![]() |
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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I think it is very safe to fly the airplane with two VORs and ADF, if
you are a proficient instrument pilot. This was done for thirty plus years prior to GPS coming into the cockpit without much problem. Remember, GPS is still a rather new invention when it comes to aviation usage. Lynne "Guy Elden Jr." wrote in message ... It may be legal to fly in instrument conditions with two VORs and an ADF, but is it really safe if you're the only pilot in the plane, weather is forming all around you, and you have to hand fly the plane? My instructor is definitely of the opinion (and I share the same view) that it is not. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ray Andraka writes:
I've found that I can fly the airplane IMC with just the HSI page on my Garmin III Pilot as long as I keep the control inputs gentle. Doing this, my instructor covers all the flight instruments. Update rate is a little on the slow side, but as long as you keep your turns gentle it is very doable. My concern is that in moderate turbulence it's much harder to keep control inputs gentle. On my last trip in IMC, for example, I hit a couple of jolts that tipped me past 20 deg bank in a fraction of a second. I'd like to know how well the GPS HSI page works in that situation (I acknowledge that the TC is also tricky when the air's that rough, since it has a slight lag built-in). Has anyone tried using the HSI page on a handheld GPS in moderate turbulence? I'd be very interested in hearing the results (especially if it was on a cloudy day or at night, when there were no light or shadow clues). All the best, David |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On the way back from OSH this summer, we punched through some nascent
cumulous formations (in a C172). While partial panel is something that we all practice (right?), and, even without a GPS as a backup, is not that difficult to handle under some (most) circumstances, the few short forays into the clouds lead me to investigate an electric AI. Although we were only in the bumpy stuff for a few minutes at a time, I quickly realized that I would be hard pressed to keep the plane right-side-up if the vacuum system went south. I love my handheld GPS for general situational awareness, but I'd much prefer an AI. (Nice spot for it, too, right under the VSI. We'll need to remove the round G meter that the original owner I guess thought would be worth while in a 172?) David Megginson wrote: Ray Andraka writes: I've found that I can fly the airplane IMC with just the HSI page on my Garmin III Pilot as long as I keep the control inputs gentle. Doing this, my instructor covers all the flight instruments. Update rate is a little on the slow side, but as long as you keep your turns gentle it is very doable. My concern is that in moderate turbulence it's much harder to keep control inputs gentle. On my last trip in IMC, for example, I hit a couple of jolts that tipped me past 20 deg bank in a fraction of a second. I'd like to know how well the GPS HSI page works in that situation (I acknowledge that the TC is also tricky when the air's that rough, since it has a slight lag built-in). Has anyone tried using the HSI page on a handheld GPS in moderate turbulence? I'd be very interested in hearing the results (especially if it was on a cloudy day or at night, when there were no light or shadow clues). All the best, David -- Remove "2PLANES" to reply. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
Dan Truesdell wrote: We'll need to remove the round G meter that the original owner I guess thought would be worth while in a 172?) Sounds like a good rule of thumb: Never buy a non-acrobatic airplane that a previous owner thought could use a G meter. -- Ben Jackson http://www.ben.com/ |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ben,
Never buy a non-acrobatic airplane that a previous owner thought could use a G meter. I like it! -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Dan Truesdell wrote: the few short forays into the clouds lead me to investigate an electric AI. Although we were only in the bumpy stuff for a few minutes at a time, Now that the FAA has finally relented and allowed you to throw away your turn coordinator and get a second AI I went and talked to my local avionics shop about the RC Allen electric AI that I see advertised for about $1800. They said don't bother as 90% of them come back because they are so horribly built. They told me to get the reliability of a vacuum AI it's gonna take about $4000. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thanks for the heads-up on those. I was figuring on about $2K, but $4K
would mean asking the other 4 owners to kick in $1000 for an item that they won't use. For a 172, it's probably just as good then to get a manifold-driven backup vacuum. Too bad the electronic AI's are not certified for IFR (the $1500 ones, not the $6000 ones.) Newps wrote: Dan Truesdell wrote: the few short forays into the clouds lead me to investigate an electric AI. Although we were only in the bumpy stuff for a few minutes at a time, Now that the FAA has finally relented and allowed you to throw away your turn coordinator and get a second AI I went and talked to my local avionics shop about the RC Allen electric AI that I see advertised for about $1800. They said don't bother as 90% of them come back because they are so horribly built. They told me to get the reliability of a vacuum AI it's gonna take about $4000. -- Remove "2PLANES" to reply. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Newps wrote in message news:govqb.129678$Fm2.107682@attbi_s04...
Dan Truesdell wrote: the few short forays into the clouds lead me to investigate an electric AI. Although we were only in the bumpy stuff for a few minutes at a time, Now that the FAA has finally relented and allowed you to throw away your turn coordinator and get a second AI I went and talked to my local avionics shop about the RC Allen electric AI that I see advertised for about $1800. They said don't bother as 90% of them come back because they are so horribly built. They told me to get the reliability of a vacuum AI it's gonna take about $4000. Why are the electric AI's so poor? I hear this frequently on the newsgroup. OTOH, one rarely hears about people complaining of TCs. Is it the extra dimension of rotation that causes the problem? Or is just RC Allen's design/mfg? -Nathan |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
I wonder if Chris Thomas is a real pilot? Anybody know? | Badwater Bill | Home Built | 116 | September 3rd 04 05:43 PM |
Pilot Error? Is it Mr. Damron? | Badwater Bill | Home Built | 3 | June 23rd 04 04:05 PM |
Single-Seat Accident Records (Was BD-5B) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 41 | November 20th 03 05:39 AM |
Effect of Light Sport on General Aviation | Gilan | Home Built | 17 | September 24th 03 06:11 AM |