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
|
|||
|
|||
I'm surprised nobody made the obligatory FAR reference: 91.205(d).
-- Larry Fransson Seattle, WA |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Roy Smith wrote:
As for satisfaction, well yes, I agree that there is satisfaction in mastery of almost any skill. That's why I learned how to work a sextant. Am I ever going to use that skill for real? Hardly, Well...it's getting unlikely for me too. The club to which I belong has also adopted the "if it breaks, don't fix it" mentality. I think that a bit of a shame, but it's true that I'd rather spend maintenance dollars elsewhere. [...] is whether it's worth investing the time it takes to master it. Especially when that time could be spent mastering a tool which provides such a vastly greater amount of information, utility, safety, etc. It's pretty much a zero sum game. If you spend an hour working on one thing, that's one hour less you get to spend on something else. Oh, see, I don't see it as a zero sum game (excluding maintenance costs). Part of why I fly is that satisfaction of flying well. Circular, I know, but true nevertheless. So getting/staying good at using the NDB - as long as I have one grin - is a reason to fly. I suppose it's my version of a $100 burger. Of course, if the student *wants* to learn how to fly NDB approaches, I see nothing wrong with teaching them, as an optional part of the curriculum. I just don't see the point of making it required. Hmm...that's more a function of the airplane, right? As I understood it, the DE could test me on anything in the aircraft. Since I was flying with a GPS, I had to be able to use it. I was also flying with an ADF, so I had to be able to use that. [Actually...I might not have flown with a GPS. Now that I think on it, the one 172S with a GPS at my FBO at the time was on a trip. So I took the checkride in an airplane with DME and ADF, but no GPS. And yes, one of my checkride approaches was an NDB (into MGJ, I think).] [Actually, the DE snuck in an extra approach, counting the one we did getting back to CDW. I think he didn't expect that we'd be able to get that one from ATC.] My club recently voted to get rid of all our ADFs. We'll keep them in the planes as long as they work, but won't spend any more money fixing them when they break. Perhaps we can just convince our respective clubs to "get it over with" and go for the new Garmin glass panel in our aircraft. - Andrew |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
I'm surprised nobody made the obligatory FAR reference: 91.205(d).
-- Larry Fransson Seattle, WA Larry: Since you asked. My favorite is 91.205 (e) which refers to DME requirements at/above FL240 but only if using VOR navigation. I love it when I explain to other lesser knowing instructors that a great many aircraft do not have DME but yet they do have IFR clearances at/above FL240. The trick is not use VOR navigation. How poorly understood, worst so how poorly taught. §91.205 Powered civil aircraft with standard category U.S. airworthiness certificates: Instrument and equipment requirements. (d) Instrument flight rules. For IFR flight, the following instruments and equipment are required: (1) Instruments and equipment specified in paragraph (b) of this section, and, for night flight, instruments and equipment specified in paragraph (c) of this section. (2) Two-way radio communications system and navigational equipment appropriate to the ground facilities to be used. (3) Gyroscopic rate-of-turn indicator, except on the following aircraft: (i) Airplanes with a third attitude instrument system usable through flight attitudes of 360 degrees of pitch and roll and installed in accordance with the instrument requirements prescribed in §121.305(j) of this chapter; and (ii) Rotorcraft with a third attitude instrument system usable through flight attitudes of ±80 degrees of pitch and ±120 degrees of roll and installed in accordance with §29.1303(g) of this chapter. (4) Slip-skid indicator. (5) Sensitive altimeter adjustable for barometric pressure. (6) A clock displaying hours, minutes, and seconds with a sweep-second pointer or digital presentation. (7) Generator or alternator of adequate capacity. (8) Gyroscopic pitch and bank indicator (artificial horizon). (9) Gyroscopic direction indicator (directional gyro or equivalent). (e) Flight at and above 24,000 ft. MSL (FL 240). If VOR navigational equipment is required under paragraph (d)(2) of this section, no person may operate a U.S.