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 |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
I live in Chicago and have found that having the rating is the only
way that I can use the plane effectively, i.e. make trips that I plan in advance to make as opposed to running out for a hamburger when the weather is nice. I still scrub flights for thunderstorms and ice but my utility has gone from about 30% to maybe 70%. Last week I was able to make an IFR flight between storms that I would never have made without the rating (there were still showers in the area even though the initial storm activity has passed through). As other posters have said, you don't need a lot of avionics for legal IFR, especially for training. It's also a lot less expensive to buy the plane with the equipment already installed than to add it later, though of course it's nice to work with the new GPS systems. |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
Ben Jackson wrote: I don't think it applies to the CDI, but you could download the install guide from Garmin's site and find out. Thanks -- I'll do that. George Patterson If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people he gives it to. |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
G.R. Patterson III wrote:
a. Replace the LORAN with an approach certified GPS. b. Add a NARCO 121 NAV in the round hole. c. Replace the intercom with an audio panel and MBR and replace the MBR with a NAV unit or slim NAV/COM. d. Something else. As always, money's tight, so I would pick b, though c also is attractive. Your choice? Panel can be seen at George, If money is really tight, I'd go with (a.), but use one of the previous generation of IFR GPSs like the UPS AT/Garmin AT GX-50/60 or the Garmin GNC-300XL. They'd require an external CDI like the small ones sold by Mid Continent Instruments. It'll install in the 3 1/2" hole using an adapter plate. I've got a GX-60, and it works just fine, even though it's not as glitzy as the 430/530/CNX-80s. You'll get the capability you need, and you can "chase" the leading edge of handheld GPSs, every couple of years, to satisfy any need for a nicer moving map. With an IFR GPS, you'll have the ability to fly to any intersection, so identifying them with dual VORs won't be an issue. --- Jay -- __!__ Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___ http://www2.ari.net/jmasino ! ! ! http://www.oceancityairport.com http://www.oc-adolfos.com |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
Jay Masino wrote: If money is really tight, I'd go with (a.), but use one of the previous generation of IFR GPSs like the UPS AT/Garmin AT GX-50/60 or the Garmin GNC-300XL. They'd require an external CDI like the small ones sold by Mid Continent Instruments. It'll install in the 3 1/2" hole using an adapter plate. If it fits in the smaller holes, I have two empty spaces for the CDI; one to the left of my T&B, and one below it. I don't know how well the FAA likes the idea of putting the CDI on the left side of the panel, though. I'll let my avionics tech decide that, I guess. With an IFR GPS, you'll have the ability to fly to any intersection, so identifying them with dual VORs won't be an issue. That was my thinking too. Thanks for the leads. George Patterson If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people he gives it to. |
#76
|
|||
|
|||
|
#77
|
|||
|
|||
|
#78
|
|||
|
|||
So what are you saying? A plane flying in clouds has to be
high-performance to be safe? What? A plane flying in clouds at subfreezing temperatures DOES have to be high performance to be reasonably safe. A low performance airplane will fall out of the sky too quickly when the ice starts building. A plane flying in clouds needs range to escape deteriorating weather. That means speed and/or endurance. All IFR is not icing. All IFR does not involve deteriorating weather. sigh Why do I bother? www.Rosspilot.com |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
G.R. Patterson III wrote:
: Ben Jackson wrote: : : I don't think it applies to : the CDI, but you could download the install guide from Garmin's site and : find out. : Thanks -- I'll do that. George, you certainly do need an external CDI for any of the GPS units, up to and including the 430/530. It can be located anywhere on the panel. You do not need an external annunciator panel with the 430/530. Mid-continent makes a line of 2.5" CDI units compatible with just about every IFR GPS, the MD-40 series. I have one of these in my plane for my IFR GPS, located just to the right of the TC. It works like a charm. If you can wait a couple days, I can take a picture of it. -- Aaron Coolidge (N9376J) |
#80
|
|||
|
|||
Your rental environment is outstanding.
