Mxsmanic , IFR sensations, and some other stuff

It seems to me the better pilots use all the clues they have
available, the physiological ones as well as those presented by the
panel, to maintain a sense of the airplane's attitude. We react to
'bumps' and the like long before the instruments indicate their
effect. We are an integrated 'package' with the airplane. No
instrument in our airplane will tell us we are picking up ice, but a
flashlight out along the leading edge will. At night no instrument
will tell us we are in a cloud, but the anti collision lights will.
When getting close to MDA, and including the windscreen in your
instrument scan so you can transition to visual is not an
instrumentation issue. If it were not for the physical effects, the
wind noise, the way the control feel changes with airspeed, and the
like, we might just as well be flying sims. Except of course sims
don't take us to other destinations, and it's the going to some other
place that really drives our particular use of general aviation.



On May 19, 4:34 pm, " wrote:
On May 19, 2:10 pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:

When every once of common sense,
physical sensation, charts floating, and g's pressing on your body tell
you you need to push, and your gyro panel is suspect, go immediately to
primary panel to verify.

Dudley,

How about the inverse, which I have been emphasizing in my
experiences? Would I not be saying the same thing?

Gyro tumbled in a position where I went from normal pitch to a 20
degree pitch up and I DID NOT feel the G's expected? After all the
airplane doesn't care if it's VMC or IMC outside the airframe so to
speak, so if I see that pitch change in VMC and get the seat of the
pants feelings of positive G, I would expect the same in IMC.

That lack of feeling flagged the HI which made me go to secondary
instruments. Would that not be the same thing as you describe above
(not to the extreme of floating charts) but in reverse?

In otherwords, I am catching the situation at hand before it became a
"control the airplane issue" by using my sensory feelings in the seat
of my pants against visual aids (in this case my instruments in IMC)
that changed without a corresponding seat of the pants feeling change.

For capturing the ILS below the glide slope, add power, no seat of the
pants feeling, flags me to check engine instrumentation or outside
temp probe for icing. In all what I am saying is that it supplements
and verifies the instrumentation based on power inputs (reduction or
adding). No different visually so to speak, if I look out the
windscreen or look at the AI and associated instruments in my scan.

As Gatts said, it's not being used for zero zero landings, but a
supplement to verify what my eyes say. The feeling should match what
my eyes say for POWER inputs no matter what meterological conditions
are outside the airplane. Again, not inner ear or head feelings, but
the seat of the pants feeling. Whether I look outside the windscreen
at the horizon or look at the AI, the feeling in the seat of the pants
should be the same. Any discrepancy for that feeling should be
resolved.

If both the gyro panel AND the primary panel tell you nothing, you've
got SERIOUS problems :-)

Amen on that and no seat of the pants skill will get you out of that.
That is called LUCK. And lots of good luck will you need! :-)))