-registered civil aircraft within the 50 states and the District of Columbia at or above FL 240 unless that aircraft is equipped with approved distance measuring equipment (DME). When DME required by this paragraph fails at and above FL 240, the pilot in command of the aircraft shall notify ATC immediately, and then may continue operations at and above FL 240 to the next airport of intended landing at which repairs or replacement of the equipment can be made. (f) Category II operations. The requirements for Category II operations are the instruments and equipment specified in -- (1) Paragraph (d) of this section; and (2) Appendix A to this part. (g) Category III operations. The instruments and equipment required for Category III operations are specified in paragraph (d) of this section. (h) Exclusions. Paragraphs (f) and (g) of this section do not apply to operations conducted by a holder of a certificate issued under part 121 or part 135 of this chapter. paul k. sanchez, cfii-mei on eagles’ wings 2011 south perimeter road, suite g fort lauderdale, florida 33309-7135 305-389-1742 wireless 954-776-0527 fax 954-345-4276 home/fax |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Roy Smith
writes: That's why I learned how to work a sextant. Am I ever going to use that skill for real? Hardly, but it sure is satisfying to spend half an hour working a round of sights and getting a nice tight fix (say, under a mile probable error). I did the same thing re the sextant, Roy. Did it for fun on my sailboat. Then found that I couldn't work up the sights till I got back to land. I'd go down into the cabin and start to figure and the stomach would not sit still. It isn't much good to know "where you were".G Chuck |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
You're lucky guys in the US. That's what is required in Germany for a IFR
certified "little" Cessna: It only lists the radio/navigational equipment: - 2 Radios for simultaneous use - 2 VOR's - 1 ADF - Transponder Mode A/C or Mode S - 1 DME Isn't that a little bit strange? Even if you don't need it you will have to have it. What do you think? In my opinion that's why you pay for a IR rating about 15 - 20000 bucks in Germany. Ralf "Mark" schrieb im Newsbeitrag news I was looking at starting my ifr training and realized the 172s in the club I blelong to don't have DMEs. Is that required for IFR flight? I noticed alot of checkpoints and such are distance from navaid. Thanks Mark |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Ralf S. wrote:
It only lists the radio/navigational equipment: - 2 Radios for simultaneous use - 2 VOR's - 1 ADF - Transponder Mode A/C or Mode S - 1 DME Isn't that a little bit strange? Even if you don't need it you will have to have it. What do you think? In my opinion that's why you pay for a IR rating about 15 - 20000 bucks in Germany. It actually sounds like a normal 172 or Cherokee avionics stack -- it's exactly what my Warrior II came with when I bought it. Every IFR-certified rental plane I've seen has this equipment, +/- the DME (which is hit or miss). An instrument rating in Canada is about 40 hours' instruction (at around USD 30/hour) plus rental time, ground school, and a few fees. Most pilots already have 10 hours IFR from the PPL and 5 from the night rating, so practically, it's around 25 hours, though there will probably be 4-5 hours of ground briefing added on. All the best, David |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Yeah, sounds much better. That's why I will do it somewhere in the US.
