Prepping for IR checkride - questions

[Paul Folbrecht]

Hello all,

I've made the appointment for my IR checkride, although it's still a
ways out, and had a couple things on my mind.

1) Concerning the heading standards (+- 10 degrees, of course), I find
that I still, at this point, _occasionally_ exceed them, _especially_ in
prepping for an approach (though I have a yoke-mounted clip for my
plates I still find my scan degrading a bit when I'm prepping & setting
up). So, that's occasionally, not _consistently_, getting off-heading
by more than 10d (probably 20d at the most). How picky are most
examiners about this type of thing? I know that the PTS states that
"consistent" exceeding of the standards is grounds for failure, so I
rather hope that me getting off-course by, say 20d, then correcting
immediatly, isn't going to have a huge impact. But who knows. Perhaps
my skills are still not quite up to snuff. BTW I have about 33h total
instrument time now, about 8 of which is in a FTD.

2) I also seem to have a devil of a time passing DIRECTLY OVER a VOR
(when I say "VOR" of course I mean "VOR or "VORTAC", etc.), for instance
when flying a full approach and the navaid is the IAF I'm using. My
instructor tells me that I ought to fly so directly over that thing that
the CDI is perfectly centered and then immediately flips from "to" to
"from" on passage, with only an instant of the flag. What I tend to do
is be off by just a bit, getting full-deflection on the CDI (for a
second or two) before the flip. He correctly points out that the
standards call out 3/4 deflection as max deflection, and there seems to
be nothing to account for this type of thing. So, is this (passing
directly, I mean directly, over the navaid) a skill that I really should
have down by the time of the checkride? Just looking for a 2nd (and
possibly 3rd-150th) opinion here.

Thanks,
~Paul

P.S. I scored a 98% on my written and am a bit worried that this may
indicate I know nothing at all of real-world IFR flying! It also may
indicate that I think like the FAA, which scares me even more. Perhaps
I should retake and hope for a lower score?

[Ben Jackson]

In article >,
Paul Folbrecht > wrote:
>
>1) Concerning the heading standards (+- 10 degrees, of course), I find
>that I still, at this point, _occasionally_ exceed them, _especially_ in
>prepping for an approach

Take your hand off the yoke when you're not looking at the instruments.
Try to study the plate in short bursts. The rush you feel on practice
flights and on the checkride isn't there in a "real" IFR XC, when you
get plenty of enroute time to study your approach.

>2) I also seem to have a devil of a time passing DIRECTLY OVER a VOR

The closer you get, the faster it will come back in, which is important
on a VOR approach. The most important thing, though, is to avoid chasing
it at the last second. Commit to a heading before it starts pegging and
hold that heading until you get a good indication on the far side.

I pegged the CDI at station passage on the VOR approach on my checkride
and I still passed.

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

[Matt Whiting]

Ben Jackson wrote:

> In article >,
> Paul Folbrecht > wrote:
>
>>1) Concerning the heading standards (+- 10 degrees, of course), I find
>>that I still, at this point, _occasionally_ exceed them, _especially_ in
>>prepping for an approach
>
>
> Take your hand off the yoke when you're not looking at the instruments.
> Try to study the plate in short bursts. The rush you feel on practice
> flights and on the checkride isn't there in a "real" IFR XC, when you
> get plenty of enroute time to study your approach.
>
>
>>2) I also seem to have a devil of a time passing DIRECTLY OVER a VOR
>
>
> The closer you get, the faster it will come back in, which is important
> on a VOR approach. The most important thing, though, is to avoid chasing
> it at the last second. Commit to a heading before it starts pegging and
> hold that heading until you get a good indication on the far side.

Yes, within a mile or so of a VOR (depending on altitude, of course),
you must fly a heading, not the needle.


> I pegged the CDI at station passage on the VOR approach on my checkride
> and I still passed.

I've never flown over a VOR and not had the needle take a wild swing or
two, usually to full scale. I think the "cone of confusion" is going to
cause this no matter how precise you are in overflying a VOR. No DE
with a clue would fail someone for a needle swing while overflying a VOR
unless you really were way off course or chasing the needle.


