Near miss from space junk.

On Apr 4, 1:39 pm, "Maxwell" wrote:
"Mxsmanic" wrote in message

...

chris writes:

Using a VOR is not part of what we learn for PPL instrument flying.

Then PPLs don't know how to fly by instruments.

Clueless as usual.

Yup..

Flying on instruments to get yourself out of the **** is not the same
things as navigating on instruments.

On Apr 3, 2:42 am, Mxsmanic wrote:
Sylvain writes:
if you are entering IMC while VFR, knowing where you are will be
the least of your problem: you'll be dead before it matters one
way or the other.

Not if you know how to fly with instruments.

Knowing how to fly with instruments is not enough. The
rationalization that you are currently pushing is among _THE_ most
deadly in aviation.

Frankly, knowing how to fly with instruments is kinda a given to even
get in a cockpit. Its really trivially easy (how hard is it to keep
an artificial horizon level?)

Knowing how to fly with instruments and assuming that means you'll be
safe in IMC is one of the few near-guarantees of ending up an aviation
statistic. The term Sophomore applies more here than probably in any
other aspect of aviation.

Flying on instruments, for a few seconds at least, is trivial.
Operating an aircraft on instruments for anything more than a half
minute or so, is a different animal. What's worse, it doesn't lend
itself to a mistake. Fixate for just 30 seconds on any one thing and
there's a decent chance you'll be beyond recovery.

The other compounding factor is the fact that flying an aircraft is
like walking (or any other physical activity) in that many of the
actions and behaviors you do to respond to the aircraft very quickly
"program" themselves into your muscle memory... (this is actually
important and the mark of a good 'stick and rudder' pilot). Things
like adding the proper rudder in a turn, or correcting for a
turbulence-induced upset (or, as you get better, preventing sed upset
from occurring by feeling it in the yoke and countering it)... These
are all mechanical skills that get programmed by experience.

This is all well, good, and beneficial for good stick and rudder
flying, but the same adaptations that make for a pilot who can shrug
off a gusty crosswind on landing can become VERY dangerous if
incorrectly triggered in an IMC environment.

For example: oddly enough in my piper flying IMC, the act of bending
forward to switch my fuel tanks induces vertigo that feels precisely
like a left-bank turbulence upset. If I bend forward to switch tanks
in IMC while my left hand is on the yoke, my arm will INSTINCTUALLY
move to counter-act the upset. I have no more control over the action
than a baseball player does to close his mitt when he catches a
baseball. Hence, experience in IMC (with a safety pilot) has taught
me to hold the yoke with my right hand during a tank switch (which has
no such muscle memory), so that my brain does automatically attempt to
right the aircraft.

This is not ignorance on the part of the pilot, its simply trained
reflexes manifesting themselves in incorrect ways. The _ONLY_ thing
that can prepare a pilot to be able to control these reflexes and
understand how their personal body and training will respond in the
sensory-limited world of IMC is experience. Period.

Knowing what pictures to look for in the various gauges is laughably
trivial. Knowing what sort of sensations to expect, and what sort of
behavior they will invoke because of your training - THAT is what
keeps you alive IMC.

And thinking that knowing the procedures and gauges is all you need is
a terribly foolish and quite possibly fatal rationalization,
especially if you use to to justify pushing your personal weather/
visibility minimums to a situation where you stand the risk of being
caught inadvertently in clag.

"chris" wrote in
oups.com:

On Apr 4, 10:01 am, Marty Shapiro
wrote:
"chris" wrote
oups.com:







Will you fly with a new moon and CAVU weather, especially
over open
country? You've got the same problem. Does NZ permit night
flight without an instrument rating and/or being on an instrument
flight plan?

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

I am not sure if it's law or just our club, but even with a night
rating you aren't meant to do cross country flights. Stay within a
certain distance of the club. I think it's 25nm but not sure

That sure sounds like a club rule. But even limiting you to
25nm
doesn't guarantee you will always have friendly terrain underneath
you to land in an emergency, especially on a dark night.

If you are properly rated for night flight, this seems like
just
another senseless rule. I can see a club putting in a rule like this
for students and maybe even low time members, but for everyone?

