Straight-ins at uncontrolled airports?

Roger writes:

I can put you upside down and give you that same feeling and you will
never know you are inverted.

And unfortunately some VFR pilots end up in exactly that position in real
life, once they are stuck in IMC. They only find out when the ground hits
them from above.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Roger writes:

I'm not so sure as I'd agree with that as we depend on those
sensations in our every day lives. Whether a new comer or veteran
those sensations, or bodily feed back are very difficult to ignore.
Some problems do crop up from a long life of flying VFR in docile
planes such as depending on the VSI for holding altitude instead of
the altimeter. CFIIs must get tired of saying "remember the VSI is a
*trend* instrument" Once it's indicating a climb or descent that climb
or descent has already been established, while you can catch it right
off the bat when watching the altimeter.

How often am I supposed to look at the VSI? I almost never look at it,
_unless_ I need to attain or maintain a specific rate of climb or descent.
The rest of the time I look at the altimeter. My logic is that the altimeter
will tell me immediately of any change in altitude, and that I generally need
to maintain an altitude much more than I need to maintain a vertical speed.
The VSI also seems to tell me things I should have already known: if it shows
a steep descent, for example, by the time it shows me that, it's already past
the time where I should have corrected for it. An altimeter shows me
immediately.

In practice, I don't think I'd pay much attention to the VSI unless I were
forced to maintain a specific vertical speed (by an instructor, an examiner,
or a procedure or ATC). But even people like ATC don't care much about your
vertical speed as long as you get to your assigned altitude within a certain
window.

I don't know what Real Pilots (tm) do, but I primarily look at the attitude
indicator, the airspeed indicator, and the altimeter, not necessarily in that
order, but almost continously (I guess that's what is meant by a "scan"). The
rest I don't watch too much for the aviating part of flying. For the
navigating part, I primarily watch the EHSI, which combines a lot of other
individual instruments into one display. I do have individual instruments for
back-up if the EHSI fails. Very occasionally I look at the GPS. The GPS
serves as an additional method for triple-checking my position. It also is
useful for finding and maintaining a specific track in windy conditions, and
it's handy for double-checking that I'm not entering any airspace that I
shouldn't. Occasionally I use it as a reference to find nearby VORs or
airports.

Once all that is out of the way, I periodically look at the engine and fuel
gauges to see if I need to change the mixture or prop and to make sure that I
still have enough fuel to get where I want to go. I did more of that last
night since flying between 14,000-foot mountains made me acutely aware of the
need for good climb rates and the need to have at least some idea of which
airports might be nearby if I should run out of fuel (I had plenty when I left
but I spent so much time getting unlost that I started to run rather low).

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Buck Murdock writes:

I've taught hundreds of pilots to fly. The worst ones, BY FAR, were the
ones who came to me with hundreds of hours of simulator-game time. They
thought they knew what they were doing, and got a rude awakening when
they tried to fly a real plane.

Some instructors say the opposite. Perhaps the instructors see what they
expect to see. If they hate sims, they'll always see "problems" related to
any use of a sim by a student; if they love sims, they'll always insist that
sim time greatly accelerated the student's learning. The reality is less
variable and surely somewhere in between.

Those with a lot of sim experience consistently required more hours and
more training to learn to fly, when compared with someone who had no
simulator or airplane time at all. You're learning lots of bad habits
in the simulators, but you don't know it, because you have nothing with
which to compare it.

I'll take that risk. The comparisons I've done thus far do not support your
assertion.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic wrote:


I'll take that risk. The comparisons I've done thus far do not
support your assertion.

What "risk?" You are, as usual taking no risk at all because, as you have
pointed out, you have no interest in flying real aircraft.

Gig 601XL Builder writes:

What "risk?" You are, as usual taking no risk at all because, as you have
pointed out, you have no interest in flying real aircraft.

I have no resources to fly real aircraft; I do have an interest in it,
although how frequently I'd want to do it if given the opportunity is an open
question.

The risk I'm taking is that thousands of hours of simulation might work
against me if I train for a real license. However, I consider this an
extremely small risk. If I get an instructor with an anti-sim chip weighing
down his shoulder, I'll find a different instructor, one born after 1914.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic wrote:
Gig 601XL Builder writes:

What "risk?" You are, as usual taking no risk at all because, as you
have pointed out, you have no interest in flying real aircraft.

I have no resources to fly real aircraft; I do have an interest in it,
although how frequently I'd want to do it if given the opportunity is
an open question.

The risk I'm taking is that thousands of hours of simulation might
work against me if I train for a real license. However, I consider
this an extremely small risk. If I get an instructor with an anti-
sim chip weighing down his shoulder, I'll find a different
instructor, one born after 1914.

You seem to be changing your story as far as your fear level when it come to
real aircraft. That aside,should you decide some day to learn to fly real
aircraft and you relate to your instructor as you do to pilots here I'm sure
you will get the chance to sample the instruction techniques of MANY
instructors.

On Feb 12, 9:58 am, "Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net
wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote:

I'll take that risk. The comparisons I've done thus far do not
support your assertion.

What "risk?" You are, as usual taking no risk at all because, as you have
pointed out, you have no interest in flying real aircraft.

Oh, there's plenty of risk. Wait until he flies his simulator
into rain and gets electrocuted.

Dan

Oh, with the sense of servce some of us had in France, I really hope
this 2 D person ventures into 3 D space with a French instructor.

On Feb 12, 3:02 pm, wrote:
On Feb 12, 9:58 am, "Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net
wrote:

Mxsmanic wrote:

I'll take that risk. The comparisons I've done thus far do not
support your assertion.

What "risk?" You are, as usual taking no risk at all because, as you have
pointed out, you have no interest in flying real aircraft.

Oh, there's plenty of risk. Wait until he flies his simulator
into rain and gets electrocuted.

Dan

Gig 601XL Builder writes:

You seem to be changing your story as far as your fear level when it come to
real aircraft.

No, I'm only correcting your long-standing and inaccurate inferences.

That aside,should you decide some day to learn to fly real
aircraft and you relate to your instructor as you do to pilots here I'm sure
you will get the chance to sample the instruction techniques of MANY
instructors.

Possibly, but one good instructor is worth dozens of bad ones.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Tony writes:

Oh, with the sense of servce some of us had in France, I really hope
this 2 D person ventures into 3 D space with a French instructor.

If I took flying lessons, it would be in the U.S. I'm not interested in
French aviation.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.