"View Limiting Device" recommendations please

Mark Hansen wrote:

Of course, during instrument training the instructor should take full
responsibility for see and avoid. However, during my training if the
CFII was unable to spot the conflicting aircraft and it was getting close,
I came out from under the hood and looked for it. IMHO, the safety of
the flight was far more important than staying under the hood and not
helping.

Besides the risk of injury or death, you're also PIC.

Usually, I spotted it within a few seconds and just went back under
the hood.

I wouldn't care for any system that prevented me from being able to
do that.

Same here, and I've only had to help twice, but I'm glad we don't have
to completely block the left front corner of the cockpit.

On a side note, the CRM method I set it up with safety pilots and
instructors, as well as suggest when I'm acting as safety pilot, is that
the person looking will also answer the ATC traffic calls themselves.
The flying pilot will still do all the normal IFR radio stuff, but this
simplifies internal cockpit comms.

On 01/15/08 10:35, B A R R Y wrote:
Mark Hansen wrote:

Of course, during instrument training the instructor should take full
responsibility for see and avoid. However, during my training if the
CFII was unable to spot the conflicting aircraft and it was getting close,
I came out from under the hood and looked for it. IMHO, the safety of
the flight was far more important than staying under the hood and not
helping.

Besides the risk of injury or death, you're also PIC.

Actually, that must be agreed upon before the flight by both the student
and the CFII (assuming the student can act as PIC with regard to FARs).

At the flight school I attended, it was policy that the CFII would be PIC
during dual training flights. Also, I've heard that in such flights, the
CFII would have a hard time denying PIC responsibility in the event of an
incident (although I never actually tested this).


Usually, I spotted it within a few seconds and just went back under
the hood.

I wouldn't care for any system that prevented me from being able to
do that.

Same here, and I've only had to help twice, but I'm glad we don't have
to completely block the left front corner of the cockpit.

Amen. I'm not sure I would fly under such circumstances... I guess it's
no different than being in the passenger cabin of a passenger jet.


On a side note, the CRM method I set it up with safety pilots and
instructors, as well as suggest when I'm acting as safety pilot, is that
the person looking will also answer the ATC traffic calls themselves.
The flying pilot will still do all the normal IFR radio stuff, but this
simplifies internal cockpit comms.

I do the same. It makes good sense.



--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane, USUA Ultralight Pilot
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

Mark Hansen wrote:

Amen. I'm not sure I would fly under such circumstances... I guess it's
no different than being in the passenger cabin of a passenger jet.

Except they're not doing low level maneuvers and stalls, as is done in
training. G

On Jan 15, 10:16*am, "akjcbkJA" wrote:
In England, the hood type devices are not allowed for serious instrument
training or checkrides.

The aircraft have to be fitted with a sort of venetian blind which
completely blocks out the outside world to the trainee/applicant but al lows
the instructor/examiner a full view.

If the window is covered up how does the CFII watch for traffic?
Sounds dangerous. Isn't it true too that in the UK you can't get an
instrument rating unless you first have an ATP?

-robert

AkjcbkJA,

The aircraft have to be fitted with a sort of venetian blind which
completely blocks out the outside world to the trainee/applicant but al lows
the instructor/examiner a full view.


Well, I've seen those contraptions. That last part of your statement I
definitely don't buy. Dangerous! Unnecessary, too.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

On Jan 15, 1:16*pm, "akjcbkJA" wrote:
In England, the hood type devices are not allowed for serious instrument
training or checkrides.

The aircraft have to be fitted with a sort of venetian blind which
completely blocks out the outside world to the trainee/applicant but al lows
the instructor/examiner a full view.

In practice they are really good as the head is not restricted, there is no
scope to peak either. A bit expensive as they tend to be fitted to
Instrument training aircraft although I have seen some removable versions.

Forget spotting traffic...how does the trainee transition to visual
for the landing? Must the instructor land the aircraft? Seems to be
an odd solution.

In England, the hood type devices are not allowed for serious instrument
training or checkrides.

The aircraft have to be fitted with a sort of venetian blind which
completely blocks out the outside world to the trainee/applicant but al
lows
the instructor/examiner a full view.

In practice they are really good as the head is not restricted, there is
no
scope to peak either. A bit expensive as they tend to be fitted to
Instrument training aircraft although I have seen some removable versions.

Forget spotting traffic...how does the trainee transition to visual
for the landing? Must the instructor land the aircraft? Seems to be
an odd solution.

If money were no object, I would give you a totally blacked out view for the
trainee, and perfect vision out for the instructor.

How to do it? Completely coat all windows with a liquid crystal membrane,
and have it hooked up to blink on and off 30 times per second, (or faster)
for half of each cycle. While current is supplied to the membranes, it turns
black, and would allow no light to enter the cockpit.

Fit the trainee with goggles, sealed on the sides, and with liquid crystal
lenses. It would be timed to be clear, only while the plane's windows were
blacked out. The instructor could see out fine, with no lenses on him/her.

This type of thing is already in use for 3-D movies, with one lens blinking,
then the other, with the film showing a left and right frame.
--
Jim in NC

On Jan 14, 9:32*pm, wrote:
I've been working on that elusive instrument rating for awhile now,
but I still haven't come up with a very good solution for my view
limiting device.
Steve Job

Boy, you missed being a Billionaire by one letter.
We just talked about this on the Mooney list. They make "old people"
foggles...
http://www.ifrglasses.com/852.html
They're called "Old Foggies" and they incorporate the reading glasses.

-Robert

On Jan 14, 11:32 pm, wrote:
I've been working on that elusive instrument rating for awhile now,
but I still haven't come up with a very good solution for my view
limiting device.

I need to wear glasses for reading (charts), but otherwise I see just
fine. I wear progressive lenses (for presbyopia) that vary from a
diopter of 2.5 on the bottom to almost no correction on the top. Most
"devices" only let you see out of the bottom of your glasses, which
works for reading but then the panel is blurry. I have to remove the
entire contraption if I want to see the "runway environment".

I've tried foggles, and a "real" wraparound hood. The hood seems to
work the best, but I get a "crushing" headache from wearing the
headset, hood, and glasses. Maybe it's because it's an old style that
clamps around you head!

I've noticed some alternatives on the market including; Overcasters,
Hoodwinks, and one called Viban.

Have any of you had success with a particular type of hood? I would
be very interested to hear your opinions, especially if you also wear
progressive or bifocal lens glasses.

Thanks!

Steve Job


Thanks to everyone who responded to this query!

My instructor bought a new hood that I tried out last night. It
attached to my head with two loose straps, using velcro to adjust the
length. Very comfortable!

I like the idea of the "Old Foggies" foggles as well. I just wish
they would change the name!

Steve Job

Steve Job

I used the HoodLamb and found it worked very well with both bifocals
and progressives. Here is a link to a web site that sells them.

http://www.cfipilot.com/IFR-Training...p/hoodlamb.htm

Good luck with your training.

Cary Mariash

On Jan 14, 11:32*pm, wrote:
I've been working on that elusive instrument rating for awhile now,
but I still haven't come up with a very good solution for my view
limiting device.

...

Have any of you had success with a particular type of hood? *I would
be very interested to hear your opinions, especially if you also wear
progressive or bifocal lens glasses.

Thanks!

Steve Job