On May 19, 2:27 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Daedalus wrote :

On Mon, 19 May 2008 18:52:05 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote:

Daedalus wrote in
m:

On Mon, 19 May 2008 17:10:55 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip



wrote:

"Ken S. Tucker" wrote in
news:f41822f7-8b58-4810-bf30-97634fd4dec3
:

On May 18, 5:09 pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
On May 18, 4:09 pm, Dudley Henriques
wrote:
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
On May 18, 3:34 pm, Dudley Henriques
wrote:
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe wrote:
"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
...
...
Without getting into a whole magilla concerning right and
wrong, simply let me say that in my opinion physical
sensation
should never, and I repeat it again so that there's NO
mistake....NEVER be used to verify or augment an
instrument
reading. In my opinion, this is what proper scan technique
is
all about. You verify instruments CONSTANTLY using other
instruments, right on down to primary panel if necessary,
but in my opinion, the basic concept of ignoring physical
cues
and sensations while on instruments is a sound principle
ans
should be followed to the letter.
...
I won't argue with a single word of that.
But...
That doesn't make physical sensations irrelevent or
unimportant. In fact, it is the MISLEADING sensations that
are
very important in the sense that, if you don't have
significant
experience "playing over" them, one typically ends up dead
(in
real life). Sitting on your lazy boy, those sensations
don't
happen - you always feel "coordinated" - you don't get
disoriented, you don't experience vertigo - which makes
flying
in simulated IMC stupid easy compared to real life.
And, I would argue that _no_ _ammount_ of desktop
simulation
will _ever_ prepare you for the assult on your senses that
can
happen when things aren't going well in real life soup.
One may think that one can handle real IMC based on desktop
experience - but without realizing just how difficult it is
to
ignore your inner ear screaming lies at you, one doesn't
really
have any idea what flying real IMC is like - I would bet
that
an experienced "sim only" pilot would pull the wings off
in
less than 3 minutes in real life.
I believe you and I are in complete agreement. Perhaps
something
being misread.
The understanding of sensations and how they interact with
the
IFR experience is of paramount importance. In fact, a lack
of
this understanding can get you killed quicker than anything
else
I can think of at the moment.
Where I was referring to the sensations issue was directly
concerned with one pilot who commented that verifying an
instrument reading with a physical sensation was important.
My
point was that instrument verification should be done
against
other instruments with the EXCLUSION of physical sensation
from
that equation.
When I was a kid, I was spun to dizzy, and
then staggered when I tried to walk. IIRC it
took a concentrated focus on some point to
sustain balance, which is me in VFR, but that
doesn't work in a fog.
Another thing I noticed is flying VFR with a lot
of turbulence, (especially with towering cumulus)
screwed my inner ear.
(That is my weakness).
I was very lucky that after just a couple of hours,
my flight instructor got me going on IFR.
He knew I had a basic handle on geometry and
algebra so he was the type to promote the advance
early on in instruction.
Ken
I tend to keep things on the basic level with students. It
helps
to hide my shortcomings :-)

After a few hours, my instructor had me doing shallow
(30's), medium (45's) and steep (60's) turns and would
critcize me because I focused on the VFR horizon and
he'd smirk and point to the Indescent Indicator showing
a 50'/per minute loss, and the IAS loss of energy and
my off-center-ball, so my turn performance was gauged
by instruments.
Obviously, I should have pulled a bit more elevator,
put on some RPM, and applied more rudder, so that's
what I did via instruments, and that's in a well done
bank at 60 degs even when VFR is available.
Ken

I'm the reverse ytpe of instructor. Initially I like students to
get
their heads outside the airplane and discover nose attitudes
(LF;Climb; glides) THEN after they have a good understanding of
these
nose attitudes I get them to cross check these attitudes with the
panel. Different strokes for different folks
Dudley Henriques

I was a Professional teacher for awhile, and so
understand the attitude.

Bwawhawhhahwhahwhahwhahhwhahwhahwha!

We did about 5 hours of night flying together,
he didn't say much by that time, except the odd
ancedote.

"oh ****, watch what you are doing!" is not an anectdote, fjukkwit.
Oh wait, maybe it;s a "ancedote"

Maybe it's an antidote!

Jade

Maybe it was an antecedant.

BTW, you wanna watch Larry, he has your number.

Bertie

Is that who keeps calling and breathing heavily?

THXS!

He mayb be crude, but he's cheaper than those 1-900 numbers.

Bertie

Speaking of cheap; you can replace the artificial horizon- how can you
tell when the wings are level?


Wait for it.



The CFI drools out of both sides of his mouth.