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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
IFR in the 1930's
Let me change that from "any thoughts" to "any helpful" thoughts G.
"Dick" wrote in message m... Staring at my empty instrument panel while considering which instruments and their placement, I got wondering how old time Mail pilots flew if caught in IFR conditions. On my project plane, I'm considering just a airspeed/altitude/ ball & tube slip (no needle) indicator/compass setup in order to avoid the venturi or vacuum pump setup. Since I consider "electric" too expensive and wondered whether a dome style compass might be the key?? Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks, Dick -Lakeland, Florida |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Dick,
The first instrument flight was made 1919 by Jim Doolittle, with no visibility at all. Good reading is the "I could never be so lucky again" and also "The Spirit of ST Louis" (1953) The last one tells a lot about how it was to be a mail pilot in the 20's Jan Carlsson www.jcpropellerdesign.com "Dick" skrev i meddelandet m... Staring at my empty instrument panel while considering which instruments and their placement, I got wondering how old time Mail pilots flew if caught in IFR conditions. On my project plane, I'm considering just a airspeed/altitude/ ball & tube slip (no needle) indicator/compass setup in order to avoid the venturi or vacuum pump setup. Since I consider "electric" too expensive and wondered whether a dome style compass might be the key?? Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks, Dick -Lakeland, Florida |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Dick" writes:
Let me change that from "any thoughts" to "any helpful" thoughts G. In his AvWeb piece on scud-running, Rick Durden mentions that the mail pilots in the 1920's just kept flying lower until they could see the ground, even if that meant skimming the tree-tops: http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182679-1.html By the 1930's, I imagine, some of them had gyroscopic instruments. Perhaps Rick can point us to online references. All the best, David |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
As a geezer who learned to fly "blind" with needle, ball and airspeed I can
say that in a slow, stable aircraft, that those are enough for rather precise instrument flight. I can still fly a respectable partial panel NDB approach with just those instruments + an altimeter. (BTW, I HATE a turn coordinator.) For me an attitude indicator and a DG are just icing on the cake. Bill Daniels "Richard Lamb" wrote in message ... You need the turn needle, ball, and airspeed at bare minumum. And you'll have to be sharp to fly IMC under those conditions. If I were planning to fly like this, I'd equip the thing properly. Make it easier to stay alive... Richard Dick wrote: Let me change that from "any thoughts" to "any helpful" thoughts G. "Dick" wrote in message m... Staring at my empty instrument panel while considering which instruments and their placement, I got wondering how old time Mail pilots flew if caught in IFR conditions. On my project plane, I'm considering just a airspeed/altitude/ ball & tube slip (no needle) indicator/compass setup in order to avoid the venturi or vacuum pump setup. Since I consider "electric" too expensive and wondered whether a dome style compass might be the key?? Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks, Dick -Lakeland, Florida |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
On my project plane, I'm considering just a airspeed/altitude/ ball & tube
slip (no needle) indicator/compass setup in order to avoid the venturi or vacuum pump setup. Since I consider "electric" too expensive and wondered whether a dome style compass might be the key?? Dear Dick, The comment about "Electric" too expensive puzzles me. Electric DGs and Artifical Horizons are pricey, yes, but do you have a starter on your bird? Then an electric turn coordinator will keep you upright, as you turn in a direction where your whiskey compass is actually a useful instrument. Every Cessna built since about the time I was born (1959) had one, you can get a yellow tag one for about the price of a pair of Air Jordan basketball shoes. A brand new one is less than a clutch job on my Honda. Cheaper than a grave marker. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Dick,