Matt

[Andrew Sarangan]

Paul Folbrecht > wrote in
:

> Hello all,
>
> I've made the appointment for my IR checkride, although it's still a
> ways out, and had a couple things on my mind.
>
> 1) Concerning the heading standards (+- 10 degrees, of course), I find
> that I still, at this point, _occasionally_ exceed them, _especially_ in
> prepping for an approach (though I have a yoke-mounted clip for my
> plates I still find my scan degrading a bit when I'm prepping & setting
> up). So, that's occasionally, not _consistently_, getting off-heading
> by more than 10d (probably 20d at the most). How picky are most
> examiners about this type of thing? I know that the PTS states that
> "consistent" exceeding of the standards is grounds for failure, so I
> rather hope that me getting off-course by, say 20d, then correcting
> immediatly, isn't going to have a huge impact. But who knows. Perhaps
> my skills are still not quite up to snuff. BTW I have about 33h total
> instrument time now, about 8 of which is in a FTD.

How much off course you get not only depends on the heading deviations, but
also on how much time you remain on the wrong heading. Letting your heading
drift occasionally while doing other tasks is not all that unusual. As long
as you catch the error and correct it promptly, I don't think this would be
a big deal.



>
> 2) I also seem to have a devil of a time passing DIRECTLY OVER a VOR
> (when I say "VOR" of course I mean "VOR or "VORTAC", etc.), for instance
> when flying a full approach and the navaid is the IAF I'm using. My
> instructor tells me that I ought to fly so directly over that thing that
> the CDI is perfectly centered and then immediately flips from "to" to
> "from" on passage, with only an instant of the flag. What I tend to do
> is be off by just a bit, getting full-deflection on the CDI (for a
> second or two) before the flip. He correctly points out that the
> standards call out 3/4 deflection as max deflection, and there seems to
> be nothing to account for this type of thing. So, is this (passing
> directly, I mean directly, over the navaid) a skill that I really should
> have down by the time of the checkride? Just looking for a 2nd (and
> possibly 3rd-150th) opinion here.
>
If you are getting full CDI deflection for only one or two seconds before
the flip, then you are doing fine. What you want to avoid is the CDI
staying that way for longer than, say, about 10 seconds.

[Brad Zeigler]

"Paul Folbrecht" > wrote in message
...
> Hello all,
>
> I've made the appointment for my IR checkride, although it's still a
> ways out, and had a couple things on my mind.
>
> 1) Concerning the heading standards (+- 10 degrees, of course), I find
> that I still, at this point, _occasionally_ exceed them, _especially_ in
> prepping for an approach (though I have a yoke-mounted clip for my
> plates I still find my scan degrading a bit when I'm prepping & setting
> up). So, that's occasionally, not _consistently_, getting off-heading
> by more than 10d (probably 20d at the most). How picky are most
> examiners about this type of thing? I know that the PTS states that
> "consistent" exceeding of the standards is grounds for failure, so I
> rather hope that me getting off-course by, say 20d, then correcting
> immediatly, isn't going to have a huge impact. But who knows. Perhaps
> my skills are still not quite up to snuff. BTW I have about 33h total
> instrument time now, about 8 of which is in a FTD.

Think about it this way: in real life ifr, if you bust your altitude, you
could cause a loss of seperation, period. If your heading drifts 20 degrees
for 10 seconds, you're not going to create a loss of seperation. The
examiner want see that if you deviate, you identify your deviation quickly
and correct as necessary. Keep your scan up by dividing the approach
briefing into small steps.

>
> 2) I also seem to have a devil of a time passing DIRECTLY OVER a VOR
> (when I say "VOR" of course I mean "VOR or "VORTAC", etc.), for instance
> when flying a full approach and the navaid is the IAF I'm using. My
> instructor tells me that I ought to fly so directly over that thing that
> the CDI is perfectly centered and then immediately flips from "to" to
> "from" on passage, with only an instant of the flag. What I tend to do
> is be off by just a bit, getting full-deflection on the CDI (for a
> second or two) before the flip. He correctly points out that the
> standards call out 3/4 deflection as max deflection, and there seems to
> be nothing to account for this type of thing. So, is this (passing
> directly, I mean directly, over the navaid) a skill that I really should
> have down by the time of the checkride? Just looking for a 2nd (and
> possibly 3rd-150th) opinion here.

I've watched students convinced they were about to cross the station while
they were still four miles out and would let the needle go full scale and
just fly a heading. The deal is this: you should be making heading
corrections based on the deflection of the needle. If you continuously make
small corrections, you should be able to keep the needle centered right on
up to the station. If the needle starts to head one way or another, make no
more than a 10 degree heading correction; if that doesn't bring the needle
back in, you're probably getting right on top.

