The Instrument you can live without

On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 11:09:52 -0400, "Mark T. Dame"
wrote:

vincent p. norris wrote:

A couple of years ago,a high-time pilot who, according to reports,
emphasized partial panel work, took off from TEB and soon killed
himself and family in a Bonanza. Apparently a gyro failure.

Have you any words of explanation to offer, or do you know what the
accident report said?

The problem with a gyro failure isn't flying the plane without your gyro
instruments, but recognizing the failure in the first place. I would
guess that most crashes caused by failed gyros were because the pilot
didn't recognize the failure.


Yah, they don't normally fail, they slowly, oh so slowly die and
slowly roll over.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
A failed gyro can be very difficult to detect. I've done it in a
simulator and didn't notice for a several minutes. For people who focus
too much on the AI, it's especially bad because they can end up putting
the plane in an unusual attitude very quickly.


-m

vincent p. norris wrote:

I practice partial panel regularly, but accidents like that worry me;
if that guy couldn't hack it, could I?


The problem here is the same as with the "are twins safer?" debate: we
don't hear about the partial-panel flights that *don't* crash. You will
find single incidents of very experienced pilots making every mistake
in the book.

-cwk.

vincent p. norris wrote:

I began teaching what I call
"Primitive Panel" over 30 years ago with a loss of gyros, then taking
away the Turn/Slip, the VSI, and leaving the student with little to
work with. They can do fine if they use their heads.


A couple of years ago,a high-time pilot who, according to reports,
emphasized partial panel work, took off from TEB and soon killed
himself and family in a Bonanza. Apparently a gyro failure.

Have you any words of explanation to offer, or do you know what the
accident report said?

I practice partial panel regularly, but accidents like that worry me;
if that guy couldn't hack it, could I?

That is the main flaw with partial panel practice. You know the gyro
has failed. In a real failure, you may well not notice the failure
until it is too late. That is one reason why my Skylane had a low
vacuum light and a PF standby system.


Matt

Matt Whiting wrote:

That is the main flaw with partial panel practice. You know the gyro
has failed. In a real failure, you may well not notice the failure
until it is too late.

You will know it pretty eimdiately, *if* you are not too lazy to
permanently do the cross checks. Cross check possibility is the reason
why you have all those "useless" instruments like VSI and turn coordinator.

Stefan

Stefan wrote:
Matt Whiting wrote:

That is the main flaw with partial panel practice. You know the gyro
has failed. In a real failure, you may well not notice the failure
until it is too late.


You will know it pretty eimdiately, *if* you are not too lazy to
permanently do the cross checks. Cross check possibility is the reason
why you have all those "useless" instruments like VSI and turn coordinator.

OK, you obviously have no, or very little, experience flying single
pilot IFR. There are times when things get very busy and the cross
checks don't occur at nearly the frequency you might desire. And subtle
failures can be hard to detect in the early stages.

Matt

Matt Whiting wrote:

OK, you obviously have no, or very little, experience flying single
pilot IFR. There are times when things get very busy and the cross
checks don't occur at nearly the frequency you might desire.

Little. Anyway, if you can't do the cross checks, then you're not safe.
If single pilot IFR means that the workload is too high to regularly do
the cross checks, then it's debatable whether single pilot IFR in IMC
should be allowed at all.

Stefan

Stefan wrote:

Matt Whiting wrote:

OK, you obviously have no, or very little, experience flying single
pilot IFR. There are times when things get very busy and the cross
checks don't occur at nearly the frequency you might desire.


Little. Anyway, if you can't do the cross checks, then you're not safe.
If single pilot IFR means that the workload is too high to regularly do
the cross checks, then it's debatable whether single pilot IFR in IMC
should be allowed at all.

You can do cross checks, just not every 20 seconds, and maybe not every
60 seconds during certain phases of the flight. You prioritize your
tasks based on needs to be done and the probability that something will
go wrong. Losing the vacuum or losing oil pressure or having all of the
fuel leak out are low probability events so you don't check them every
10 seconds. You need to check your heading and altitude very frequently
when nearing the MDA or DH on an approach, but you don't check nearly as
frequently during cruise.

You have the typical attitude of someone who has read about instrument
flying, but hasn't done any.


Matt

On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 22:48:16 +0200, Stefan
wrote:

Matt Whiting wrote:

That is the main flaw with partial panel practice. You know the gyro
has failed. In a real failure, you may well not notice the failure
until it is too late.

You will know it pretty eimdiately, *if* you are not too lazy to
permanently do the cross checks. Cross check possibility is the reason
why you have all those "useless" instruments like VSI and turn coordinator.

One indication you might get if you fly IFR a lot is getting queasy.
Your body is telling you one thing and your eyes (the AI) are telling
your something else as the AI is dying.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com



Stefan

That's why I really like practicing IFR with MS Flight Sim. I set the
instruments to fail randomly. The first few times the AI failed, I did tend
to follow the dead AI as it keeled over. I think it really improves your
scan. It just isn't the same when the CFII slaps a plastic disc over it and
says "You've just lost your AI." A good portion of the lesson was lost
already at that point.

" That is the main flaw with partial panel practice. You know the gyro
has failed. In a real failure, you may well not notice the failure until
it is too late.

LWG wrote:
That's why I really like practicing IFR with MS Flight Sim. I set the
instruments to fail randomly. The first few times the AI failed, I did tend
to follow the dead AI as it keeled over. I think it really improves your
scan. It just isn't the same when the CFII slaps a plastic disc over it and
says "You've just lost your AI." A good portion of the lesson was lost
already at that point.

" That is the main flaw with partial panel practice. You know the gyro

has failed. In a real failure, you may well not notice the failure until
it is too late.

I agree. Simulators are a great proficiency tool no doubt. However,
even they don't simulate all that is going on when flying in heavy
weather, at night, with ATC in your ear and a failed alternator. :-)


Matt