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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Unrelated response to your specific question.... do they have a dual
com/nav stack in the 152? I ask, because all the 152 trainers I've seen at my FBO only have one com and one nav. I would think that adding another stack would only serve to further reduce the marginally okay max load capy of the 152? Hi Cecil - the plane is 65610 with West Valley out of Palo Alto ( http://www.wvfc.org/craft/65610.html ), and it does have dual nav/com with glideslope and an inop ADF. All this adds about 80 or so pounds to the empty weight. The max load is decreased, but the performance is more than compensated for by the sparrowhawk conversion. I'm a fair bit lighter than the FAA "standard passenger" - so I can barely fly with my instructor and full fuel. After doing my PP in 152's, I had originally planned on doing my instrument in 172SPs in order to become proficient with the autopilot and GPS approaches - which I figure I'll be much more likely to use in 'real life' IFR flight. However, I'm a grad student with a pretty tight budget - and there's a $50/hour wet difference between the 152 and 172SPs. I told my instructor that I wanted to spend at least some of my instrument training in the cheaper 152, and his response was basically "why not do all of it in the 152, after you finish the checkride it'll only take a couple lessons for you to learn the GPS and autopilot, and this will save you thousands of dollars." Sound's good to me! - Ray |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
I still think you are wasting your time and that of your students. Compass
turns are not practical...that's why they haven't been in the PTS for a long time; it's not just a change in the most recent PTS. Turn coordinator calibration is a non-issue, except for CFII checkrides. So you aim for 270 and end up with 250...is this life-threatening? Easy to fix, and absolutely no one will notice. Anyone who cannot pick two headings off of the heading indicator, count the number of ten-degree/45-degree tick marks between them, and divide by three may not be intellectually suited to aviation. Bob "Barry" wrote in message ... Compass turns are not required by the PTS. In my opinion, teaching and practicing compass turns is a complete waste of time that could be more profitably spent on more practical maneuvers. OTOH, timed turns make perfectly good sense.... Compare that with simply rolling into a standard rate turn (still hard to maintain in turbulence) and watching the seconds tick by. BTW, nobody expects you to roll out anywhere close to a desired heading when conditions are really bad. Yes, compass turns are not in the new PTS. However, I think that it's still a skill worth learning. I prefer (and teach) using timing for small turns (heading change 60 degrees or less), and the compass for larger turns. All you really need to remember is that if the desired heading is north, you roll out early, and if the desired heading is south, you go past it before rolling out. This gets you close, and then you used a small timed turn to get closer. I really think this is easier than trying to figure out the time required for say, a right turn from 320 to 180. There's also the effect of the turn coordinator calibration. But I wouldn't insist on compass turns if the pilot makes acceptable timed turns. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
I couldn't agree more with you and Bob. I can turn a lot more accurately
with a stop watch than a mag compass. But his question wasn't about the merits of each .. it was about using the compass when it's outside the viewing area of the hood. That would also be a factor when setting the DG prior to starting an approach. To which I still say .. have the CFI/safety pilot read it for you. wrote in message ... I'm with Gardner on this one. compass turns are a complete waste of time and money. Use a clock. Forget lead, lag, accelerate north, decelerate south, and all the rest of the anal aviation gobbledygook.. On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 16:28:32 GMT, "OtisWinslow" wrote: Ask the CFI to tell you when you hit the compass heading you want to start your rollout on. Talk thru your logic for selecting this heading. (compensating for lead/lag of the compass) "Ray" wrote in message ... I'm just starting out my instrument training in a Cessna 152 that has a compass mounted at the top of the windshield. Here's a sample picture for those who have never seen it, http://www.airliners.net/open.file/643201/M Can anyone tell me if it's still possible to do compass turns under the hood with this kind of setup? I've seen a lot of planes with high mounted compasses, so I imagine this isn't a new question. - Ray |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Well, if you do timed turns and forget all the other nonsense, you
only need to know the heading when the aircraft is straight and level. Looking at a bouncing compass during a turn in the clouds and burning up a bunch of brain cycles at the same time figuring leads and lags and accelerations and decelerations with your attention diverted from the instrument panel, is asking for trouble, if you ask me. When your eyes return to the panel, you will probably find the altitude decreasing rapidly and your airseed increasing rapidly, and then you get to do partial panel unusual attitude recovery for real. By this time ATC is probably on your case about your altitude, and you are wishing you were somewhere else. How about instead (1) look at the compass and note your heading (2) use a compass rose (10 seconds per number on the rose) to calculate the time for your desired turn (4) concentrate on a nice smooth, level turn (5) check your heading after the rollout and (6) tidy up the error, if any. Not nearly as gee-whiz as all the compass gobbledygook, but a whole lot safer, if you ask me. On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 14:06:30 -0600, Ben Jackson wrote: On 2005-04-01, wrote: Some examiners don't care. Others will just tell you your compass heading whenever you ask for it. I always thought that was funny, since the hardest thing for me about the mag compass is reading it. When I practiced compass turns I did it by looking at the mag compass, even though I could see outside. The skill I was trying to learn wasn't attitude instrument flying at that point. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 12:56:39 -0800, "Bob Gardner"
