no instrument flight

It might an old message, but I ran across it and would
encourage instructors and those who haven't to at least
experience two flights with no reference to instruments,
at least to pattern altitude. Learn to use the wind
noise and pitch attitude on a glider you know well.
One of the more rewarding aspects of glider flight
is getting away from the knobs and dials and reading
the winds, feeling the thermals in your butt, etc.
Even in the most advanced sailplanes. It also makes
one a better pilot and more confident. When I have
a student that is at the last stage before solo and
they appear to be having trouble with the landing,
most of the time it is instrument fixation, and these
flights right before solo are perfect for zero instruments.
They can do it and it's a great confidence builder.
You'll be in the back seat keeping a watchful eye
as the instructor pilot.

there have been many off field landings and off the
end of the pavement landings that likely could have
been avoided if this 'oneness' with the aircraft were
stressed more in our training. I believe the SSF does
support this position and use of 'instrument failure'
as part of the teaching syllabus. They have a fine
web site very useful to CFIs anywhere.

Regards to the German instructor that brought it up.

Bob
San Antonio Soaring
Boerne Stage Field

We have our students do a no instrument (No Altimeter and No AirSpeed) not
just down to pattern altitude.. but all the way to landing. If it fails..
you are not going to get it back in the traffic pattern. And also to remove
that "altitude crutch" when judging the pattern.
BT


"Robert Bruce" wrote in message
...
It might an old message, but I ran across it and would
encourage instructors and those who haven't to at least
experience two flights with no reference to instruments,
at least to pattern altitude. Learn to use the wind
noise and pitch attitude on a glider you know well.
One of the more rewarding aspects of glider flight
is getting away from the knobs and dials and reading
the winds, feeling the thermals in your butt, etc.
Even in the most advanced sailplanes. It also makes
one a better pilot and more confident. When I have
a student that is at the last stage before solo and
they appear to be having trouble with the landing,
most of the time it is instrument fixation, and these
flights right before solo are perfect for zero instruments.
They can do it and it's a great confidence builder.
You'll be in the back seat keeping a watchful eye
as the instructor pilot.

there have been many off field landings and off the
end of the pavement landings that likely could have
been avoided if this 'oneness' with the aircraft were
stressed more in our training. I believe the SSF does
support this position and use of 'instrument failure'
as part of the teaching syllabus. They have a fine
web site very useful to CFIs anywhere.

Regards to the German instructor that brought it up.

Bob
San Antonio Soaring
Boerne Stage Field

No airspeed and/or altimeter training is essential. From personal
experience (2000+ glider hours in both rental and private gliders) you
WILL eventually lose the use of either of these instruments inflight -
and it should be absolutely no big deal!

Altimeter first - this is a plain old no-brainer. This is probably the
least valuable (after the compass) instrument in the glider for safe
flight. And it has NO serious business in the pilot's crosscheck once
the decision to land has been made - which could be at 1000' agl at the
IP, or 20 miles out on a final glide to a field you have never been to.
Any student who refers to the altimeter in the pattern should be
immediatly deprived of the use of that instrument until he understands
how to visually judge his pattern, from both high and low initial
points. I cringe when I find the altimeters in the club two-seat ships
I fly set to zero (QFE) instead of field elevation - because the
implication is that our club instructors and students are using the
altimeter as a crutch in the pattern.

Now, the airspeed indicator. Nice to have, but again, not necessary
for safe flight once the concept of angle-of-attack is thouroughly
understood. While I would probably fly my own ship knowing the
altimeter wasn't working (and wouldn't hesitate with a working GPS), I
wouldn't take off with a known bad airspeed indicator. But once
airborne, it really isn't a big deal - especially with some practice
and familiarity with the glider.

Kirk
66

Non instrumented flight or at least circuit practice is part of the UK
syllabus. I agree it is a very necessary skill to have.

Want some fun? Remove the front canopy string and ask the student to
fly without it! I lost the string on takeoff on my Nimbus 3 once, boy
did I ever have to work hard for the next couple of hours. At the best
of time that ship wanted to fly sideways, without the string it was
nigh-on impossible to be confident that I was going straight. On
reflection on the ground I think that the loss of the string in an open
class ship presented more of a danger than say a blocked static ( had
that once too! ) and loosing vario, altimeter and ASI all at once.