>
> Thanks,
> ~Paul
>
> P.S. I scored a 98% on my written and am a bit worried that this may
> indicate I know nothing at all of real-world IFR flying! It also may
> indicate that I think like the FAA, which scares me even more. Perhaps
> I should retake and hope for a lower score?

I hope this is a joke. The "don't get too high a score on the knowledge
test" theory is yet another aviation myth. Hint: the examiner already
knowns you don't know anything about real-world IFR flying...you don't have
your rating yet.

[Alan Pendley]

The 3/4 scale deflection tolerance is only for tracking a VOR or ILS;
passing over a VOR will almost always get full scale deflection in the cone
of confusion.

Regards,
-Alan

PP-ASEL-IA
============
He correctly points out that the
standards call out 3/4 deflection as max deflection, and there seems to
be nothing to account for this type of thing. So, is this (passing
directly, I mean directly, over the navaid) a skill that I really should
have down by the time of the checkride? Just looking for a 2nd (and
possibly 3rd-150th) opinion here.

[Paul Folbrecht]

Thanks. It seems this is the consensus. Although what my instructor is
aiming for is possible (and I'm sure he can do it regularly), it's
awfully difficult in practice. He says the full deflection should be
for just an instant, while I usually have it for maybe 2s.

Thanks to everybody else who replied, too.

Alan Pendley wrote:
> The 3/4 scale deflection tolerance is only for tracking a VOR or ILS;
> passing over a VOR will almost always get full scale deflection in the cone
> of confusion.
>
> Regards,
> -Alan
>
> PP-ASEL-IA
> ============
> He correctly points out that the
> standards call out 3/4 deflection as max deflection, and there seems to
> be nothing to account for this type of thing. So, is this (passing
> directly, I mean directly, over the navaid) a skill that I really should
> have down by the time of the checkride? Just looking for a 2nd (and
> possibly 3rd-150th) opinion here.
>
>
>

[Paul Folbrecht]

>>P.S. I scored a 98% on my written and am a bit worried that this may
>>indicate I know nothing at all of real-world IFR flying! It also may
>>indicate that I think like the FAA, which scares me even more. Perhaps
>>I should retake and hope for a lower score?
>
>
> I hope this is a joke. The "don't get too high a score on the knowledge
> test" theory is yet another aviation myth. Hint: the examiner already
> knowns you don't know anything about real-world IFR flying...you don't have
> your rating yet.

Yes, it was certainly a joke. :-) It was funny, too, damn it.
Although, thinking like the FAA is something that would scare me a bit.

[C Kingsbury]

"Paul Folbrecht" > wrote in message
...
> Hello all,
>
> I've made the appointment for my IR checkride, although it's still a
> ways out, and had a couple things on my mind.
>
> 1) Concerning the heading standards (+- 10 degrees, of course), I find
> that I still, at this point, _occasionally_ exceed them, _especially_ in

During my checkride my heading deviations exceeded 10d and altitudes +/-
100' but I was always correcting as this happened, so the examiner allowed
it.

Another point to keep in mind is to have a good structured process for
briefing the approach so that you do it the same way each time. This way you
will do it more quickly, make fewer mistakes, and maintain better control of
the flight overall. My process is as follows:

1. Find the FAF and put it into the GPS/Loran
2. Tune the VOR/NDB/LOC frequency and set the proper course on the OBS
3. Set radios with approach, tower, and ground in active/standby as
appropriate
4. Tune any available crossing radials or other fixes that can provide
additional information
5. Figure out the next altitude you need to be at and how far out you are.

My only other advice would be to get a good night's sleep, get up early and
have a good breakfast, and relax. Odds are if your CFI has signed you off
you're ready to pass and your goal is simply to not screw up too badly.

-cwk.

[Matt Whiting]

Paul Folbrecht wrote:
> Thanks. It seems this is the consensus. Although what my instructor is
> aiming for is possible (and I'm sure he can do it regularly), it's
> awfully difficult in practice. He says the full deflection should be
> for just an instant, while I usually have it for maybe 2s.

Your flight instructor doesn't understand very well how a VOR
transmitter works. The cone of confusion gets larger with increasing
altitude. If you fly over the VOR about 50' above it, then the
deflection would be for "just an instant." If you fly over at 10,000
feet, the full scale deflection can last for quite some time (several
seconds at least), depending on how fast an airplane you are flying.


