 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Guest
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 14, 2006 5:38 am Post subject: IFR Requirements |
 |
|
Good Morning Alan,
Mind if I inject just a small objection here?
It is not at all difficult to learn to use a "Partial Panel" and be able to survive quite well without the aid of an instructor.
However, as you state, it does take training.
My suggestion is that each and every IFR pilot should find an instructor who is competent in whatever sort of last ditch equipment the pilot decides to use and seriously embark on about twenty hours of concentrated study using nothing more than the Partial Panel chosen.
For what it is worth, when I received my instrument rating, we were not allowed to use any gyroscopic instrument during the check ride other than the T&B. No attitude or directional gyroscope was allowed. We who earned our ratings that way are obviously no smarter than current applicants. Many will claim, probably rightly so, that we are not as smart as you young whippersnappers. Nevertheless, we managed to learn how to keep things right side up in twenty hours or so. There is no reason why it cannot be done today.
I keep hoping that someone will come up with a modern solid state presentation that is better than a T&B. Meanwhile, the T&B will still do the job.
As I have mentioned many times in the past, I consider the Turn Coordinator to be an abomination as a "last ditch" instrument, but even it can be used with enough training.
While I am on this rant. I believe it is a crying shame that Garmin has chosen to use the TC representation in their 196, 296 and 396 panel representation. The GPS handhelds show only yaw, not roll. An actual mechanical TC shows both roll and yaw, in fact, you can't tell by looking at it whether it is showing roll or yaw!
In any case, since a T&B shows only yaw, not roll, just as does the Garmin unit, I believe it would be a much better last ditch backup if it (the Garmin) used a pictorial representation of a T&B rather than a TC. Personally, I have a presentation in mind that I THINK would be better than either!
Off the soap box, and thanks for the springboard for my Rant.
Decide on which poison you prefer, then --- learn how to use it!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
In a message dated 6/14/2006 8:08:53 A.M. Central Standard Time, aadamson(at)highrf.com writes:
| Quote: | Those questions have to be answered and seriously. Going NORDO is one thing, but loosing all orientation when in the clag.... well, you know the outcome of that.... (ever tried unusual attitude recovery with partial panel? Did ya survive before the instructor had to bail you out?).
|
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bruce(at)glasair.org
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 14, 2006 7:32 am Post subject: IFR Requirements |
|
|
Alan,
I don't have any problems with glass panels. I have a problem with how some builders implement them.
If you take a look at part 121 and most heavy iron aircraft with full glass you'll see that they have duel independent EFIS systems (including duel AHRS) with an electronic comparator/alerter and a third gyro instrument. Now why do they have all this?
We've many hours behind our old steam gauges and know their failure modes. Not so with EFIS. Remember, it's a computer, and can fail in ways you've never seen before. In some cases you won't even know it's failed. That brings us to training.
The airlines spend big bucks training their guys in EFIS switchology and failure modes. Just where are we to get this kind of training? Our local CFII? Some of these failure modes can't be duplicated in the aircraft and need a simulator to do it right. But you say 'I'm good at partial panel', so was this poor guy.
http://www.aero-news.net/news/genav.cfm?ContentBlockID=8F3C17D0-5398-4355-BBB0-D47B0DAC1D23&Dynamic=1. Those EFIS screens are very hypnotic and compelling. Remember when you were doing partial panel with your CFII and he failed the ADI? He did that by covering the instrument. In real life, the instrument just starts leaning in pitch or roll. It's very difficult not to follow the gauge even when you know it's failed. Imagine how difficult it would be with an EFIS. If the AHRS goes bonkers and you still need the screen for ASI and altitude. The best thing to do is just pull the breaker and fly with what's left.
I don't have the answers, perhaps others do.
Bruce
www.glasair.org
[quote]
--
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
endspeed(at)yahoo.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 14, 2006 8:52 am Post subject: IFR Requirements |
|
|
Yes, I agree. The important thing when flying is did
or didn't the EFIS lose the ability to provide a
horizon. When building, however, it is more important
to consider how to prevent a no attitude reference
situation. So, to keep this airplane airworthy, don't
blame the EFIS, fix the electrical system. Bob
--- "Lloyd, Daniel R." <LloydDR(at)wernerco.com> wrote:
[quote]
Daniel R." <LloydDR(at)wernerco.com>
To a pilot that is dependant on the instrument, does
it matter why, or
more importantly just that it does not work when I
need it. The whole
purpose of this thread was to state the value of
backup instruments, and
while the EFIS itself did not fail, the end result
is that it was not
available, which means that you needed a backup. The
easy solution for
this is to have an EFIS with an internal battery, IE
Dynon? I will be
using a Chelton, but it is still dependant on
electrons flowing to it,
as it does not have an internal battery option, but
I will be backing it
up with both a Portable GPS and a Dynon with
internal battery.
Dan
RV10 (40269)
--
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