wrote: I still think you are wasting your time and that of your students. Compass turns are not practical...that's why they haven't been in the PTS for a long time; it's not just a change in the most recent PTS. Turn coordinator calibration is a non-issue, except for CFII checkrides. So you aim for 270 and end up with 250...is this life-threatening? Easy to fix, and absolutely no one will notice. Anyone who cannot pick two headings off of the heading indicator, count the number of ten-degree/45-degree tick marks between them, and divide by three may not be intellectually suited to aviation. Bob Amen. But why do any dividing at all? Each number on a compass rose is 10 seconds. Count the numbers between your present heading and the desired heading (just go "ten,twenty, thirty...") and interpolate the overage/underage, and you'll be very close when you roll out, with probably one more little turn to tidy up. But you are absolutely right about the compass turn stuff. It's damn near as ridiculous as parallel, teardrop and direct entries. Or "reverse sensing". But let's not go there... "Barry" wrote in message ... Compass turns are not required by the PTS. In my opinion, teaching and practicing compass turns is a complete waste of time that could be more profitably spent on more practical maneuvers. OTOH, timed turns make perfectly good sense.... Compare that with simply rolling into a standard rate turn (still hard to maintain in turbulence) and watching the seconds tick by. BTW, nobody expects you to roll out anywhere close to a desired heading when conditions are really bad. Yes, compass turns are not in the new PTS. However, I think that it's still a skill worth learning. I prefer (and teach) using timing for small turns (heading change 60 degrees or less), and the compass for larger turns. All you really need to remember is that if the desired heading is north, you roll out early, and if the desired heading is south, you go past it before rolling out. This gets you close, and then you used a small timed turn to get closer. I really think this is easier than trying to figure out the time required for say, a right turn from 320 to 180. There's also the effect of the turn coordinator calibration. But I wouldn't insist on compass turns if the pilot makes acceptable timed turns. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
I agree. Nothing like inserting high workload items such as compass turns
into situations where stress has created tunnel vision. Bob wrote in message ... On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 12:56:39 -0800, "Bob Gardner" wrote: I still think you are wasting your time and that of your students. Compass turns are not practical...that's why they haven't been in the PTS for a long time; it's not just a change in the most recent PTS. Turn coordinator calibration is a non-issue, except for CFII checkrides. So you aim for 270 and end up with 250...is this life-threatening? Easy to fix, and absolutely no one will notice. Anyone who cannot pick two headings off of the heading indicator, count the number of ten-degree/45-degree tick marks between them, and divide by three may not be intellectually suited to aviation. Bob Amen. But why do any dividing at all? Each number on a compass rose is 10 seconds. Count the numbers between your present heading and the desired heading (just go "ten,twenty, thirty...") and interpolate the overage/underage, and you'll be very close when you roll out, with probably one more little turn to tidy up. But you are absolutely right about the compass turn stuff. It's damn near as ridiculous as parallel, teardrop and direct entries. Or "reverse sensing". But let's not go there... "Barry" wrote in message ... Compass turns are not required by the PTS. In my opinion, teaching and practicing compass turns is a complete waste of time that could be more profitably spent on more practical maneuvers. OTOH, timed turns make perfectly good sense.... Compare that with simply rolling into a standard rate turn (still hard to maintain in turbulence) and watching the seconds tick by. BTW, nobody expects you to roll out anywhere close to a desired heading when conditions are really bad. Yes, compass turns are not in the new PTS. However, I think that it's still a skill worth learning. I prefer (and teach) using timing for small turns (heading change 60 degrees or less), and the compass for larger turns. All you really need to remember is that if the desired heading is north, you roll out early, and if the desired heading is south, you go past it before rolling out. This gets you close, and then you used a small timed turn to get closer. I really think this is easier than trying to figure out the time required for say, a right turn from 320 to 180. There's also the effect of the turn coordinator calibration. But I wouldn't insist on compass turns if the pilot makes acceptable timed turns. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 20:04:53 -0600, A Lieberman
wrote: On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 21:50:10 GMT, wrote: But you are absolutely right about the compass turn stuff. It's damn near as ridiculous as parallel, teardrop and direct entries. Or "reverse sensing". But let's not go there... cfeyeeye, Agree with everything but reverse sensing. I hear on ATIS a lot at JAN for approaches, expect back course 16 right (16L is closed), so learning to "pull the needle in" is important in this neck of the woods. Allen There is no such thing as "reverse sensing". Instruments don't change the way they sense. There is only "reverse thinking". But let's not get started on that. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
There is no such thing as "reverse sensing". [...]
There is only "reverse thinking". There's also "reverse polish notation". Jose -- Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Fwd: [BD4] Source of HIGH CHTs on O-320 and O-360 FOUND! | Bruce A. Frank | Home Built | 1 | July 4th 04 07:28 PM |
How high can you fly a Cessna 172? | Victor | Piloting | 11 | April 10th 04 10:24 PM |
Strange compass behavior | me | Owning | 10 | February 14th 04 04:24 AM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |
High CHTs on Cessna 175 | Ron Natalie | Owning | 2 | September 9th 03 02:14 AM |