In my area, few FBO's or clubs have more than one rental that is not a trainer or multitrainer. In order to be sure that you can rent from each FBO, you have to remain current with them by renting regularly. In other words, you have to spread your business around enough so that if you need a plane on short notice, you will not have to get a currency check out to actually have a choice of places to rent. In the end, its easier just owning your own. "C Kingsbury" wrote in message om... (Michael) wrote in message om... This is highly unusual to say the least. I've also seen what such planes (new C82's) rent for, and I believe that anyone whose budget for purchase is limited enough that an IFR-equipped airplane is not an option could not afford to rent such planes regularly. 3 pretty new 182s got for $130-150/hour wet and very well equipped (1 w/ sferics, 2w/datalink WX, all A/P). One is a Turbo 182, not that you need it all that much out here where 2000' gets called Mt. Something. If you budget $1000/month for ownership that would allow you to rent these between 80 and 92 hours per year. Managed wisely (i.e. recurrent training) that ought to be enough for a 140kt airplane. While I agree that geography (really climate) has everything to do with this, I have flown in the Northeast enough to know that this is not realistic unless you are unwilling to fly VFR in MVFR conditions. Well, I'm not. MVFR up here often turns into MIFR. I'd rather spend the enroute segment on top and shoot an approach to 800-1000AGL at the end than slog along in 3mi viz at 1000 and risk getting snared by precipitation fog. You mean you're not flying IMC in subfreezing temperatures? Or that no Airmet for icing in clouds was issued? Does the FAA keep records of flight plans filed? I'll bet you'd find an awful lot filed between October and April by no-known-ice planes. Good, bad, or indifferent it's been my experience that's how it's done around here. The airmet is out there pretty much non-stop for 4-5 monoths of the year. What people look at very closely are the pireps. I've only flown those days in the winter with a very gray-haired CFII. That's the condition that probably gives me the most pause. Thunderstorms around here are more well behaved. The conditions that cause them are pretty consistent, and when they do start up the radar is pretty good about telling us where they are. Ice remains something of an X factor. There's also the fact that it's reasonable to equip a plane for flight in icing, but not for thunderstorm penetration. If the latter, I invite you to consider this story: http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...ate.net&rnum=1 Yeah, it's a useful reminder that the IFR ticket potentially opens up new risks to you as well as new capabilities. BTW, I believe the author of that story has given up IFR flying... A week ago somebody posted an AvWeb story about an old-time scudrunner who gave it up after seeing an unlit 800' tower with guy wires across a highway. Of the IFR trips I've made to the NE, I would say that about 1 in 3 would have been cancelled had I not had spherics capability. You're right - the ATC system was hosed on the days I needed a Stormscope. I was rerouted half a dozen times in 200 miles. Shucks, I get re-routed that many times on VFR days going from BED to HPN But I got where I was going. Without, I would have had to land. Not so bad if I'm headed West - get up to the line, land, get rained on, continue. Pure bitch if headed East. Them's the breaks. Worst comes to worst, your options are no fewer than a VFR-only pilot's. Sometimes they'll be better. My next plane will definitely have sferics or a datalink unit. Issue #1 - fuel related doesn't always mean stupidity. There are misfuelings that are hard to catch, there are fuel leaks, etc. Don't write them all off. Your point was, "how are you going to fare in low wx if that single engine quits." Having a second engine does not prevent misfueling, mismanagement, etc. In fact, the added complexity of many multi-engine fuel systems (esp. serious long-range ones with multiple aux tanks that require manual transfers) seems likely to increase the likelihood of precisely this sort of thing. Sure enough, I found a handful of these in the records I pulled. skill level. About 1 in 4 train seriously, work at it, and are good or at least getting there. The rest - well, let's just say that I wouldn't curl up and go to sleep in the back seat of their airplanes on an IFR trip. Two of my partners are instrument-rated with 4-5 times the hours I have. I've flown safety pilot with them to help them stay current. They're conscientious and methodical, but I also watch them make lots of little slip-ups. And I think, enough of these under the wrong circumstances, and that's curtains. I don't think either of them has filed an IFR plan once in the past few years, but they stay current for some reason nonetheless. Personally, I've decided that if I'm going to fly IFR for real, I'm also going to go up in actual conditions with my CFII at least once every three months for a workout no matter what. He loves the scud, and he loves beating people up in it. The way I see it, you can be a bit of a duffer when it comes to hamburger-fetching and probably not risk too much more than a bruised ego, but IFR is for professionals only, whether you're getting paid or not. will. I pretty regularly instruct in single airplanes in IMC. But I don't fool myself about the risks, either. Pretty much what this whole game comes down to. If you want to minimize the risks, you drive or take the winged people tube. Well, it appears most VFR pilots don't really stay current, either, particularly if you leave out the technically-current 20hrs/yr sightseer types. But why leave them out? Because these guys are not VFR-current enough to safely execute the sort of long-distance MVFR cross-countries we're talking about here. They're the VFR equivalent of my legally IFR-current partners. guys are. They're not flying for transportation - why hold them to the standards required to do it? I'm 100% for Sport Pilot. Though I will confess to a degree of skepticism about being able to make a good pilot in 20-30 hours as a lot of people seem to be hoping for. Looking back at my experience, I can't see why I would have developed the necessary skills any faster in an LSA than in a PA-28. Does weight and maybe 15 knots of speed make that much difference? Still, it ought to be significantly cheaper to certify, build, and maintain LSA than traditional spamcans. That's 100% upside. Due to towers and congested areas scud running isn't a practical choice either around here. Don't bet on it. Low VFR is a skill, just like IFR...(SNIP) Unfortunately, these days few people get to fly even dual XC in MVFR, never mind solo XC. I think we're in agreement on this one. The more variety of conditions people are exposed to, the better. This is one of my CFII's arguments against the ten-day instrument courses. He actually tells people he prefers they spend at least a year working on their rating so they see the different conditions each month offers. But when we're talking C-172's and Cherokee 140's and such, the utility of the instrument rating is so minimal that, IMO, it's just not worth bothering with - the time and money is better spent on other things. Hmmm... Well, pretty much every CFII and insurance guy I've spoken to out in these parts would disagree. One who wouldn't was the guy in Alaska who gave me my SES, which I got 8 hours after doing my private. His advice was, "go out and scare yourself for at least a hundred hours first." He went on to say, "the instrument rating is pretty much useless." My local CFII's response was, "Well, in Alaska he's right, but this ain't Alaska." Too bad, I think sometimes. Best, -cwk. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Instrument Rating Checkride PASSED (Very Long) | Alan Pendley | Instrument Flight Rules | 24 | December 16th 04 02:16 PM |
Get your Glider Rating - Texas | Burt Compton | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | December 1st 04 04:57 PM |
"I Want To FLY!"-(Youth) My store to raise funds for flying lessons | Curtl33 | General Aviation | 7 | January 9th 04 11:35 PM |
Question about Question 4488 | [email protected] | Instrument Flight Rules | 3 | October 27th 03 01:26 AM |
Enlisted pilots | John Randolph | Naval Aviation | 41 | July 21st 03 02:11 PM |