![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Tina writes:
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. Not under IFR. Under IFR, only the instruments count. It worries me that so many pilots here are trying so desperately to justify an extremely dangerous practice. Dudley is being very diplomatic. Under IFR, sensations don't count at all, ever. Only instruments count. Countless pilots have died because they refused to accept this. All training and literature ceaselessly emphasize the importance of this. And yet some people still argue against it, because they want to believe that they can fly by the seat of their pants in all conditions. These pilots should take care to always remain VFR in VMC, because it is clear that they would endanger themselves under IFR in IMC. We react to 'bumps' and the like long before the instruments indicate their effect. Not if you are doing things right. First, you've been scanning the instruments constantly, so any change they indicate is immediately noticed. Second, the bumps must be ignored, so there is nothing to react to when they occur. No instrument in our airplane will tell us we are picking up ice, but a flashlight out along the leading edge will. That is not a sensation in the context of this discussion. Sensations here clearly mean physical movements, and people here are trying to justify using physical movement sensations in the aircraft to fly it, while giving the instruments only secondary priority. That's not the right way to fly IFR. At night no instrument will tell us we are in a cloud, but the anti-collision lights will. Under IFR, you don't need to know. Your instruments tell you where you are and where you're going. If you're in IMC, you obviously have visible moisture, and you can check the temperature to see if you're at risk for icing. When getting close to MDA, and including the windscreen in your instrument scan so you can transition to visual is not an instrumentation issue. You are not at MDA during most of the flight. If you can see outside, you're not in IMC. If you are in IMC, you use only your instruments. 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. If you don't like flying by instruments, then fly only VFR in VMC. If you cannot get away from the desire to depend on physical sensations to fly, don't go anywhere near IMC. Yes, it's a lot like a sim, the only difference being that in a sim you feel nothing (unless it's a motion sim), and in real life you feel something. However, whether you feel nothing or something, you still fly by instruments, period. 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. If you don't rely on your instruments in IMC, you'll never reach those other destinations. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Apology re mxsmanic | terry | Piloting | 96 | February 16th 08 05:17 PM |
I saw Mxsmanic on TV | Clear Prop | Piloting | 8 | February 14th 07 01:18 AM |
Mxsmanic | gwengler | Piloting | 30 | January 11th 07 03:42 AM |
Getting rid of MXSMANIC | [email protected] | Piloting | 33 | December 8th 06 11:26 PM |
Feeling aircraft sensations | Ramapriya | Piloting | 17 | January 12th 06 10:15 AM |