Prepping for IR checkride - questions

Hello all,

I've made the appointment for my IR checkride, although it's still a
ways out, and had a couple things on my mind.

1) Concerning the heading standards (+- 10 degrees, of course), I find
that I still, at this point, _occasionally_ exceed them, _especially_ in
prepping for an approach (though I have a yoke-mounted clip for my
plates I still find my scan degrading a bit when I'm prepping & setting
up). So, that's occasionally, not _consistently_, getting off-heading
by more than 10d (probably 20d at the most). How picky are most
examiners about this type of thing? I know that the PTS states that
"consistent" exceeding of the standards is grounds for failure, so I
rather hope that me getting off-course by, say 20d, then correcting
immediatly, isn't going to have a huge impact. But who knows. Perhaps
my skills are still not quite up to snuff. BTW I have about 33h total
instrument time now, about 8 of which is in a FTD.

2) I also seem to have a devil of a time passing DIRECTLY OVER a VOR
(when I say "VOR" of course I mean "VOR or "VORTAC", etc.), for instance
when flying a full approach and the navaid is the IAF I'm using. My
instructor tells me that I ought to fly so directly over that thing that
the CDI is perfectly centered and then immediately flips from "to" to
"from" on passage, with only an instant of the flag. What I tend to do
is be off by just a bit, getting full-deflection on the CDI (for a
second or two) before the flip. He correctly points out that the
standards call out 3/4 deflection as max deflection, and there seems to
be nothing to account for this type of thing. So, is this (passing
directly, I mean directly, over the navaid) a skill that I really should
have down by the time of the checkride? Just looking for a 2nd (and
possibly 3rd-150th) opinion here.

Thanks,
~Paul

P.S. I scored a 98% on my written and am a bit worried that this may
indicate I know nothing at all of real-world IFR flying! It also may
indicate that I think like the FAA, which scares me even more. Perhaps
I should retake and hope for a lower score?

In article ,
Paul Folbrecht wrote:

1) Concerning the heading standards (+- 10 degrees, of course), I find
that I still, at this point, _occasionally_ exceed them, _especially_ in
prepping for an approach

Take your hand off the yoke when you're not looking at the instruments.
Try to study the plate in short bursts. The rush you feel on practice
flights and on the checkride isn't there in a "real" IFR XC, when you
get plenty of enroute time to study your approach.

2) I also seem to have a devil of a time passing DIRECTLY OVER a VOR

The closer you get, the faster it will come back in, which is important
on a VOR approach. The most important thing, though, is to avoid chasing
it at the last second. Commit to a heading before it starts pegging and
hold that heading until you get a good indication on the far side.

I pegged the CDI at station passage on the VOR approach on my checkride
and I still passed.

--
Ben Jackson

http://www.ben.com/

Ben Jackson wrote:

In article ,
Paul Folbrecht wrote:

1) Concerning the heading standards (+- 10 degrees, of course), I find
that I still, at this point, _occasionally_ exceed them, _especially_ in
prepping for an approach


Take your hand off the yoke when you're not looking at the instruments.
Try to study the plate in short bursts. The rush you feel on practice
flights and on the checkride isn't there in a "real" IFR XC, when you
get plenty of enroute time to study your approach.


2) I also seem to have a devil of a time passing DIRECTLY OVER a VOR


The closer you get, the faster it will come back in, which is important
on a VOR approach. The most important thing, though, is to avoid chasing
it at the last second. Commit to a heading before it starts pegging and
hold that heading until you get a good indication on the far side.

Yes, within a mile or so of a VOR (depending on altitude, of course),
you must fly a heading, not the needle.


I pegged the CDI at station passage on the VOR approach on my checkride
and I still passed.

I've never flown over a VOR and not had the needle take a wild swing or
two, usually to full scale. I think the "cone of confusion" is going to
cause this no matter how precise you are in overflying a VOR. No DE
with a clue would fail someone for a needle swing while overflying a VOR
unless you really were way off course or chasing the needle.


Matt

Paul Folbrecht wrote in
:

Hello all,

I've made the appointment for my IR checkride, although it's still a
ways out, and had a couple things on my mind.