Matt

[Chris]

"Paul Folbrecht" > wrote in message
news:N_ixd.160722

Make sure you have had plenty to eat about an hour before the start. It is
amazing how much energy you burn just on the oral and you need to make sure
you have plenty of energy left for the flying.

Do not be tempted to skip eating because of nerves etc. The food is really
important.

Assuming your instructor thinks you are ready, then you likely are and all
you need to do is follow strategies that raise your likelihood of success.

I set myself the target of flying within half the deviations than those
required for the PTS. That reduces any corrections necessary and avoids
swinging from one extreme to another with over corrections and a high chance
of blowing the limits.

The other tip is to talk to yourself when you are doing things. I find that
the brain lets me make errors if I just think something whereas when I say
it out aloud there are less errors. Also, it lets the examiner know what you
are thinking about.

I had the situation during my checkride where I had misdialled in the ILS
frequency. When I was getting nothing on the ident, I talked my way through
the issue. The DPE knew I knew something was wrong and knew that I was going
to catch the mistake as I went through the rechecking process aloud.

Mistake spotted and rectified, happy DPE, happy me. In the debrief he said
the commentary was a good habit to have especially in a single pilot
situation as one needed to challenge oneself.

Chris

ps good luck

[Matt Young]

Based on my experience from my checkride, the examiner is looking to see
if you understand what's going on and can deal with it safely. I
completely blew my partial panel approach royally. I can't remember the
details of what happened, I just remember being confused and turned
around in my head, be it nerves or what (and I'm sure there would be
nerves if I ever really had to fly a partial panel VOR approach).
Anyway, the examiner later told me that he had very nearly started to
fill out a pink slip when I said (he was playing ATC) "Memphis Center,
669RA would like to fly direct Hot Springs VOR and restart the
approach." "Cessna 9RA, c/m 3k, fly direct HOT cleared VOR ZAPLE
approach." Everything from there on went great. Just pay attention,
and show that you can safely handle the plane.

Paul Folbrecht wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I've made the appointment for my IR checkride, although it's still a
> ways out, and had a couple things on my mind.
>
> 1) Concerning the heading standards (+- 10 degrees, of course), I find
> that I still, at this point, _occasionally_ exceed them, _especially_ in
> prepping for an approach (though I have a yoke-mounted clip for my
> plates I still find my scan degrading a bit when I'm prepping & setting
> up). So, that's occasionally, not _consistently_, getting off-heading
> by more than 10d (probably 20d at the most). How picky are most
> examiners about this type of thing? I know that the PTS states that
> "consistent" exceeding of the standards is grounds for failure, so I
> rather hope that me getting off-course by, say 20d, then correcting
> immediatly, isn't going to have a huge impact. But who knows. Perhaps
> my skills are still not quite up to snuff. BTW I have about 33h total
> instrument time now, about 8 of which is in a FTD.
>
> 2) I also seem to have a devil of a time passing DIRECTLY OVER a VOR
> (when I say "VOR" of course I mean "VOR or "VORTAC", etc.), for instance
> when flying a full approach and the navaid is the IAF I'm using. My
> instructor tells me that I ought to fly so directly over that thing that
> the CDI is perfectly centered and then immediately flips from "to" to
> "from" on passage, with only an instant of the flag. What I tend to do
> is be off by just a bit, getting full-deflection on the CDI (for a
> second or two) before the flip. He correctly points out that the
> standards call out 3/4 deflection as max deflection, and there seems to
> be nothing to account for this type of thing. So, is this (passing
> directly, I mean directly, over the navaid) a skill that I really should
> have down by the time of the checkride? Just looking for a 2nd (and
> possibly 3rd-150th) opinion here.
>
> Thanks,
> ~Paul
>
> P.S. I scored a 98% on my written and am a bit worried that this may
> indicate I know nothing at all of real-world IFR flying! It also may
> indicate that I think like the FAA, which scares me even more. Perhaps
> I should retake and hope for a lower score?

[Brad Zeigler]

"Paul Folbrecht" > wrote in message
...
> >>P.S. I scored a 98% on my written and am a bit worried that this may
> >>indicate I know nothing at all of real-world IFR flying! It also may
> >>indicate that I think like the FAA, which scares me even more. Perhaps
> >>I should retake and hope for a lower score?
> >
> >
> > I hope this is a joke. The "don't get too high a score on the knowledge
> > test" theory is yet another aviation myth. Hint: the examiner already
> > knowns you don't know anything about real-world IFR flying...you don't
have
> > your rating yet.
>
> Yes, it was certainly a joke. :-) It was funny, too, damn it.
> Although, thinking like the FAA is something that would scare me a bit.

