View Single Post
  #7  
Old February 15th 07, 01:57 AM posted to rec.aviation.student,rec.aviation.ifr
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 57
Default Realistic Instrument Training using MSFS 2004

On Feb 14, 5:29 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
I don't want to have my life dependent on a working autopilot, so I am
purposely avoiding it for now.


If you have a choice between a working autopilot and nothing, the working
autopilot is generally preferable.

Your life depends on an autopilot each time you board a commercial flight,
particularly if it's not a U.S. airline.

In IMC, you use all the resources you have in order to not get killed.
Eschewing the autopilot because you resent automation will put you at a
disadvantage if you are stuck in IMC and the autopilot can save you but you
can't remember how to use it.


I have nothing at all against autopilots; I think they are great. In
fact I love all technology which makes life easier and safer. Since I
won't be flying a commercial airline with redundant everything, I want
a way to mitigate the effects of single points of failure. Some non-
redundant items I can't do anything about (one fuel supply, one
engine, one pilot), but the ones I can I will. I have used the
autopilot flying VMC, and plan to become proficient flying with it in
IMC as well. Autopilots (at least the single axis one in the Dakota)
are just not that hard to use. I don't want to have to depend on
it. I think I will be a better and safer pilot if I can fly safely
and proficiently without all but the very basics.

My comments about the use of the autopilot are for my training, not
for actual use (especially when my family is on board).

I understand that the airplane doesn't
know if it's in the clouds, but I can sure tell. Being able to fly
without an autopilot, and using only the instruments as a reference is
a HUGE part of my training.


Perhaps I've not made myself clear. You use the instruments to assess your
situation. You use your autopilot to carry out your commands. The autopilot
is not a reference or a source of information; it is a work-saving device.
When you have lots of complex instruments to scan, it's very handy to have
something that will fly the aircraft for you based on your instructions.
There's no advantage to flying the plane by hand IFR if you have an autopilot.
And flying IFR is not the time to practice controlling the aircraft; if you
don't already know how to do that, trying to learn in IMC will lead to your
premature demise.


I have 250+ hours in VMC. I know how to control an aircraft. In VMC
you have this big horizon out the window available to judge your
attitude. In IMC, you just have the instruments. You have to learn
to ignore all physical sensations (no flying by the seat of your pants
here), and trust your instruments. The first part of every instrument
training syllabus I've ever seen emphasizes the ability to control the
airplane first and foremost. An autopilot will do this for you, but
that's no excuse for not knowing how to do it yourself. I don't want
to die from stupidity!


That said, once I have my rating I will take advantage of everything
(autopilot, handheld GPS) at my disposal. But I still intend to
practice partial panel, no autopilot, no GPS so I don't get too rusty.


Try to make the distinction between sources of information and control
mechanisms. IFR is all about getting the right information; it's not about
controlling the aircraft.


I think both are important. In fact if you can't control the
airplane, but you know everything else about your situational
awareness and what exact procedures to follow, you will die knowing
exactly where you are buried.

It sure is a lot more interesting when all you have are the "steam
gauges". But I agree with you that autopilots do make life easier
(and safer).


Autopilots and gauges are two different things. See above. Flying on
autopilot doesn't relieve you of the need to watch your instruments, it just
relieves you of the need to continually fly the airplane. Turning the
autopilot off doesn't make you any better at reading the instruments, either.


The PIC is always responsible for the safety on his/her ship, and of
course that includes monitoring the gauges to make sure the autopilot
is doing it's job. But what happens when you notice it isn't behaving
properly and you have to pull the breaker? That's why it's important
to have a backup plan.

When your autopilot breaks, there is also difficulty in actually doing
it.


If you can control the aircraft in VFR, you can control it in IFR. If you
can't control the aircraft, you belong on the ground.


Different skill sets are required to control the airplane precisely
using instrument reference alone, versus looking out the window.

If your autopilot is not broken, there's no shame in using it. That's what it
is there for.


I would not be ashamed to use the autopilot. I'm just talking about
training here. I would be ashamed to have earned my instrument rating
and have to be dependent on the autopilot to be safe. But I doubt
there are any CFII's out there that would let that happen.


I went to Reality XP's website, and they had a side by side comparison
of the "stock" gauges, and their product. Amazing. One of the planes
I fly (and will be training in) has the Garmin 430, so I might be
downloading that as well. Thanks for the tip.


They were still photos, no? They are really impressive when they are actually
operating. Silky smooth action, behavior just like the real thing, and no
buttons or knobs that do not work.


It's a 5 second (or so) flash(?) animation at http://www.reality-
xp.com/products/FLNT/index.htm. Very impressive.
--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.