My "favorite" club rule, and this was present at one time in
the rules
for at least 3 clubs at a nearby airport, was the one prohibiting
landings on runways less than 3,000' long. This airport's only
runway is 2,443' long. I always wondered where the club expected
members to return the aircraft while complying with this rule.

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No, it sure doesn't guarantee friendly terrain. Which is why I
haven't got a night rating yet, I don't like that idea very much.

I heard once a good thing to do during a forced landing at night is to
turn your landing light on, if you don't like what you see, turn it
off again :-)

Absolutely!


Another reason I haven't gone for my night rating yet is this part of
the country is fog city during the winter, and it's more often than
not foggy at the airport. I don't like the idea of coming back and
being stuck unable to land. Apparently the tower watches for signs of
fog forming and tells anyone in the area to get their asses back
pronto. If they miss out there is a set procedure to fly to a certain
major airport which doesn't get fogged in, which is 25 mins flight
time away at a certain altitude. Don't like that idea either,
really... Especially if I gotta work the next day...


Wow, I thought I had made up some good excuses for missing work. :-)
That sure is good service you are getting from your tower. Sounds like you
have your own version of LA's "June Gloom".


--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

Maxwell writes:

When was the last time you experienced vertigo while flying your desk?

I don't experience any motion at all while flying a non-motion sim. Thus, I
have no conditioned responses that would cause me to adjust the controls in
response to various physical sensations. I depend exclusively on instruments
and the view out the window. And that is pretty much as it should be, except
for coordinated turns and aerobatics.

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

On Apr 3, 7:35 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Maxwell writes:
When was the last time you experienced vertigo while flying your desk?

I don't experience any motion at all while flying a non-motion sim. Thus, I
have no conditioned responses that would cause me to adjust the controls in
response to various physical sensations.

Sed "conditioned responses" are in fact tremendously valuable
adaptations of real-world pilots. A key part of remaining 'ahead of
the aircraft' so to speak is to train yourself to automatically
respond to upsets before they manifest into major deviations, this is
almost always a direct link between the tactile feedback you receive
from your yoke and your inner ear to muscles to provide control inputs
to the aircraft.

I would venture to say that making a gusty crosswind landing would be
impossible without them.

I depend exclusively on instruments and the view out the window. And that is pretty much as it should be.

Incorrect.

Its funny actually, I'm friends with several CFI's, and if there is
one constant I hear from them about 'simulator jockey' new-starts
(which included myself as a student, mind you) is that they actually
have a hard time divorcing themselves from the instruments and flying
on 'feel'... which means that they tend to take a lot longer to learn
to fly precisely, and often suffer from 'Pilot induced turbulence',
that is, they spend so looking and thinking about their responses,
that in the real dynamic world of aircraft flight their actions are
painfully slow and late- they're constantly 'chasing' the plane
instead of adapting too it.

For my first few lessons actually, I had a quite difficult time until
my instructor learned to keep reminding me to 'get out of the
cockpit', that is, adjust my personal frame of reference so that I
'was' the aircraft, instead of being a person sitting in an aircraft.
As soon as I learned to make this mental leap, my stick skills
improved light-years over just one or two flights.

Ironically, I've found that it was only after I learned to get out of
the cockpit and 'fly the plane' that I had the necessarily reflexes
and skills to 'fly the panel' when I started IFR training.

The 'conditioned responses' you so proudly claim to lack are part of
the fundamental skillsets of a pilot. Learning to fly IMC is learning
how to understand/control them in a sensory-limited and vertigo-
inducing experience.

On Apr 4, 2:28 pm, Marty Shapiro
wrote:
"chris" wrote groups.com:





On Apr 4, 10:01 am, Marty Shapiro
wrote:
"chris" wrote
oups.com:

Will you fly with a new moon and CAVU weather, especially
over open
country? You've got the same problem. Does NZ permit night
flight without an instrument rating and/or being on an instrument
flight plan?

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

I am not sure if it's law or just our club, but even with a night
rating you aren't meant to do cross country flights. Stay within a
certain distance of the club. I think it's 25nm but not sure

That sure sounds like a club rule. But even limiting you to
25nm
doesn't guarantee you will always have friendly terrain underneath
you to land in an emergency, especially on a dark night.

