I give up, after many, many years!

"Jay Honeck" wrote in
news:%FLXj.168576$yE1.70999@attbi_s21:

I fly by feel. I orient myself visually, either looking out the
window or looking
at the instruments. I navigate visually. But I FLY by feel.

How many seconds can you fly by feel before you get into trouble.

Initially we were talking about instrument flight. Somehow, several
posts upstream this got conflated into instrument flight after a
vacuum failure -- a completely different kettle of fish.

IMHO (and this from a 1300-hour VFR pilot and aircraft owner who
stopped just short of taking the IFR flight test in '02) MX's
assertions regarding ignoring physical sensations mesh perfectly with
everything I've been taught about instrument flight.




Now that I believe. Two compleat idiots slurping each other.

Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

A Lieberman writes:

Read my ILS rational, where you feel the applied power to capture the
glide slope. If you don't feel it in the seat of your pants, you got
a bigger issue. If you are above the glide slope, and you reduce
power, the lack of pressure in your butt should happen, but if the
opposite happens, you have a problem.

To capture the glide slope, you watch the needles on your instruments.

Good example, though not likely, but very possible is having the trim
set in the nose down position rather then nose up. Apply power and
instead of maintaining level altitude, you just accelerated downhill
and you wouldn't get that firm seat of the pants feeling.

Applying power will not accelerate you downhill. Power controls
altitude, pitch controls speed. At constant pitch, increased power
produces increased lift, and thus produces a climb.

The building airspeed and the ABSENCE of an expected seat of the
pants feeling doesn't bode well. This would be an extreme example,
but very pluasible.

Just look at the instruments, and forget the seat of the pants. Your
altimeter will tell you about changes in altitude, and your airspeed
indicator will tell you about changes in speed.

Remember, that the above sensations helps CONFIRM the instruments,
NOT the other way around.

No. The instruments confirm. The instruments are the final
authority. If you are looking at the instruments to begin with (as
you will be in IMC), you don't need anything else, and paying
attention to sensations of movement will only get you into trouble.

You can't.

Yes, you can. You can fly entirely with instruments. You _have to_
fly entirely with instruments in IMC. Doing anything else is
dangerous.

It's a combination that makes it all work.

No combination is necessary.

If you put 100 percent faith in instruments and ignore what I am
describing above, then you are failing to recognize instrumentation
or airplane setting errors, and that will lead to a not so good
ending.

Failing instruments in IMC usually lead to a not-so-good ending. The
seat of your pants won't help you.

It's a combination of instruments AND what you feel in the seat of
your pants (NOT your inner ear feelings) that makes a difference
between landing at minimums or butching up an approach.

No, it's instruments.

Again, go up with an IA rated pilot, see what the real deal is all
about. That hood just doesn't do it any justice, nor will any MSFS
desktop simulator do it.

This is unrelated to simulations or hoods. In the real world, in IMC,
you fly by instruments.

Look at the cowling, and it was straight
and level relative to the camera, but in reality, I was in a climbing
right turn.

If the cowling starts to move while you're flying, you have worse
problems than just failing instruments.

In my case, I verified the VSI reading with the feeling in my rear
end.

Your rear end is useless for measuring rate of climb.


Just try getting kicked in the ass and see....

Bertie

"Jay Honeck" wrote in
news:aJMXj.168650$yE1.132961@attbi_s21:

Bottom line, in IMC your seat of pants sensation will save your butt,
but you got to use it by listening to what it's telling you, or more
importantly NOT telling you. (seat of the pants sensation)

Gotcha. That's quite a different "sensation" than the inner ear --
thanks for the clarification.

However, I think many in this group are arguing right past MX,
dismissing him out of hand simply because most of the respondents
can't stand him. Your point that seat of the pants pressure sensations
are used during instrument flight does not disprove MX's point about
the necessity of relying primarily on your instruments for accurate
information in IMC. #



That wasn;'t his point, fjukkwit. and people dismiss him because he's
wrong.

You just like him because you're trying to slurp a k00k in order to gain
an ally.


Bertie

wrote:


If you don't feel it, then you really are missing one of the finer
tools of flying as IFR flying is not all gauges. All gauge flying

Well, of course you're going to feel all kinds of stuff while flying
instruments: turbulence, control inputs, power setting
changes...whatever, but IMHO they are just as likely to bite you as save
you. A good scan is what saves your butt, of both primary and secondary
instruments. At least that's my experience with single and multi engine
solo IFR. But there are many here with a lot more experience than either
of us. I keep wondering where they are. Probably got tired of the
endless name calling. :-(

"Ken S. Tucker" wrote in
:

On May 18, 2:19 pm, terry wrote:
On May 19, 7:08 am, Mxsmanic wrote: A Lieberman
writes:
Yep, go ahead, try leveling off with an AI ERRONEOUSLY showing a
20 pitch up. Go ahead and trust that instrument.

