Is it possible to switch from VFR to IFR and back?

In article ,
Mxsmanic wrote:

Ron Garret writes:

You'd be surprised.

I'd be in danger. If there's nothing but fog outside the windows, how
is peripheral vision going to help me with the instruments? Which
instruments are in my peripheral vision?

You are cementing your reputation for being deliberately obtuse. I said
nothing about instruments being in your peripheral vision.

Less stressful to be sure. But you'd be amazed how different it can be
if you really can't see out the window and your (real not simulated)
life is on the line.

No, I would not be amazed.

Don't be so sure. If you are ever in Southern California look me up and
we can put it the test.

rg

Mxsmanic wrote:

If you can't see anything out the window and you are VFR then you're
already screwed. Time to declare an emergency.

Well, if you are equipped for instrument flight and rated for it and
there isn't too much traffic, I wouldn't call it an emergency,


Oh brother. Not knowing anything about real IFR, the FARs, ATC
procedures, and the inherent safety problem (until you eventually
get your requested IFR clearance), your dogmatic statement like
the above is absurd.

F--

Ron Garret writes:

You are cementing your reputation for being deliberately obtuse. I said
nothing about instruments being in your peripheral vision.

Well, then, explain how peripheral vision helps with instrument
flight. By definition, instrument flight involves only instruments.

Don't be so sure. If you are ever in Southern California look me up and
we can put it the test.

I've surprised people before. Most people assume that others are like
themselves, and that's a dangerous assumption.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

In article ,
Mxsmanic wrote:

Ron Garret writes:

You are cementing your reputation for being deliberately obtuse. I said
nothing about instruments being in your peripheral vision.

Well, then, explain how peripheral vision helps with instrument
flight. By definition, instrument flight involves only instruments.

You may define it that way, but reality is not bound by your definition.

But your real problem is that you have discarded the context of the
conversation. (You do this a lot, and it's very annoying.) The context
in this case was that you are flying by reference to instruments in
non-IMC conditions. In such cases you get a lot of information from
your peripheral vision. In particular, in VMC you can tell if the plane
is still right-side-up even if your gaze is fixed on the panel. More
precisely, in VMC you CAN'T NOT TELL (parse that carefully) if the plane
is right-side up even if your gaze is fixed on the panel. The
processing of the information in your peripheral vision is done
subconsciously. If the plane starts to bank you can't help but notice.
This is the reason hoods are used for instrument training. (BTW, even
under a hood there are subtle sensory cues when you are in VMC that go
away in real IMC, like the ambient lighting or shadows moving across
your lap, that give you clues about your orientation.)

In the clouds all that goes completely away. If the plane starts to
bank there are no sensory cues at all that this is happening until the
bank becomes extremely, often unrecoverably, severe.

"No problem" you say, "I just keep my wings level by looking at the AI."
And yes, that true. But the first thing you will notice in reality is
that the AI gives you much coarser information than your peripheral
vision does. Again, this is hard to appreciate unless you actually
experience it (and you cannot experience it in your typical sim because
there is no peripheral visual stimulation). So you will quickly realize
that you have to pay a lot more attention to keep the wings level using
the AI than you did using your peripheral vision. But now you have
other things to worry about. It is not enough to keep the wings level,
you have to also keep the plane heading in the right direction. So you
have to move your gaze from the AI to the DG. While your gaze is
averted you are flying totally blind. Your fovea is not large enough to
fixate simultaneously on the AI and the DG (at least not in a real
plane) so you have to remember to look back at the AI.

OK, still no problem. So you look at the DG briefly, then come back to
the AI. But now you have to call ATC. To do that you have to find the
frequency on your chart. To do that you have to look away from the AI
again and look at the chart. Once again you are flying blind. But
reading a chart is much harder than reading a DG. You have to hunt
around to find the right place. Maybe you have to refold it. Maybe you
have to get out a flashlight (because you've just flown into a cloud and
it's now much darker than it was when you began). Suddenly you realize
that you haven't looked at the AI in a while. You glance up and it's
flopped over onto its side. You move the yoke to level the wings, and
try to calm down because you have just come close to death. You look at
the DG and find that you are off course because of the inadvertent bank.
You correct. Then you look down at the chart again to try again to find
the right ATC frequency to call.

By now several minutes have elapsed and you are no longer sure exactly
where you are (assuming you don't have a moving map GPS -- those gadgets
make life a whole lot easier). You were flying on instruments before
you flew into the cloud so you've already got your VORs tuned in, but
now you have to twiddle the OBS to find your cross-radial. Once again
you have to take your eyes away from the AI. You twiddle the knob and
center the needle. Back to the AI, then you have to look down at your
chart again to figure out where you actually are based on that
information.

Now... how long has it been since you looked at the altimeter? Oh ****,
in all this time you suddenly realize you've lost 2000 feet! The threat
of actual real-life death looms again as you realize that you are no
longer above the terrain. Where exactly are you? You still haven't
figured that out yet. OK, no problem, just push in the throttle and
climb. Look at the chart again...

