![]() |
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 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Aug 4, 10:22*am, Mxsmanic wrote:
a writes: There was something in the literature recently about using a/p in IMC is safer, but from my point of view I am much more aware of what's going on hand flying (and have done so over the Rockies) than sitting back and 'managing' the airplane while it's on auto pilot.. The workload for single-pilot IFR is substantial, particularly in actual IMC. This is an important argument favoring the suggestion that autopilot be heavily used for IFR. With two pilots, things are easier, although an autopilot might still be preferable. At least the autopilot only does what it is told. At the same time, it does encourage a certain amount of complacency, which has even bit airline pilots on more than one occasion. A sad confession is the a/p does do a better job of keeping the needles crossed on an ILS than I do, but the correct interpretation of that is, I need more practice at it than the a/p does. There's no shame in an automated system doing better than a human being at something it is designed to do. A huge 'and moreover' is, I want hands on near minima, don't want to mess with the a/p if I have to fly a miss, and don't want to transition from a/p to manual when I decide conditions are not right for a landing. Aviators understand this stuff. It depends on the aircraft and the type of flying. I hate responding to a troll, but his statement is nonsensical when he claims a substantially higher workload for SEL under IFR/IMC. What increase in workload? Control by reference to instruments? Navigating? Communicating? Changing Frequencies? Flying a predetermined route? Most of us rated for instrument flight would assert the workload is NOT substantial and I, among many, prefer IFR than VFR because it is in fact easier and certainly safer. It's a matter of training, something a non-aviator would not understand. It would take a completely abnormal set of circumstances before I would consider a long night CAVU XC flight under VFR Abnormal would be, for example, during the controller's slowdown/strike during the Reagan presidency. This is an aviator's forum, aviators understand this stuff. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Promises to be a good show this year! | PLMerite | Aviation Photos | 0 | May 3rd 08 12:43 PM |
Stability variation | WingFlaps | Piloting | 2 | April 28th 08 03:45 AM |
Towing stability studies | Dan G | Soaring | 27 | February 21st 08 08:38 PM |
Tow vehicle -- electronic stability control | Greg Arnold | Soaring | 4 | June 8th 06 12:31 PM |
Atmospheric stability and lapse rate | Andrew Sarangan | Piloting | 39 | February 11th 05 05:34 AM |