If you are properly rated for night flight, this seems like
just
another senseless rule. I can see a club putting in a rule like this
for students and maybe even low time members, but for everyone?

My "favorite" club rule, and this was present at one time in
the rules
for at least 3 clubs at a nearby airport, was the one prohibiting
landings on runways less than 3,000' long. This airport's only
runway is 2,443' long. I always wondered where the club expected
members to return the aircraft while complying with this rule.

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No, it sure doesn't guarantee friendly terrain. Which is why I
haven't got a night rating yet, I don't like that idea very much.

I heard once a good thing to do during a forced landing at night is to
turn your landing light on, if you don't like what you see, turn it
off again :-)

Absolutely!



Another reason I haven't gone for my night rating yet is this part of
the country is fog city during the winter, and it's more often than
not foggy at the airport. I don't like the idea of coming back and
being stuck unable to land. Apparently the tower watches for signs of
fog forming and tells anyone in the area to get their asses back
pronto. If they miss out there is a set procedure to fly to a certain
major airport which doesn't get fogged in, which is 25 mins flight
time away at a certain altitude. Don't like that idea either,
really... Especially if I gotta work the next day...

Wow, I thought I had made up some good excuses for missing work. :-)
That sure is good service you are getting from your tower. Sounds like you
have your own version of LA's "June Gloom".

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Most of New Zealand doesn't suffer from fog excessively, but the
Waikato region where I am based, although much better than it used to
be, still has some bad fogs.. Some winters, most days the fog clears
about 1pm and rolls back in at 3pm...

We actually had fog two nights this past week, and summer has only
just gone!!!

On Apr 4, 2:10 pm, "EridanMan" wrote:
On Apr 3, 2:42 am, Mxsmanic wrote:

Sylvain writes:
if you are entering IMC while VFR, knowing where you are will be
the least of your problem: you'll be dead before it matters one
way or the other.

Not if you know how to fly with instruments.

Knowing how to fly with instruments is not enough. The
rationalization that you are currently pushing is among _THE_ most
deadly in aviation.

Frankly, knowing how to fly with instruments is kinda a given to even
get in a cockpit. Its really trivially easy (how hard is it to keep
an artificial horizon level?)

Knowing how to fly with instruments and assuming that means you'll be
safe in IMC is one of the few near-guarantees of ending up an aviation
statistic. The term Sophomore applies more here than probably in any
other aspect of aviation.

Flying on instruments, for a few seconds at least, is trivial.
Operating an aircraft on instruments for anything more than a half
minute or so, is a different animal. What's worse, it doesn't lend
itself to a mistake. Fixate for just 30 seconds on any one thing and
there's a decent chance you'll be beyond recovery.

The other compounding factor is the fact that flying an aircraft is
like walking (or any other physical activity) in that many of the
actions and behaviors you do to respond to the aircraft very quickly
"program" themselves into your muscle memory... (this is actually
important and the mark of a good 'stick and rudder' pilot). Things
like adding the proper rudder in a turn, or correcting for a
turbulence-induced upset (or, as you get better, preventing sed upset
from occurring by feeling it in the yoke and countering it)... These
are all mechanical skills that get programmed by experience.

This is all well, good, and beneficial for good stick and rudder
flying, but the same adaptations that make for a pilot who can shrug
off a gusty crosswind on landing can become VERY dangerous if
incorrectly triggered in an IMC environment.

For example: oddly enough in my piper flying IMC, the act of bending
forward to switch my fuel tanks induces vertigo that feels precisely
like a left-bank turbulence upset. If I bend forward to switch tanks
in IMC while my left hand is on the yoke, my arm will INSTINCTUALLY
move to counter-act the upset. I have no more control over the action
than a baseball player does to close his mitt when he catches a
baseball. Hence, experience in IMC (with a safety pilot) has taught
me to hold the yoke with my right hand during a tank switch (which has
no such muscle memory), so that my brain does automatically attempt to
right the aircraft.

