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 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
My opinion is that an autopilot is one of the most important items of safety
equipment for single-pilot IFR. It frees a lot of brain cells for important tasks like situational awareness and, in VMC, looking for traffic. My CFII fully agreed with that and recommended liberal use of the autopilot for single-pilot IFR. And before the flames start, I'm fully aware of the need to be proficient in flying IFR without the A/P. "Peter R." wrote in message ... David Megginson ) wrote: The poster also mentioned flying with an autopilot, though it fell out of the followups. That makes a lot more sense as a personal safety minimum, since the AP does actually help to keep the wings level. Personally, I'm happy to hand fly, but I believe that my plane would be safer if it had a simple wing-leveller that I could hit as a panic button if I ever experienced extreme vertigo. I'm willing to fly without it, but I can respect that other people might not be. Interesting you mention this point. I am in the process of watching a few of the Richard Collins Sporty's aviation DVDs. In the IFR Tips and Techniques DVD, he offers a PoV that suggest a pilot hand flying in IMC does not necessarily have the big picture view that a pilot who uses an AP might. -- Peter ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
David Megginson ) wrote:
Peter R. writes: Interesting you mention this point. I am in the process of watching a few of the Richard Collins Sporty's aviation DVDs. In the IFR Tips and Techniques DVD, he offers a PoV that suggest a pilot hand flying in IMC does not necessarily have the big picture view that a pilot who uses an AP might. I haven't heard that before. Is it because hand flying doesn't leave you as much time to look at charts, etc., and interpret secondary information? I believe that is what he was alluding to, although he did not expand on the point other than a few general sentences. IIRC, he stating that allowing the AP to fly frees up the more of the pilot's brain cycles to monitor engine instruments, charts, GPS, weather, as well as completely prepare for the upcoming approach. Collins did mention the dilemma of maintaining proficiency with hand flying, but he still advocates the majority of flying be done by the AP in IMC, as (in his experience) the big picture in IMC is so crucial to a successful outcome. There is complete segment on another of his DVDs devoted solely to the use of AP. I expect that he expands on these thoughts, but I have yet to view it. -- Peter ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Mick Ruthven ) wrote:
My opinion is that an autopilot is one of the most important items of safety equipment for single-pilot IFR. It frees a lot of brain cells for important tasks like situational awareness and, in VMC, looking for traffic. My CFII fully agreed with that and recommended liberal use of the autopilot for single-pilot IFR. I am learning that any piece of equipment that increases the safety of my flight ought to be used to its fullest potential. And before the flames start, I'm fully aware of the need to be proficient in flying IFR without the A/P. Me, too. Once again, the key here is to avoid the warm and seducing arms of complacency. -- Peter ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 16:11:52 GMT, David Megginson
wrote: Peter R. writes: Interesting you mention this point. I am in the process of watching a few of the Richard Collins Sporty's aviation DVDs. In the IFR Tips and Techniques DVD, he offers a PoV that suggest a pilot hand flying in IMC does not necessarily have the big picture view that a pilot who uses an AP might. I haven't heard that before. Is it because hand flying doesn't leave you as much time to look at charts, etc., and interpret secondary information? Pretty much, but it also eliminates the danger of turning in the direction you look. Turn your head to the right and look down at charts and you will have a tendency to do the same with the airplane. With "George" doing the flying that doesn't happen. OTOH never forget to keep up the scan...Although rare, George can make mistakes too and sometimes some rather rapid ones. Roger Halstead (K8RI EN73 & ARRL Life Member) www.rogerhalstead.com N833R World's oldest Debonair? (S# CD-2) All the best, David |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Roger Halstead writes:
Turn your head to the right and look down at charts and you will have a tendency to do the same with the airplane. With "George" doing the flying that doesn't happen. OTOH never forget to keep up the scan...Although rare, George can make mistakes too and sometimes some rather rapid ones. As I mentioned, I'd love to install a wing leveller some day when I have money available, so I'm not anti-autopilot. That said, this particular problem is an easy one to avoid -- if you're messing with a chart or plates or anything else, let go of the yoke. Touching it cannot possibly do any good when you're not actually looking at the attitude instruments. All the best, David |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 19:58:10 GMT, David Megginson
wrote: Roger Halstead writes: Turn your head to the right and look down at charts and you will have a tendency to do the same with the airplane. With "George" doing the flying that doesn't happen. OTOH never forget to keep up the scan...Although rare, George can make mistakes too and sometimes some rather rapid ones. As I mentioned, I'd love to install a wing leveller some day when I have money available, so I'm not anti-autopilot. That said, this particular problem is an easy one to avoid -- if you're messing with a chart or plates or anything else, let go of the yoke. Touching it cannot possibly do any good when you're not actually looking at the attitude instruments. That can work quite well, except when you are in some turbulence and getting bounced around. It also depends on the airplane. On a smooth day the Deb is a joy to hand fly, but it's pretty slipery. OTOH if it gets really rough you turn off the autopilot and hand fly it any way. Roger Halstead (K8RI EN73 & ARRL Life Member) www.rogerhalstead.com N833R World's oldest Debonair? (S# CD-2) All the best, David |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
David Megginson wrote in message ...