The AI is the most reliable instrument on most aircraft, after the
magnetic compass. And of course you'll want two, just in case one
fails, for IFR.

Would love to know what your sources are on that information MX. in
all the aircraft I have flown both the AI and DI were powered from
the same vacuum pump and the pump is the most common cause of failure
of gyroscopic instruments. How do I know that? not from any books I
have read, and I have many on aviation, but from first hand advice
from several flying instructors, and actually had a vacuum pump
failure in a Warrior on one of my PPL flight tests ( and you are not
allowed to ask why I had more than one test :) )
Terry
PPL Downunder

I like the Mxsmanic type. We could get him into the
right seat of some fella puttin in hours for a split on
the rent & gas.
Ten minutes later, I figure the Left-seater would say
SHUT the F##K UP, I'm trying to drive the friggin
airplane. I'd love a tape recording of that, bla-bla-bla.
Seriously MX, you oughta jump into the right seat
for some fun.
Ken


the pilot would just put you out. Good time to try out your new theory
on stealth dive bomibng for your next guv'mint contract.


Bertie

On May 18, 2:07 pm, B A R R Y wrote:
On Sun, 18 May 2008 14:00:48 -0700 (PDT), "Ken S. Tucker"

wrote:
With ASI out, use the back-up stall buzzer on final,
then 4 knot accuracy is easy...duh.

On final?
Have you ever really landed an airplane?

Yeah, I use the manuals IAS and InDescent
indicator recommendations, with an eye on
attitude and adjust to the runway numbers,
with the expanding keystone, (the airstrip is
an expanding quadrangle, even in sims).
I'll float down to 37 KIAS alone in a 150 using
the stall horn frequency and amplitude, for fun.

Landing is my fav especially with serious X-wind.
Coming in with 30 deg crab, and waltz the machine
gently over the numbers is like dancing with a
beautiful woman, and then the flare, either way,
it's a rush when it all harmonizes.
Ken

"Jay Honeck" wrote in
news:mnVXj.115088$TT4.68884@attbi_s22:

Pretty much the same thing applies to you in this regard as you have
only made it to somewhere between second and third base in the IFR
realm. There are a lot of people on this group who are quite
experienced in IFR flight and I might be one of them. But I still
welcome the opportunity to learn from those who have earned my
respect. The IFR virgins should shut up, listen and learn.

Good observation. I usually subscribe to this approach, when the
topic of instrument filght comes up, since I *am* a newbie in that
realm. I've only shot 54 instrument approaches under the hood, and
have maybe fifty hours total simulated IMC, which pales into
insignificance when compared with someone who flies instruments daily.

However, in this case MX is parroting "the book" on instrument flight,
while several others are arguing counter to "the book".
No he isn't, and no they aren't.


Fjukkwit.


Bertie

Buster Hymen wrote in
02:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote in
:


I look out the window to see what has
changed.


What, so looking over at the boulangerie across the road tells you
what, exactly?


Bertie, according to the on line 3D map of Paris I just looked at,
across the street from 29 Rue du General Bertrand looks like another
apartment building. But if one turn's left from 29 Rue du General
Bertrand and crosses Rue de Sevres, you are at Hopital Necker, which
is for sick children. Anthony is probably in the hospital's long term
care facility for adults who are developmentally 7 years old and have
no hope of progressing.




You are a google god.


Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

A Lieberman writes:

MSFS don't simulate fouled plugs BTW, or any other engine anomaly
that
can be encountered in the real world flying.

MSFS aircraft are properly maintained by default.


Bwawhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwhawhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwh awhahwhahwhhahwhahwhah
whawhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwhawhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwh awhahwhahwhhahwhahwhah
whawhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwhawhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwh awhahwhahwhhahwhahwhah
whawhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwhawhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwh awhahwhahwhhahwhahwhah
whawhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwhawhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwh awhahwhahwhhahwhahwhah
whawhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwhawhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwh awhahwhahwhhahwhahwhah
whawhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwhawhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwh awhahwhahwhhahwhahwhah
whawhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwhawhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwh awhahwhahwhhahwhahwhah
whawhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwhawhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwh awhahwhahwhhahwhahwhah
whawhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwhawhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwh


Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

writes:

The fly by the seat of my pants did not feel like I had a 20 to 30
degree pitch up which my horizon indicator showed (which was
waaaaaaaaay more then Vx pitch).

Had I followed the horizon indicator and leveled the plane soley by
the HI, I would have been in a 20 degee pitch down and augured it in.
There was nothing accurate about my HI and it was my seat of the
pants feeling that set all sorts of alarms and bells out in my head..

You were lucky. Most people who have trusted the seat of their pants
in IMC are dead. It probably wouldn't be a good idea to press your
luck.


You are an idiot and you have no idea of what you're talking about.


Bertie