Ian

Robert Bruce wrote:
It might an old message, but I ran across it and would
encourage instructors and those who haven't to at least
experience two flights with no reference to instruments,
at least to pattern altitude. Learn to use the wind
noise and pitch attitude on a glider you know well.
One of the more rewarding aspects of glider flight
is getting away from the knobs and dials and reading
the winds, feeling the thermals in your butt, etc.
Even in the most advanced sailplanes. It also makes
one a better pilot and more confident. When I have
a student that is at the last stage before solo and
they appear to be having trouble with the landing,
most of the time it is instrument fixation, and these
flights right before solo are perfect for zero instruments.
They can do it and it's a great confidence builder.
You'll be in the back seat keeping a watchful eye
as the instructor pilot.

there have been many off field landings and off the
end of the pavement landings that likely could have
been avoided if this 'oneness' with the aircraft were
stressed more in our training. I believe the SSF does
support this position and use of 'instrument failure'
as part of the teaching syllabus. They have a fine
web site very useful to CFIs anywhere.

Why not begin instruction with both ASI and Alt. covered, until final
prep for solo? If the ship has instruments in the back for the
instructor, to meet the minimum equipment list, I don't see a down-side.
No crutchs, no bad habits.
Thoughts?

Shawn

wrote:
No airspeed and/or altimeter training is essential.

I agree with this, but ...

From personal
experience (2000+ glider hours in both rental and private gliders) you
WILL eventually lose the use of either of these instruments inflight -
and it should be absolutely no big deal!

....suppose you always flew gliders with a redundant altimeter that read
AGL? Would it be proper for the pilot to refer to this during landing?
Would he be safer overall, even if his "that looks about right" skills
faded a bit?

A lot of us have this redundant, AGL readout altimeter in our cockpits
already: it's a PDA running a program like SeeYou or Winpilot.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA

www.motorglider.org - Download "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane
Operation"

Eric Greenwell wrote:
...suppose you always flew gliders with a redundant altimeter that read
AGL? Would it be proper for the pilot to refer to this during landing?
Would he be safer overall, even if his "that looks about right" skills
faded a bit?

A lot of us have this redundant, AGL readout altimeter in our cockpits
already: it's a PDA running a program like SeeYou or Winpilot.

Eric,

The problem is, as always, with the "always". Most low time or student
pilots will probably not be flying in a glider equipped with a PDA - or
a glide computer, for that matter!

In addition, while the PDA is a fantastic tool (I use MCU, with the AGL
navbox on all the time) it is also a serious "eye-magnet", and the last
thing a pilot should be looking at in the pattern! It should really be
used in the same way as the altimeter - at the IP (or equivalent) to
confirm the approximate height above the landing area, then once
commited to a landing, should be completely ignored.

Like drugs, all the fancy moving map displays have a big potential for
mis-use - there is so much neat information there, that it is a real
temptation (especially during "easy" phases of flight) to look at the
display and play with it, instead of looking out the window. One needs
to train oneself to only access the information when it is needed, and
to setup the displays so that important info is easily gained without a
lot of button pushing - otherwise it can be a real safety hazard!

Kirk
66

wrote:
Eric Greenwell wrote:
...suppose you always flew gliders with a redundant altimeter that read
AGL? Would it be proper for the pilot to refer to this during landing?
Would he be safer overall, even if his "that looks about right" skills
faded a bit?

A lot of us have this redundant, AGL readout altimeter in our cockpits
already: it's a PDA running a program like SeeYou or Winpilot.

Eric,

The problem is, as always, with the "always". Most low time or student
pilots will probably not be flying in a glider equipped with a PDA - or
a glide computer, for that matter!

I don't think it's a good thing for student pilots, but how about the
licensed pilot flying cross-country? Would outlandings be safer if
pilots used the AGL information? I already do so to some extent, when I
use the "make waypoint here" feature over a good outlanding field, then
use that waypoint as my "target" for the glide computer.


In addition, while the PDA is a fantastic tool (I use MCU, with the AGL
navbox on all the time) it is also a serious "eye-magnet", and the last
thing a pilot should be looking at in the pattern! It should really be
used in the same way as the altimeter - at the IP (or equivalent) to
confirm the approximate height above the landing area, then once
commited to a landing, should be completely ignored.