It would be funny if it weren't for the instructors out there chiding their
students for doing "too good".

Thankfully the FAA has plenty of other asinine policies that are nearly that
absurd.

[Ross Oliver]

Matt Whiting > wrote:
>Your flight instructor doesn't understand very well how a VOR
>transmitter works. The cone of confusion gets larger with increasing
>altitude. If you fly over the VOR about 50' above it, then the
>deflection would be for "just an instant." If you fly over at 10,000
>feet, the full scale deflection can last for quite some time (several
>seconds at least), depending on how fast an airplane you are flying.


If you are getting full scale deflection then you are not in
the cone of confusion. You are also not passing directly over the
station. The cone of confusion is the volume directly over the
station where there is no VOR signal. That's why it's called the
cone of confusion. If you are getting a signal, then you should
not be confused.

The goal should be to go from a needle-centered TO indication, to a
no-signal flag for 1-2 seconds, to a needle-centered FROM indication.
There should not be any full-scale swing of the CDI needle. While
this is challenging and takes practice, it is by no means
impossible. Autopilots do it all the time.

[Matt Whiting]

Ross Oliver wrote:

> Matt Whiting > wrote:
>
>>Your flight instructor doesn't understand very well how a VOR
>>transmitter works. The cone of confusion gets larger with increasing
>>altitude. If you fly over the VOR about 50' above it, then the
>>deflection would be for "just an instant." If you fly over at 10,000
>>feet, the full scale deflection can last for quite some time (several
>>seconds at least), depending on how fast an airplane you are flying.
>
>
>
> If you are getting full scale deflection then you are not in
> the cone of confusion. You are also not passing directly over the
> station. The cone of confusion is the volume directly over the
> station where there is no VOR signal. That's why it's called the
> cone of confusion. If you are getting a signal, then you should
> not be confused.
>
> The goal should be to go from a needle-centered TO indication, to a
> no-signal flag for 1-2 seconds, to a needle-centered FROM indication.
> There should not be any full-scale swing of the CDI needle. While
> this is challenging and takes practice, it is by no means
> impossible. Autopilots do it all the time.

Every VOR I've flown has a needle the swings wildly from side to side or
goes full-scale to one side when crossing a VOR. Doesn't matter how
precisely the VOR is crossed. The off flag appears as well, but the
needle doesn't just sit in the donut through all of this. Maybe you'll
believe the Air Force.

http://www.vusaf.org/aetc/documents/VOR%20MANEUVERS%20_PART%202.pdf#search='vor%20cone %20of%20confusion'


Matt

[Brian]

1)As long as it is occasional deviations and you catch it and point it
out to him it will not be an issue. Just talk to your self as you make
the correction. "Ok, get back on 210" then just make sure you actually
do get back on 210. The examiner probably already caught that you were
off heading and is just waiting to see if you will catch it.

My examiner let me fly 400 feet below the MDA for a full minute or more
before he busted me. I bet if I had caught and corrected it he would
have passed me. The next time I made sure I read the chart correctly.


Another instructor I work with walked in after just letting a student
solo and told me. "That guy can't do a good landing to save his life,
on the other hand he is better at saving bad landings than I am" The
point being I would rather fly with pilot that makes and recognizes his
mistakes than one that never makes a mistake. I don't know what the guy
that never makes mistakes will do when he does make one.

2) As you Cross over the Vor turn 10-15 degrees toward the needle swing
and hold that correction until the needl starts coming back. Your
instructor is correct that it should just switch and that that should
be your target, but you will seldom hit it. Aim for perfection, and
take the best you can get.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

[Roy Smith]

Brian > wrote:
> 2) As you Cross over the Vor turn 10-15 degrees toward the needle swing
> and hold that correction until the needl starts coming back.

It really helps to know how far you are from the station, using DME,
GPS, or a crossing radial. Five miles out, you still want to be
tracking back to the radial. One mile out, calling it close enough
and holding heading makes more sense. Without a good idea of how far
out you are, it's hard to know which is the right strategy.