Peter R. writes: Interesting you mention this point. I am in the process of watching a few of the Richard Collins Sporty's aviation DVDs. In the IFR Tips and Techniques DVD, he offers a PoV that suggest a pilot hand flying in IMC does not necessarily have the big picture view that a pilot who uses an AP might. I haven't heard that before. Is it because hand flying doesn't leave you as much time to look at charts, etc., and interpret secondary information? Collins is a big supporter of APs, and I'm with him. I have a wing-leveler in my PA28-180. It is a huge help when copying clearance amendments, studying an approach plate, or eating lunch. I definitely agree with RC's point that the AP frees up mental bandwidth to process other things like the big picture. A lot of people get uptight about APs - but when used properly (ie not a crutch) they can be a huge asset to single-pilot flying, particularly IFR. -Nathan |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
David Megginson wrote in message ...
(Snowbird) writes: So don't dismiss the viewpoint that it's unsafe to fly pax IMC without a GPS. Think about your plans if you start smelling electrical smoke in IMC (BTDT), or if the engine quits, or even if you have a vacuum failure or wx is forming around you and you have to scurry for an airport in a hurry. That GPS adds a lot of safety "bang for the buck" and I have no argument against the viewpoint of someone who wouldn't leave home IMC without it. I agree entirely that a handheld GPS in the flightbag is an excellent safety investment Well, just to clarify my views: a handheld GPS in the flightbag is next to useless. It has to be set up, turn on, and acquired at the beginning of the flight to have practical value if things go south. I didn't have the impression, though, that the poster was writing about emergency backup Not clear. The statement IIRC was simply that he wouldn't want to fly pax in IMC without GPS. I concur. -- I had the impression that he (and his instructor) thought that flying with VOR or ADF was somehow more dangerous than flying with GPS. In fact, if we're talking about using a handheld GPS in IMC, we're talking about extra workload, because the pilot has to tune in the VOR and/or ADF and *then* tune the handheld backup as well. Huh? I fly around with two GPS on and acquired in the cockpit, and I've never "tuned" one yet . I have selected a navaid or airport -- is that what you mean? The point is: A moving map GPS is a significant aid to situational awareness whether the GPS has anything selected, or not. It will always tell you where you are relative to nearby airports and navaids. So it doesn't have to increase workload one iota. I would agree that using with *any* equipment you're not proficient with is a dangerous distraction, but given equal proficiency, tuning and spinning an ADF or VOR receiver involves no higher a workload than fiddling with GPS buttons. Actually the opposite is true. Tuning a VOR receiver and setting the OBS is a significantly *lower* workload than setting up a route, loading an approach, or even selecting a navaid and inputting a course on the typical older panel-mount IFR GPS. However, given a choice between flying a VOR or NDB approach or flying a stand-alone GPS approach in actual, I want the latter every time. My thing with simple wing-leveler autopilots is I'm not sure how well ours (anyway) would work in really nasty conditions. The sort of conditions most likely to induce spatial disorientation. Not dissing it as a safety item at all, just saying I see it more as a workload-reducer. Cheers, Sydney |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
David Megginson wrote in message ...
As I mentioned, I'd love to install a wing leveller some day when I have money available, so I'm not anti-autopilot. That said, this particular problem is an easy one to avoid -- if you're messing with a chart or plates or anything else, let go of the yoke. Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha This has to be someone who flies Cessnas or (possibly) Pipers I gotta read this one to my (Grumman specialist) CFI he'll get a good belly laugh too. Sydney (it's not true that all small GA planes are stable enough to fly hands-off level long enough to "mess with" a chart or plate or anything else) |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Response not crossposted - it's against my religion.
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 11:34:36 -0500, Peter R. wrote: And before the flames start, I'm fully aware of the need to be proficient in flying IFR without the A/P. Me, too. Once again, the key here is to avoid the warm and seducing arms of complacency. Disclaimer: I am instrument rated, but not much more than that; I haven't flown an IFR flight plan since I got the ticket last year, at least in a real airplane (I've done a few in Flight Simulator). That said... I plan to almost always hand-fly instrument approaches in practice conditions, other than during training sessions with a CFII to better understand the autopilot as used in APR mode. But, if I'm making an approach in actual conditions, without that CFII in the other seat, I'm probably going to let the autopilot fly the approach to the MAP/DH or darn near close to that, with me managing the vertical descent as needed on non-ILS approaches. Of course, this assumes that I'm proficient in the use of the autopilot for approach work... But , if I'm in an airplane that has an AP that I'm not familiar with, then I'll hand fly it. But in general I'd rather let the machinery keep me upright and alive as long as possible when I'm Doing The Real Thing - there's a lot going on then and I'll use every available aid to keep the workload as manageable as possible. My ego is OK with that approach (no pun intended). I would rather be overly cautious and alive than doggedly hand-fly an approach in marginal conditions. My .02, Dave Blevins |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
I wonder if Chris Thomas is a real pilot? Anybody know? | Badwater Bill | Home Built | 116 | September 3rd 04 05:43 PM |
Pilot Error? Is it Mr. Damron? | Badwater Bill | Home Built | 3 | June 23rd 04 04:05 PM |
Single-Seat Accident Records (Was BD-5B) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 41 | November 20th 03 05:39 AM |
Effect of Light Sport on General Aviation | Gilan | Home Built | 17 | September 24th 03 06:11 AM |