Philosophical question on owning & IFR rating

G.R. Patterson III wrote:
If it fits in the smaller holes, I have two empty spaces for the CDI; one to the left
of my T&B, and one below it. I don't know how well the FAA likes the idea of putting
the CDI on the left side of the panel, though. I'll let my avionics tech decide that,
I guess.

I think the FAA's guidelines for placement of the CDI is something vague
like "within view of the pilot", so the left side would probably be
fine. However, if it was me, I'd use your 3.5" hole with adapter. It's
a more intuitive location for an IFR scan (in my opinion). That said,
mine is to the right of the radio stack. Take a look at:
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino/private/panel2.JPG
My ILS head is where your spare hole is. Anyway, you can see what one of
those Mid Continent CDIs looks like inside a 3.5" hole.

--- Jay


--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino ! ! !
http://www.oceancityairport.com
http://www.oc-adolfos.com

kontiki wrote:

With respect to the weather conditions in North Carolina...
that doesn't matter much for IR training... in fact you will have
the opportunity for more "actual" hours which will benefit you
in the long run. Weather isn't as much of an impediment for an
IR rating as it is for a PPL rating.


I wasn't mentioning weather here as an impediment to the IFR rating so
much as a factor in determining the value of getting one.

Matt Whiting wrote:
I believe the
instrument rating adds a complete new dimension to your flying skills
and greatly increases the precision with which you fly, be it IFR or
VFR. A very useful rating to obtain, IMO, even if you don't use it
later on.


This is actually the best argument for getting the IFR rating IMO (and
in my situation).

Aaron Coolidge wrote:

If you can wait a couple days, I can take a picture of it.

I'm not in any hurry -- making tentative plans for the future.

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

Jay Masino wrote:

Take a look at:
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino/private/panel2.JPG

Thanks. Nice photo.

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

Rosspilot wrote:

All IFR is not icing. All IFR does not involve deteriorating weather.

That should be "Not all IFR is icing. Not all IFR involves deteriorating weather."
What you said is that IFR never involves icing or deteriorating weather.

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

ospam (Rosspilot) wrote
All IFR is not icing.

All IFR in IMC flown in subfreezing weather has the potential for
icing. Icing is not predictable. All you really know is this - if
you have visible moisture and subfreezing temperatures, you are at
risk.

All IFR does not involve deteriorating weather.

All IFR in IMC involves the potential for deteriorating weather. When
you're flying in or above cloud, you can't effectively monitor it.
Therefore, you need to have sufficient range to exit the weather
system. If you don't have that range, you are at risk.

Michael

All IFR is not icing.

All IFR in IMC flown in subfreezing weather has the potential for
icing.


Ok . . . all IFR is *not* conducted in subfreezing weather.

All IFR does not involve deteriorating weather.

All IFR in IMC involves the potential for deteriorating weather.


You seem hell-bent on making the argument that all IFR exceeds the capacity of
a light single.

It's simply nonsense. You have to know your aircraft's limitations, and flight
plan properly. Exercizing the "no-go" decision is a big part of having the
Instrument Rating.


if
you have visible moisture and subfreezing temperatures, you are at
risk.

you need to have sufficient range to exit the weather
system. If you don't have that range, you are at risk.


If you launch under a crystal clear blue sky in a brand new Mooney Ovation or
Piper Saratoga you are "at risk".

Give me a break!



www.Rosspilot.com

All IFR is not icing. All IFR does not involve deteriorating weather.

That should be "Not all IFR is icing. Not all IFR involves deteriorating
weather."
What you said is that IFR never involves icing or deteriorating weather.



I know you think you know what I meant but what I said isn't exactly what I
thought or meant to say, although it is what you thought I meant.

G






www.Rosspilot.com

I had an avionics guy tell me that my VOR head (localizer only, no GS) could
be used if we added a GPS. A switch to toggle from receiving from VOR head
or GPS would do it. That right?

"Ben Jackson" wrote in message
news:UHSYc.74315$9d6.21993@attbi_s54...
In article ,
Roy Smith wrote:
My understanding (somebody please correct me if I'm wrong) is that some
of the newer units (I'm thinking specifically of the CNX-80) are
certified such that you don't need an external CDI, as long as the unit
is mounted so that the built-in one is within some specified distance
from the pilot's center of vision, or some such.

I think that applies to the annunciator (msg, ptk) which is displayed in
the lower-lefthand corner of the CNX-80. I don't think it applies to
the CDI, but you could download the install guide from Garmin's site and
find out. I looked into it once. Sadly my radio stack is too far from
the centerline.

--
Ben Jackson

http://www.ben.com/