I still remember one training flight I took years ago where I saw the
CDI head out to the peg and confidently said to my instructor, "We're
almost on top of the VOR, so I'm not going to chase the needle; I'll
just hold heading and wait for the To/From to flip". In reality, we
were still a bunch of miles out and he just sat there watching me head
off into space.

[Ross Oliver]

Matt Whiting > wrote:
>Every VOR I've flown has a needle the swings wildly from side to side or
>goes full-scale to one side when crossing a VOR. Doesn't matter how
>precisely the VOR is crossed. The off flag appears as well, but the
>needle doesn't just sit in the donut through all of this. Maybe you'll
>believe the Air Force.
>
>http://www.vusaf.org/aetc/documents/VOR%20MANEUVERS%20_PART%202.pdf#search='vor%20cone %20of%20confusion'


From the referenced document:

The cone of confusion is an area above the station where the signal
from the antenna is not receivable and therefore is not reliable.

So, yes, I do believe the Air Force. Show me a CDI that does not center
the needle when the VOR signal is lost.

I also challenge your claim that the needle will swing "wildly from side
to side." Passing slightly abeam the station will cause the needle to
go full deflection in one direction and stay there until after station
passage. In a properly functioning CDI, there should be no side-to-side
swinging.

[Paul Folbrecht]

_Excellent_ point. My VFR GPS helps so much for situational awareness
(I have no DME), and I'm still struggling a bit with whether to use it
on the checkride. As of now I have it on the copilot yoke anyway
(because I need my chart clip and timer on my yoke) but I can still look
at it if need be. One component to the question is whether or not the
DE will just choose to make me do without it anyway.

> It really helps to know how far you are from the station, using DME,
> GPS, or a crossing radial. Five miles out, you still want to be
> tracking back to the radial. One mile out, calling it close enough
> and holding heading makes more sense. Without a good idea of how far
> out you are, it's hard to know which is the right strategy.
>
> I still remember one training flight I took years ago where I saw the
> CDI head out to the peg and confidently said to my instructor, "We're
> almost on top of the VOR, so I'm not going to chase the needle; I'll
> just hold heading and wait for the To/From to flip". In reality, we
> were still a bunch of miles out and he just sat there watching me head
> off into space.

[Steven Barnes]

My examiner left our panel mounted VFR GPS on while I was doing partial
panel stuff. After that approach, I noticed him casually turn the GPS to a
page that didn't give me any useful info. Not sure if it was on purpose or
not. At least it gave me a chance to see how the winds were affecting my
ground track. Made the next 2 approaches, even without GPS, a bit easier.


"Paul Folbrecht" > wrote in message
...
> _Excellent_ point. My VFR GPS helps so much for situational awareness
> (I have no DME), and I'm still struggling a bit with whether to use it
> on the checkride. As of now I have it on the copilot yoke anyway
> (because I need my chart clip and timer on my yoke) but I can still look
> at it if need be. One component to the question is whether or not the
> DE will just choose to make me do without it anyway.
>
> > It really helps to know how far you are from the station, using DME,
> > GPS, or a crossing radial. Five miles out, you still want to be
> > tracking back to the radial. One mile out, calling it close enough
> > and holding heading makes more sense. Without a good idea of how far
> > out you are, it's hard to know which is the right strategy.
> >
> > I still remember one training flight I took years ago where I saw the
> > CDI head out to the peg and confidently said to my instructor, "We're
> > almost on top of the VOR, so I'm not going to chase the needle; I'll
> > just hold heading and wait for the To/From to flip". In reality, we
> > were still a bunch of miles out and he just sat there watching me head
> > off into space.

[Roy Smith]

In article >,
"Steven Barnes" > wrote:

> My examiner left our panel mounted VFR GPS on while I was doing partial
> panel stuff. After that approach, I noticed him casually turn the GPS to a
> page that didn't give me any useful info. Not sure if it was on purpose or
> not. At least it gave me a chance to see how the winds were affecting my
> ground track. Made the next 2 approaches, even without GPS, a bit easier.

I'm sure it was on purpose.

[Brian]

A couple a weeks ago I did an IFR dual Cross Country with a student who
had his Garmin 295 (VFR GPS) Mounted in the airplane. I fully believe
in using everthing you got and were were IMC for about 1/2 of the
flight.

