We don't fly in a one cue world. (Instruments)

Pilots have to learn to use any and all cues available to them to be
thoroughly proficient at all times, and in all normally anticipated
conditions commensurate with the ratings they hold and the aircraft they
are flying.
This means learning to use the senses such as the visual cues as well as
how the aircraft feels physically to them through their hands and feet.
The reason we learn to use all available cues is that when one cue fails
we have another. Also, the manner in which we use these cues change.
For example, when we are VFR, normally a pilot will use visual and
audible, as well as physical cuing backed up by instrument cuing. In
this case all cues are available so they are used.
When we go IFR, we lose the visual cues and we deliberately set aside
all the physically felt cues, and the instruments and audible cues
become prime.
The bottom line on all this is that if a pilot learned to fly using only
instruments, that pilot would be denied a properly trained reference set
of visual cues and physical cues.
In other words, if you're trying to solve a physics problem, don't leave
your algebra book at home! :-))

Flying a plane is nothing more than the proper application of a few
sound basics. Learning to use all the available cues is simply learning
sound basics.


Thank you






wrote:
I guess I'm going to have to start (and perhaps finish) my primary
training in order to understand this comment completely.

I understand that being able to see outside helps the brain make a
connection between the behavior of the airplane and what it looks
like. However, couldn't you learn to feel the airplane and how it
behaves only on instruments ever? Could you complete a PPL without
ever looking out the window? At the risk of sounding like a simmer,
why is this "feel" so necessary when training the beginning pilot and
then relearned for an instrument rating? I know I'm making an error
of logic here (otherwise pilot training would be much different), but
what is it exactly?

I have done enough research to understand the difference between VFR,
VMC, IFR, and IMC and who and why you would fly in each one. I would
imagine this is part of training when getting a PPL. So how would a
pilot mix up these two worlds?

-SPCT

On Feb 17, 9:34 am, Dudley Henriques wrote:
Yes. You are missing something, and it's vitally important you
understand it....and understand it completely.

Instrument flying is a totally separate issue from the way one learns to
fly an airplane during initial training. They are integrated in certain
ways. In other ways the two are entirely separate.

We are discussing here the initial process of learning to fly, NOT
flying in instrument conditions.

VFR is one thing IFR is quite another.

When an instructor discusses "flying by feel", they are in no way
advocating the non-use of instruments and warning sensors available to
the pilot in the aircraft. They are simply reducing the available
"tools" the pilot relies on to a lower level to help the pilot
understand his/her flight evironment more closely without the aid of
artificial help.

In the IFR scenario, an instructor will do the same thing when they
reduce a pilot to flying on the primary panel only.

Don't think of flying VFR and IFR in the same breath. This attitude can
get a pilot into deep trouble down the line.

When you start talking instruments, you're in a whole new ball game when
it comes to cues. Everything changes. There are no more visual cues.
There is no more "feeling" of the airplane. There are ONLY the instruments.

It's a whole different flying world. You learn to fly by "feel" to
better understand the aerodynamics and how the airplane interfaces in
it's environment. Visual cues are part of this equation.
Once these things are learned, you TRANSITION into a whole new world
where instruments replace these cues. Don't EVER, as long as you fly,
get these two worlds mixed up in your mind. Doing that will kill you in
an airplane faster than you can imagine!

--
Dudley Henriques



--
Dudley Henriques