Since you indicated you did not wish to use a venturi, one alternative that had been used in the 20-30s for sufficient vacuum/flowrate to reliably operate a Turn and Bank is to tap off your motor's intake spider downstream of the carb (on a Continental, you could use one of the pre-threaded primer fitting holes). What you do is start with a fitting a small hole (~#40 or so) and, by a series of iterative enlargements, adjust until the level of desired vacuum was reached at cruise power. This is similar to the standby vacuum systems now sold for modern aircraft but, as the old vacuum T&Bs needed less vacuum levels/airflow, one would normally have sufficient vacuum throughout most flight regimes. Just a thought. Mike Bednarek "Dick" wrote in message m... Staring at my empty instrument panel while considering which instruments and their placement, I got wondering how old time Mail pilots flew if caught in IFR conditions. On my project plane, I'm considering just a airspeed/altitude/ ball & tube slip (no needle) indicator/compass setup in order to avoid the venturi or vacuum pump setup. Since I consider "electric" too expensive and wondered whether a dome style compass might be the key?? Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks, Dick -Lakeland, Florida |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Badwater Bill" wrote in message ... On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 16:26:02 GMT, "Bill Daniels" wrote: As a geezer who learned to fly "blind" with needle, ball and airspeed I can say that in a slow, stable aircraft, that those are enough for rather precise instrument flight. I can still fly a respectable partial panel NDB approach with just those instruments + an altimeter. (BTW, I HATE a turn coordinator.) For me an attitude indicator and a DG are just icing on the cake. Bill Daniels I agree with you Bill. The absolute minimum is a needle and ball, airspeed, altimeter and compass. I like a few extras myself. If I could only have one more instrument it would be a DG. If I could have two, it would be a DG then a horizon. I also hate turn coodinators. Pieces of crap. The turn needle is much better. BWB I should have said, "Needle, ball, airspeed, altimeter, CLOCK and wet compass". Everything depended on being able to read a bouncing wet compass and timing turns exactly. Today we have all these fancy gadgets but most of the time we still depend on the old wet compass for heading data. Every figured what you would do if the wet compass goes TA while you are in the soup and all you have is a manually set DG? Been there. Bill Daniels |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Dick wrote: Staring at my empty instrument panel while considering which instruments and their placement, I got wondering how old time Mail pilots flew if caught in IFR conditions. By the 30's, the mail was going by airlines. I assume you mean the old open cockpit planes of the 20's (like the Pitcairn Mailwing or the earlier Jennie). A skilled pilot can keep one straight and level by the feel of the relative wind on his cheeks and the sound of the wind in the wires, combined with the ball and altimeter. This still isn't as good as a gyro stack, and the accident rate was high. Lots of the pilots simply put the mail on the train if things got too bad. Lindberg discusses some of this in one of his books, and Gann has at least two novels about the period. I've also read an old book by a veteran mail pilot, but I have no idea any more what the title was (I checked it out from either the Knoxville public library or the Bearden High School library in the 60's). George Patterson Brute force has an elegance all its own. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Badwater Bill wrote: The turn needle is much better. I had heard this, so that's what I put in my Maule when I bought it. Still don't know why it's better, though. George Patterson Brute force has an elegance all its own. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"G.R. Patterson III" writes:
A skilled pilot can keep one straight and level by the feel of the relative wind on his cheeks and the sound of the wind in the wires, combined with the ball and altimeter. I'm not too sure about the first two -- if relative wind told you anything at all about whether the wings were level, we be able to use something simpler than gyroscopic instruments for IFR today. It you take the last two, ball and altimeter, and add the magnetic compass, then it would be at least theoretically possible to fly straight (-ish) and level (-ish) in IMC, though they probably just flew very close to the ground, as Durden's article suggested. All the best, David |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FS: 1930's Space Exploration Un-Cut Tatoo Sheet | J.R. Sinclair | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | June 7th 04 06:28 AM |
1930s Navy side numbers. | JDupre5762 | Naval Aviation | 3 | September 24th 03 07:51 PM |
IFR in the 1930's | Rich S. | Home Built | 43 | September 21st 03 01:03 AM |
IFR in the 1930's | Del Rawlins | Owning | 33 | September 11th 03 07:42 PM |
IFR in the 1930's | Rich S. | Owning | 0 | August 29th 03 11:59 PM |