IFR in the 1930's

In rec.aviation.owning Badwater Bill wrote:
: two, it would be a DG then a horizon. I also hate turn coodinators.
: Pieces of crap. The turn needle is much better.

My limited experience having flown with both (albeit moreso with
the TC than the turn needle), is that the TC is *much* more stable in
turbulence than the stick. Have I just been flying with slow TC and/or
twitchy turn needles?

From what I've seen, keeping the wings level partial panel with
the stick would be almost impossible in turbulence.

Feel free to correct:
-Cory


--
************************************************** ***********************
* The prime directive of Linux: *
* - learn what you don't know, *
* - teach what you do. *
* (Just my 20 USm$) *
************************************************** ***********************

Hate to sound dense but how do you fly an NDB approach without an ADF?

"Bill Daniels" wrote in message
nk.net...
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

"Steve House" wrote:
Hate to sound dense but how do you fly an NDB approach without an ADF?

Old answer: RDF. At least in the marine world, this was the predecessor
to the ADF. I'm assuming this was true in the aviation world too?
Stands for Radio Direction Finder (as opposed to Automatic Direction
Finder). Same principle, the difference being with the RDF, you have to
manually turn the antenna to find the strongest signal. The workload
involved pretty much requires a dedicated radio operator or navigator.

New answer: GPS

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
"Steve House" wrote:
Hate to sound dense but how do you fly an NDB approach without an ADF?

Old answer: RDF. At least in the marine world, this was the predecessor
to the ADF. I'm assuming this was true in the aviation world too?
Stands for Radio Direction Finder (as opposed to Automatic Direction
Finder). Same principle, the difference being with the RDF, you have to
manually turn the antenna to find the strongest signal. The workload
involved pretty much requires a dedicated radio operator or navigator.

New answer: GPS

Actually you turn the antenna for the weakest signal.

I can see emulating an NDB approach with a GPS, flying the same pathway etc.
but for something to be a "real" NDB approach wouldn't you need some device,
an actual ADF or a manual DF antenna rig, that actually receives the radio
beacon signal and gives you a bearing to it? A GPS may give you a bearing
to a waypoint that has the same coordinates as the beacon antenna and/or
guide you over the same path you'd follow with the NDB approach, but unless
it's actually picking up the radio beacon from the ground station would it
count as a true NDB approach?

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
"Steve House" wrote:
Hate to sound dense but how do you fly an NDB approach without an ADF?

Old answer: RDF. At least in the marine world, this was the predecessor
to the ADF. I'm assuming this was true in the aviation world too?
Stands for Radio Direction Finder (as opposed to Automatic Direction
Finder). Same principle, the difference being with the RDF, you have to
manually turn the antenna to find the strongest signal. The workload
involved pretty much requires a dedicated radio operator or navigator.

New answer: GPS

"Mike Weller" wrote in message
s.com...

It's an exercise in futility now to try to teach modern day students
something as simple as how the BFO works.

How 'bout "Whistle-stop tuning"?

Rich S.

On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 22:39:45 GMT, "Dave Stadt"
wrote:

Actually you turn the antenna for the weakest signal.


Yes, you tune for a "null".

It's an exercise in futility now to try to teach modern day students
something as simple as how the BFO works.

Sigh, I guess that I'm getting old.

Naw... things are just getting better!

Mike Weller