Here in Germany many airplanes are not equiped for IFR. Most of them have only one VOR and one radio. Maybe a ADfF but not too many have a DME. And as you can imagine the new ones that are equiped are more expensive. So for one hour IFR you'll have to count with 200 EUR and more per hour. rgds ralf "David Megginson" schrieb im Newsbeitrag able.rogers.com... Ralf S. wrote: It only lists the radio/navigational equipment: - 2 Radios for simultaneous use - 2 VOR's - 1 ADF - Transponder Mode A/C or Mode S - 1 DME Isn't that a little bit strange? Even if you don't need it you will have to have it. What do you think? In my opinion that's why you pay for a IR rating about 15 - 20000 bucks in Germany. It actually sounds like a normal 172 or Cherokee avionics stack -- it's exactly what my Warrior II came with when I bought it. Every IFR-certified rental plane I've seen has this equipment, +/- the DME (which is hit or miss). An instrument rating in Canada is about 40 hours' instruction (at around USD 30/hour) plus rental time, ground school, and a few fees. Most pilots already have 10 hours IFR from the PPL and 5 from the night rating, so practically, it's around 25 hours, though there will probably be 4-5 hours of ground briefing added on. All the best, David |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
"Mark" wrote in message
news I was looking at starting my ifr training and realized the 172s in the club I blelong to don't have DMEs. Is that required for IFR flight? I noticed alot of checkpoints and such are distance from navaid. I'll add to the excellent commentary: 1) Don't train in a DME-free plane, and then check out a DME-equipped one for the checkride (as I nearly did). Checkrides are not the place to figure how to fly an arc or hold at a DME fix. I had practiced both, but not recently outside the sim. 2) When looking for approaches to avoid, don't forget to check NOTAMs. For example, the VOR-A approach at Olympia is semi-permanently NOTAM'ed DME required, I think because the TCM VOR is longterm out of service, and it was the other way of identifying HABOR. -- David Brooks |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Roy Smith wrote
The question is not whether there is greater than zero value in NDB. It's clear that there is. As for satisfaction, well yes, I agree that there is satisfaction in mastery of almost any skill. That's why I learned how to work a sextant. Am I ever going to use that skill for real? Hardly, but it sure is satisfying to spend half an hour working a round of sights and getting a nice tight fix (say, under a mile probable error). The real question is - did you learn things about navigation by learning to work a sextant that you would not have learned otherwise, and are those things important? Some (maybe most) students have to have VOR triangulation explained to them. Clearly some never learn, or forget - I have a friend who works at a FSS that long ago lost DF steer capability, and he has to talk pilots through the procedure on a regular basis. On the other hand, I bet you intuitively grasped the procedure without having it explained, and immediately understood the impact of geometry on the accuracy of the fix. It's really not possible to do an NDB approach acceptably unless you really understand the difference between heading, bearing, course, and track - not in the sense that you can parrot back dictionary definitions on the ground, but in the sense that you immediately understand what the differences are and what's important. Can those things be learned without the NDB? Certainly - but the pilot who has learned and internalized those things finds an NDB approach easy, even if he has never done one before. On the other hand, a pilot who gets those things confused is going to have no end of trouble with NDB approaches. He might well need 10 hours of training before he can do them. He's not learning to do NDB approaches - he's learning to maintain situational awareness in real time with minimal resources. Is that important? I think it is. If I had a dollar for every time I've ever had to tell an instrument student "Just because the needle is centered does not mean you're flying the right heading..." Actually, flight instructor compensation being what it is, I probably do. More to the point, an awful lot of pilots seem to lose situational awareness and crash. Loss of situational awareness is probably the single biggest killer in IMC. I suppose one day we will all have multiply redundant moving maps, and at that point the ability to maintain situational awareness with minimal resources may not be important anymore. I don't believe that day is here yet, and it may never come. I've also heard the argument that the time is better spent learning GPS. I don't believe that. First of all, even a moving map GPS is no substitute for situational awareness. I've seen an instrument student using an IFR moving map GPS turn the wrong way on a published segment and proceed to descend while going away from the airport. Second, flying a GPS approach is trivial. It's just like a VOR approach, except that the radial is perfectly straight, there is no zone of confusion, and you get a constant readout on distance to the next fix. The hard part of flying GPS approaches is working the user interface on the box - and they're all different. In my opinion, the most important reason to retain the ADF in the instrument trainer is as a hedge against the generally low quality of instrument instruction. A good instrument instructor can teach good situational awareness habits even without it, just as a good primary instructor can teach good takeoff and landing habits without a tailwheel. But the lack of an ADF, like the lack of a tailwheel, allows a student to get by with sloppy habits if the instructor doesn't intervene. Michael |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Horsepower required for level flight question... | BllFs6 | Home Built | 17 | March 30th 04 12:18 AM |
Inconol 713 required | Martin | Home Built | 18 | January 7th 04 05:38 AM |
required readback on clearance | [email protected] | Instrument Flight Rules | 15 | September 17th 03 04:33 PM |
Why is ADF required on ILS approach? | Rich Raine | Instrument Flight Rules | 27 | August 1st 03 05:14 PM |
Radio license required? | Marty Ross | Instrument Flight Rules | 10 | July 17th 03 09:58 PM |