![]() |
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
Once one accepts the fact that all sensing is "normal", and flies headings as indicated by the VOR head, instead of the more difficult methd of flying left and right needles, back course localizer flying is no more difficult than "ordinary" course tracking. On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 21:07:48 -0500, "Richard Kaplan" wrote: "Michael" wrote in message . com... somehting like this not done - because this is how we've always done it (and because the FAA would make such a modification cost-prohibitive). I have such a switch on my airplane -- it is part of my Cessna 400B autopilot control head. Just flip the switch and the CDI needle reverses its orientation. I agree completely that this makes a back course approach easier to fly even though "training" should be able to solve the problem otherwise. Let me give another example to support your point. One of the most challenging situations I occasionally try in my simulator is a demonstration of reversed ailerons not caught by a pilot on preflight. In theory, once the pilot realizes what happened, there is no emergency at all -- the airplane is perfectly controllable. In reality, almost all pilots find this to be an extremely difficult scenario, and in fact it seems as if the higher-time the pilot the harder it is to reverse one's thinking and provide reverse aileron input. The same is likely true when flying a localizer back-course approach; we are all so used to "normal" sensing on a CDI needle that our responses become so ingrained/automatic as to make it much harder to reverse this action on rare back-course approach. -------------------- Richard Kaplan www.flyimc.com d |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|