How to adhere to this obstacle departure procedure?

wrote:

Make a climbing right turn. If you have not crossed your 090 course
by the time you reach a 060 heading or so, stop the turn and hold
that heading until you intercept. the 090 course from the south side
of the course. Proceed on course.

Interesting. This was certainly not an item touched on during my
instrument training.

I suppose this is where receiving training from an experienced instrument
pilot and instructor would far surpass receiving training from a
time-building instructor.


--
Peter


















----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

I suppose this is where receiving training from an experienced
instrument pilot and instructor would far surpass receiving training
from a time-building instructor.

Not really. What makes you think that an experienced pilot or
instructor necessarily has any higher level of knowledge regarding
obstacle clearances on IFR departure procedures? Opinions, sure, but
knowledge?

Point two is that students only retain a small fraction of what
they're taught. Even if your instructor had understood the sublties
regarding ODP's, it's not likely that you would have digested them in
their entirety.

An interesting thing about DP's is that they tend to not be very
GPS-friendly. They're often full of stuff like intercepting bearings, and
determining when you've crossed a certain radial. Nothing you can't do
with a GPS, but people tend to be less familiar with these functions than
with just going direct to a waypoint.

Roy Smith wrote:

An interesting thing about DP's is that they tend to not be very
GPS-friendly. They're often full of stuff like intercepting bearings, and
determining when you've crossed a certain radial. Nothing you can't do
with a GPS, but people tend to be less familiar with these functions than
with just going direct to a waypoint.

Then again, portables like the Garmin 295 and 296 have an RMI option, which
would make flying this particular ODP very easy.

Greg Esres wrote:

Not really. What makes you think that an experienced pilot or
instructor necessarily has any higher level of knowledge regarding
obstacle clearances on IFR departure procedures? Opinions, sure, but
knowledge?

I am making the assumption that one who flies often in the system is more
proficient and experienced. Proficiency and knowledge, when coupled with
a desire to instruct, carries a lot more weight than one who received their
ratings back-to-back with an ultimate goal of flying for the airlines.

A pilot who has logged many hours flying in the system for real, as in
commuting, traveling, etc., is going to encounter many more of the
procedural and weather subtleties of IFR flight than a time-building
instructor who logs 95 percent of his/her hours as an instructor.

Not only have I encountered this first hand, but I have spoken with others
at about my same level have also encountered this issue when seeking IFR
refresher training.

This is one reason why I subscribe to _IFR_ and _IFR Refresher_. I look to
the articles within these periodicals to learn from the experiences of
those who have been flying or controlling IFR aircraft for many
hours/years.

Point two is that students only retain a small fraction of what
they're taught.

Is that so? Have a study to back this up? I suggest that those who
routinely exercise their rating in actual IMC will reinforce all that they
have learned and then some. That's my opinion, worth what you paid for
it.

Even if your instructor had understood the sublties
regarding ODP's, it's not likely that you would have digested them in
their entirety.

Perhaps. IMO this would depend on the student and what they actually do
with their IFR rating once they receive it. If it gets tucked away on a
shelf and rarely used to fly in actual IMC, then I would agree.

--
Peter


















----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

I am making the assumption that one who flies often in the system is
more proficient and experienced. Proficiency and knowledge, when
coupled with

You're confusing the concepts of "proficient", "experienced", and
"knowledge".

Lots of experienced, proficient pilots out there with no knowledge of
obstacle clearance requirements. Lots of experienced, proficient
pilots with lousy radio technique. Lots of experienced, proficient
pilots who don't understand how airplanes fly.

retention level is low...Is that so? Have a study to back this
up?

Six years instructing, and sampling knowledge levels after training is
over? But any learning theory book will supply you with the studies
you seek, if common sense doesn't.

IMO this would depend on the student and what they actually do
with their IFR rating once they receive it.

Not in this case. The only way you can reinforce your knowledge of
ODP's is to hit something every now and then. Until you do, this
knowledge is merely theoretical.

I don't disagree with the answers you received on this question, but
you bought into the idea that turning to the heading is "close enough"
without any idea of whether the posters knew what they were talking
about.

You can learn a lot from _IFR_ and _IFR Refresher_ but the knowledge
level of the authors is highly variable. I dumped "Refresher" after
some random CFI wrote a "Pitch vs. Power" article. When I want that
sort of analysis, I'll turn to aerodynamics texts. I stopped taking
"IFR" after I noticed that so many of their quizzes contained
incorrect answers. These guys are supposed to be experts?

Opinion from experienced pilots can be useful, but you need a way to
discern the good stuff from the bad stuff. Unless they rigorously
work to improve their own knowledge, they're as likely to be as full
of crap as the newbie -II, maybe more so.

Greg Esres wrote:

Lots of experienced, proficient pilots out there with no knowledge of
obstacle clearance requirements. Lots of experienced, proficient
pilots with lousy radio technique. Lots of experienced, proficient
pilots who don't understand how airplanes fly.

You comment how I bought into the responses I received to my original
question in this thread, then proceed to spout the above and the theory
about student knowledge retention as if I should just accept these ideas.

Sorry, but unless you can back the above comments up with an official
definition of "lots," "lousy," "experienced," and "proficient," I simply
read this as just another pilot's opinions.

Six years instructing, and sampling knowledge levels after training is
over?

Just out of curiosity, in the last six years were the majority of your
hours were accumulated through instructing? Did you have time before your
instructor rating to fly with a purpose to many destinations?

I ask this seriously because I don't want to underestimate your background.
However, the title "instrument instructor" alone doesn't do it for me since
I have met a few instrument instructors with zero IMC time.


But any learning theory book will supply you with the studies
you seek, if common sense doesn't.

Common sense? How is it common sense that a student only retains a small
fraction of what they were taught? It seems to me that any instructor
hiding behind this "theory" may want to consider the manner in which he is
teaching the material, rather than concede that this as true.

I don't disagree with the answers you received on this question, but
you bought into the idea that turning to the heading is "close enough"
without any idea of whether the posters knew what they were talking
about.

Would an incorrect response to an IFR procedure question posted in this
newsgroup survive uncontested by the many experienced regulars? The 100%
agreement between the responders in this thread was pretty telling.


--
Peter


















----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

question in this thread, then proceed to spout the above and the
theory about student knowledge retention as if I should just accept
these ideas.

Not *should* but probably *would*. :-)

I simply read this as just another pilot's opinions.

Ah, very good. The question is, how to verify knowledge?

Obstacle clearance: read TERPS. Read Wally Roberts articles. Call
Flight procedures offices. Tim seems to be a "TERPS" guy, which I
infer because the information he dispenses conforms with information
to the above sources.

Radio Technique: read the AIM.

How airplanes fly: read aerodynamics textbooks.

However, the title "instrument instructor" alone doesn't do it for
me since I have met a few instrument instructors with zero IMC time.


No doubt. But what I question is the standards by which you judge
your instructors.

You certainly want someone with a reasonable amount of IMC time, so
that you will feel safe when you fly with him. But beyond that, what
benefit does it provide you?

We have a local guy with 25,000 hours who sometimes allow flight
instructors to ride right seat in his King Air to build turbine time.

This guy has been known to takeoff into IMC without a clearance. He
never uses approach plates or enroute charts, and will often descend
right through MDA until he sees the runway. He's rude and obnoxious
on the radio.

But hey, the guy is experienced! Sounds like the instructor for you.


Would an incorrect response to an IFR procedure question posted in
this newsgroup survive uncontested by the many experienced regulars?
The 100% agreement between the responders in this thread was pretty
telling.

Ah, truth by majority vote. The only terpster that replied is "Tim".