This is not ignorance on the part of the pilot, its simply trained
reflexes manifesting themselves in incorrect ways. The _ONLY_ thing
that can prepare a pilot to be able to control these reflexes and
understand how their personal body and training will respond in the
sensory-limited world of IMC is experience. Period.

Knowing what pictures to look for in the various gauges is laughably
trivial. Knowing what sort of sensations to expect, and what sort of
behavior they will invoke because of your training - THAT is what
keeps you alive IMC.

And thinking that knowing the procedures and gauges is all you need is
a terribly foolish and quite possibly fatal rationalization,
especially if you use to to justify pushing your personal weather/
visibility minimums to a situation where you stand the risk of being
caught inadvertently in clag.

I have come to the conclusion that although mx is wrong about a lot of
stuff, the danger is not to himself, as he has already told us he has
no intention of flying, but instead to those who actually do fly (I am
thinking of student pilots here) and read his posts and get dangerous
ideas from him.

EridanMan writes:

Its funny actually, I'm friends with several CFI's, and if there is
one constant I hear from them about 'simulator jockey' new-starts
(which included myself as a student, mind you) is that they actually
have a hard time divorcing themselves from the instruments and flying
on 'feel'... which means that they tend to take a lot longer to learn
to fly precisely, and often suffer from 'Pilot induced turbulence',
that is, they spend so looking and thinking about their responses,
that in the real dynamic world of aircraft flight their actions are
painfully slow and late- they're constantly 'chasing' the plane
instead of adapting too it.

If that were really just a consequence of following the instruments
exclusively, then nobody would be able to fly IFR with any precision.

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

In article ,
says...
chris writes:

Using a VOR is not part of what we learn for PPL instrument flying.

Then PPLs don't know how to fly by instruments.

A min of 5hrs (IIRC) is spent learning to fly by instruments. Not
instruments to guide one to a destination - but instruments to keep the
plane upright - basically, straight and level. Here in NZ I was taught
to do this on a limited panel too (I would imagine that's pretty
standard anywhere).

I thought it was great fun - I extended my limited 'IFR' time w' my
instructor, asking him to put the plane into unusual attitudes and then
I'd recover under the helmet. We even did spin recovery while under the
helmet. I loved it.

--
Duncan

In article ,
says...
Mxsmanic wrote:

I had the same thing happen in the sim today; you just have to keep your
eye
on the instruments. If there's nothing to see outside the window, there's
no reason _not_ to keep your eye on the instruments.

there are a number of things in an aircraft under IFR that might take
your attention away from the instruments and which are not confined within
a screen right in front of your eyes; in no particular order: checking
the outside temp and looking whether you are getting ice; I know you
read the forecast, but there are always surprises; dealing
with the passager who has just barfed into your charts; changing
frequencies; looking for clean charts and/or reading them; remember,
no 'pause' button; going through check lists; occasionally talking
to a real live person on the other side of the radio who gave
you a complicated clearance that is only superficially related to
what you asked, etc.

Yeah I won't forget the day I was on a flight from Christchurch (NZCH)
to Omarama (NZOA) with 1 pax OB. I'd got my mate Marty to take the
controls while I sorted my next position report (head burried in the
charts and my paperwork etc). At the time we were below 3000' AGL and
so not that far below the cloud layer.

Well when I looked up, we were IN THE SOUP. 'course I near shat myself
(as well as wondering why the hell Marty had said nothing at all to me).
I was also aware of the large mountains not that far in front of us.

So in fairly quick sequence it was:
"I have control".
Use the intruments.
Keep the wings level.
Get a descent going.

And while I was telling Marty to keep an eye out the window for the
ground, we pretty much broke out of it at that time.

We didn't say much to each other until Omarama - me; I was thinking long
and hard about my mistakes (Marty's flown with me on many occasions and
he's a smart guy, he knows we don't venture into clouds). At the end of
the day I concluded it was a big mistake of mine to put as much faith in
Marty as I had done - I'm a trained pilot - but Marty isn't.

Since then I keep a close eye on what my 'co-pilot's' doing. I know
they like to have a go at it - hey it's fun - but I ensure it's taking
pressure off me and not putting it on (or leading us in that direction).

--
Duncan