That's the way I think it should be used. The big difference over an
altimeter is the PDA/moving map can indicate (fairly well) your AGL at
an uncharted farmer's field, and the altimeter can't.


Like drugs, all the fancy moving map displays have a big potential for
mis-use - there is so much neat information there, that it is a real
temptation (especially during "easy" phases of flight) to look at the
display and play with it, instead of looking out the window. One needs
to train oneself to only access the information when it is needed, and
to setup the displays so that important info is easily gained without a
lot of button pushing - otherwise it can be a real safety hazard!

Absolutely! Pilots should know the difference between "need to know" and
"just interesting" information. Of course, I had the same problem with
paper maps, rulers, and whiz wheel calculators, trying to figure out
where I was, how far away I was from a safe field, and if I could still
get there. A difference, perhaps, is I suspect pilots weren't likely to
pull out a paper map while in a gaggle, but they might be inclined to
punch a few buttons on their glide computers while in the gaggle.


--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA

www.motorglider.org - Download "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane
Operation"

Eric Greenwell wrote:
I don't think it's a good thing for student pilots, but how about the
licensed pilot flying cross-country? Would outlandings be safer if
pilots used the AGL information? I already do so to some extent, when I
use the "make waypoint here" feature over a good outlanding field, then
use that waypoint as my "target" for the glide computer.

I've been working with digital terrain elevation data since the mid-80s.
There are noticeable errors in some of the publicly available source
data. Fitting data for a usable area into the memory available in a PDA
requires a reduction in resolution. One also needs to consider the
possibility of significant GPS altitude errors. This data is fine for
drawing maps and getting a general idea of the height of the terrain,
but, in my opinion, depending on it for flying a pattern into an
unfamiliar field would be a mistake...

Marc

"Shawn" sdotherecurry@bresnannextdotnet wrote in message
. ..
Robert Bruce wrote:
It might an old message, but I ran across it and would
encourage instructors and those who haven't to at least
experience two flights with no reference to instruments,
at least to pattern altitude. Learn to use the wind
noise and pitch attitude on a glider you know well.
One of the more rewarding aspects of glider flight
is getting away from the knobs and dials and reading
the winds, feeling the thermals in your butt, etc.
Even in the most advanced sailplanes. It also makes
one a better pilot and more confident. When I have
a student that is at the last stage before solo and
they appear to be having trouble with the landing,
most of the time it is instrument fixation, and these
flights right before solo are perfect for zero instruments.
They can do it and it's a great confidence builder.
You'll be in the back seat keeping a watchful eye
as the instructor pilot.

there have been many off field landings and off the
end of the pavement landings that likely could have
been avoided if this 'oneness' with the aircraft were
stressed more in our training. I believe the SSF does
support this position and use of 'instrument failure'
as part of the teaching syllabus. They have a fine
web site very useful to CFIs anywhere.

Why not begin instruction with both ASI and Alt. covered, until final prep
for solo? If the ship has instruments in the back for the instructor, to
meet the minimum equipment list, I don't see a down-side. No crutchs, no
bad habits.
Thoughts?

Shawn

I've done this more and more lately. With the insutrments covered, students
don't have anything to look at inside the cockpit so they look outside - at
things like pitch attitude, bank, other traffic and their position relative
to the gliderport. I suggest they gently raise the nose until the glider
shakes and makes funney noises and then lower it a little until it flies
smoothly. Maneuvers are made at this pitch attitude.

Stalls are just learning to recognize the shakes and funny noises and then
that if the nose is raised further, the glider will get really unhappy and
drop the nose and maybe a wing.

Landings are just lowering the nose a little from the min sink speed to make
the glider a bit noisier at the IP and fly the pattern holding this noise
level while constantly watching the angle to the runway. On final, they
just fly the same noisey airspeed right down to a foot above the runway,
level off with their eyes on the far end of the runway and wait patiently
until the glider lands itself.

Beginning students almost always do better with instruments covered. I
don't remove my Sporty's instrument covers from the airspeed and altimeter
until prepping the student for the checkride. By then they regard
instruments as interesting amd maybe even useful but by no means neccessary
for safe flight.

If I get a student from another school who is having problems, the first
thing is to pull out the Sporty's instrument covers. More often than not,
this cures the problem - neither the other instructor or the student
realized the problem was tunnel vision on the airspeed indicator.

Bill Daniels