant see the needle. No big problem, just fly the rest of the
> trip by feel unless its a new plane you haven't flown before
> Rocky


LOL!
I have had that happen also.
Started making a weird noise and then just started roaming.

[chixfly2]

> The first time is when I rise flaps on takeoff.
> Very often the second and last is on final.


Yeah - but those are two very important times during the flight - when
airspeed is essential.

[Bob Gardner]

I made sure that every one of my students learned to land without an
airspeed indicator before I signed them off for solo. Pitch attitude and
power setting are all you need...the airspeed indicator is nice, but (except
for those nasty regulations), not a requirement for safe flight.

Bob Gardner

"chixfly2" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
>> How about a tach needle that begins to spin at engine RPM's. Like so
>> fast you cant see the needle. No big problem, just fly the rest of the
>> trip by feel unless its a new plane you haven't flown before
>> Rocky
>
>
> LOL!
> I have had that happen also.
> Started making a weird noise and then just started roaming.
>