Just as we intercepted the Arc for a VOR DME approach in IMC I noted
that the the GPS appeared to be frozen. We flew the full approach to an
actual missed. We never did see the airport and then shot the ILS at
another nearby airport and and were climbing out for our return flight
before we felt like we had enough time to see what was going on with
the GPS. It was completely locked up and still showed us on the Arc for
the VOR DME Approach. We finally had to remove the batteries to reset
it as even the power switch was frozen.

Your DE was just simulating this exact scenario. It was great lesson
for my student.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

[A Lieberman]

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 03:39:08 GMT, Steven Barnes wrote:

> My examiner left our panel mounted VFR GPS on while I was doing partial
> panel stuff. After that approach, I noticed him casually turn the GPS to a
> page that didn't give me any useful info. Not sure if it was on purpose or
> not. At least it gave me a chance to see how the winds were affecting my
> ground track. Made the next 2 approaches, even without GPS, a bit easier.

On my checkride, I did everything possible NOT to use my VFR panel mounted
GPS on my partial panel approach UNTIL the DE gave me a subtle hint to use
"every available" tool in my plane.

With that subtle hint, it didn't take me long on my partial panel approach
to code in DRCT JAN, put it on the CDI page and fly my partial panel with
the help of the GPS.

I had to set the CDI page to show my track and desired track, all while
flying the plane.

The DE's rational was that you lost vacuum, you still have electrical, so
use all tools available on the electrical system.

On my full panel approaches, the DE was glad I used the GPS to monitor the
tracking of my flight in the CDI window. It helped me figure out the
crosswind component to set my header bug on my localizer and ILS
approaches. I never use the map feature anyway, so it felt comfortable for
me on the CDI window on my checkride.

Allen

[Alan Pendley]

My instructor told me to think of the checkride as a "day's work", and he
was right. It took loads of mental and physical energy, and I felt like I
had put in a full day at work by the time it was over.

-Alan Pendley
PP-ASEL-IA
=============
Make sure you have had plenty to eat about an hour before the start. It is
amazing how much energy you burn just on the oral and you need to make sure
you have plenty of energy left for the flying. Do not be tempted to skip
eating because of nerves etc. The food is really
important.

[Jack Allison]

Hey Paul...good luck on the checkride. I just started my instrument
work and posts like this are great reading. I'm sure to come back to
things like this, hopefully sometime in the spring when I get to take
the DPE along.

As for the high score on the written, IMHO, I don't think it matters to
the examiner. A good examiner is going to probe for what you know/don't
know no matter what your written score.

Looking forward to your post about the checkride.

Jack Allison
PP-ASEL, Instrument student

[CFII_ASC]

Paul,

Heading control: The PTS says "...not consistently outside the
limits..." Most examiners are going to give you considerable leeway.
What they are looking for, really, is how 'ahead' and 'in control' are
you? Are you always inside the limits but working yourself into a
frenzy to do it, or are you occaisionally outside the limits but
clearly in command of the flight? A couple of 20 d deviations during
the approach briefing probably will not bust you. Don't do it on the
ILS, tho.

Some tips on heading control: 1) trim the aircraft to a true, exact
hands off perfect trim. 2) Let go of the yoke 3) use light rudder
pressure to keep the TC at 0 turn. 4) go work the side task (i.e.
approach briefing) for five seconds or so 5) look back at the
instruments; 6) don't touch the yoke, just use light rudder pressure to
set up a slow (one wingtip) turn rate towards the desired heading 7)
go back to the side taks *while* that correction is taking place (dont
sit and watch it until on heading and then look away; use the time
while the correction takes effect. 8) Never touch the yoke when your
eyes are not actively scanning the flight instruments.

VOR tracking: Your CFII is doing a good job at challenging you, but
for the checkride no reasonable examiner is going to require a
perfectly centered needle over the VOR. If you are getting a pegged
needle only for a second or two when crossing the VOR, you are doing
better than most, and will pass the checkride just fine. The terrain
clear area on an airway is 4nm each side; the deviation off center that
corresponds to two seconds pegged is, well, insignificant. If you
really, really, really, want to nail that vor down to the last foot,
try this; as you get really close, the needle starts to get 'twitchy,'
and hard to track. At that point, abandon any heading information, but
simply turn at standard rate in the same direction as the motion (not
position) of the needle. You can really nail it this way, but it is
questionable that this is the best use of your mental resources at that
moment. You probably have other things to do which would be of more
use.

Written: No, that means you studied. Make sure when you go in you
know what question you missed and why.

Regards,

Gene