Now you're starting to get a little freaked out because in this game if
you lose you can't just hit the reset button. Have you remembered to
apply right rudder? Are you watching your airspeed? Where the hell are
you? And you still haven't found the frequency to contact ATC. And you
haven't looked at the turn coordinator even once, so if your AI flopped
over because your vacuum pump failed and you were following the scenario
above then you're dead. Real-life dead, not simulator dead.

And then there's turbulence. And there are a couple of other things
I've left out too because this post is already way too long.

When the stakes are high things are different.

Don't be so sure. If you are ever in Southern California look me up and
we can put it the test.

I've surprised people before. Most people assume that others are like
themselves, and that's a dangerous assumption.

Come to LA and we will see.

rg

Mxsmanic wrote:
Christopher Brian Colohan writes:

AFAIK, the majority of GA planes have neither radar altimeters nor
TCAS.

That is my impression, also. The Baron in my sim has a RA, and it
does in real life, too (from pictures I've seen). But it's an
expensive aircraft. In sims you always get the deluxe versions of
every aircraft, with all the options.

Bad or marginal weather is usually pretty easy to spot from a
distance.

I've heard apocryphal stories of sudden changes that produce fog from
nowhere, but I don't know how reliable those stories are.

And if you want to fly more often in worse weather, first
acquire the necessary training and a better plane.... Of course, this
can cost big $$$...

[sigh] Everything costs big bucks in aviation. If automobiles were
like planes, most people would be driving go-karts to work.

If you had studied weather at all ( which is part of your training as a
pilot ) you would know that fog does not come out of nowhere but is a
function of temperature/dew point spread and is fairly easy to predict.
While predicting the exact temp/dew point can be difficult, predicting
that the conditions are conducive to the creation of fog is not, so
therefor it does not come out of nowhere.

John Theune writes:

If you had studied weather at all ( which is part of your training as a
pilot ) you would know that fog does not come out of nowhere but is a
function of temperature/dew point spread and is fairly easy to predict.

Temperatures can change suddenly, especially in moving air. Sharp
gradients in temperature can exist, also.

While predicting the exact temp/dew point can be difficult, predicting
that the conditions are conducive to the creation of fog is not, so
therefor it does not come out of nowhere.

A problem with this is that conditions cannot be measured everywhere,
and local conditions may be different from the measured conditions.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

John Theune wrote in newsSnah.11768$LH2.11383
@trndny04:

If you had studied weather at all ( which is part of your training as a
pilot ) you would know that fog does not come out of nowhere but is a
function of temperature/dew point spread and is fairly easy to predict.
While predicting the exact temp/dew point can be difficult, predicting
that the conditions are conducive to the creation of fog is not, so
therefor it does not come out of nowhere.

Hey John,

Not sure if you are aware of Mxmaniac's trolling habits. He only plays
MSFS, and puts on an act of flying a plane. He has no intention of using
the valuable experiences we share.

You may want to save the time of your responses to those that really
appreciate your time. While Mx does post good questions, his response are
not learning conducive, but more along of combative. Check his posting
history and you will see.

And yes, you are so right, fog is not that difficult to predict :-). They
just tend to blow the forecast of "low level flying fog" AKA stratiform
clouds here where I live *smile*. If there is a forecast of fog here,
generally that is spot on.

Allen

Ron Garret wrote in
:

More precisely, in VMC you CAN'T NOT TELL (parse
that carefully) if the plane is right-side up even if your gaze is
fixed on the panel.

Hey Ron,

Did you mean IMC in the above sentence?

"No problem" you say, "I just keep my wings level by looking at the
AI." And yes, that true. But the first thing you will notice in
reality is that the AI gives you much coarser information than your
peripheral vision does. Again, this is hard to appreciate unless you
actually experience it (and you cannot experience it in your typical
sim because there is no peripheral visual stimulation).

You are wasting your time Ron.

I have been this route with Mx. Look me up in Google with the buzz word of
leans. According to Mx, he suffers leans looking at a screen of a
computer.

So needless to say, it would be better served if you reply to those that
really do appreciate the value of your time.

Allen

On 11/26/06 14:39, A Lieberma wrote:
Ron Garret wrote in
:

More precisely, in VMC you CAN'T NOT TELL (parse
that carefully) if the plane is right-side up even if your gaze is
fixed on the panel.

Hey Ron,

Did you mean IMC in the above sentence?

Hey Allan, did you miss the "parse that carefully" ;-)

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

In article ,
A Lieberma wrote:

Ron Garret wrote in
:

More precisely, in VMC you CAN'T NOT TELL (parse
that carefully) if the plane is right-side up even if your gaze is
fixed on the panel.

Hey Ron,

Did you mean IMC in the above sentence?

No. Read it carefully (especially the part where it says to read it
carefully ;-)

"No problem" you say, "I just keep my wings level by looking at the
AI." And yes, that true. But the first thing you will notice in
reality is that the AI gives you much coarser information than your
peripheral vision does. Again, this is hard to appreciate unless you
actually experience it (and you cannot experience it in your typical
sim because there is no peripheral visual stimulation).

You are wasting your time Ron.

Could be, but it's my time to waste.

rg