1) Concerning the heading standards (+- 10 degrees, of course), I find
that I still, at this point, _occasionally_ exceed them, _especially_ in
prepping for an approach (though I have a yoke-mounted clip for my
plates I still find my scan degrading a bit when I'm prepping & setting
up). So, that's occasionally, not _consistently_, getting off-heading
by more than 10d (probably 20d at the most). How picky are most
examiners about this type of thing? I know that the PTS states that
"consistent" exceeding of the standards is grounds for failure, so I
rather hope that me getting off-course by, say 20d, then correcting
immediatly, isn't going to have a huge impact. But who knows. Perhaps
my skills are still not quite up to snuff. BTW I have about 33h total
instrument time now, about 8 of which is in a FTD.

How much off course you get not only depends on the heading deviations, but
also on how much time you remain on the wrong heading. Letting your heading
drift occasionally while doing other tasks is not all that unusual. As long
as you catch the error and correct it promptly, I don't think this would be
a big deal.




2) I also seem to have a devil of a time passing DIRECTLY OVER a VOR
(when I say "VOR" of course I mean "VOR or "VORTAC", etc.), for instance
when flying a full approach and the navaid is the IAF I'm using. My
instructor tells me that I ought to fly so directly over that thing that
the CDI is perfectly centered and then immediately flips from "to" to
"from" on passage, with only an instant of the flag. What I tend to do
is be off by just a bit, getting full-deflection on the CDI (for a
second or two) before the flip. He correctly points out that the
standards call out 3/4 deflection as max deflection, and there seems to
be nothing to account for this type of thing. So, is this (passing
directly, I mean directly, over the navaid) a skill that I really should
have down by the time of the checkride? Just looking for a 2nd (and
possibly 3rd-150th) opinion here.

If you are getting full CDI deflection for only one or two seconds before
the flip, then you are doing fine. What you want to avoid is the CDI
staying that way for longer than, say, about 10 seconds.

"Paul Folbrecht" wrote in message
...
Hello all,

I've made the appointment for my IR checkride, although it's still a
ways out, and had a couple things on my mind.

1) Concerning the heading standards (+- 10 degrees, of course), I find
that I still, at this point, _occasionally_ exceed them, _especially_ in
prepping for an approach (though I have a yoke-mounted clip for my
plates I still find my scan degrading a bit when I'm prepping & setting
up). So, that's occasionally, not _consistently_, getting off-heading
by more than 10d (probably 20d at the most). How picky are most
examiners about this type of thing? I know that the PTS states that
"consistent" exceeding of the standards is grounds for failure, so I
rather hope that me getting off-course by, say 20d, then correcting
immediatly, isn't going to have a huge impact. But who knows. Perhaps
my skills are still not quite up to snuff. BTW I have about 33h total
instrument time now, about 8 of which is in a FTD.

Think about it this way: in real life ifr, if you bust your altitude, you
could cause a loss of seperation, period. If your heading drifts 20 degrees
for 10 seconds, you're not going to create a loss of seperation. The
examiner want see that if you deviate, you identify your deviation quickly
and correct as necessary. Keep your scan up by dividing the approach
briefing into small steps.


2) I also seem to have a devil of a time passing DIRECTLY OVER a VOR
(when I say "VOR" of course I mean "VOR or "VORTAC", etc.), for instance
when flying a full approach and the navaid is the IAF I'm using. My
instructor tells me that I ought to fly so directly over that thing that
the CDI is perfectly centered and then immediately flips from "to" to
"from" on passage, with only an instant of the flag. What I tend to do
is be off by just a bit, getting full-deflection on the CDI (for a
second or two) before the flip. He correctly points out that the
standards call out 3/4 deflection as max deflection, and there seems to
be nothing to account for this type of thing. So, is this (passing
directly, I mean directly, over the navaid) a skill that I really should
have down by the time of the checkride? Just looking for a 2nd (and
possibly 3rd-150th) opinion here.

I've watched students convinced they were about to cross the station while
they were still four miles out and would let the needle go full scale and
just fly a heading. The deal is this: you should be making heading
corrections based on the deflection of the needle. If you continuously make
small corrections, you should be able to keep the needle centered right on
up to the station. If the needle starts to head one way or another, make no
more than a 10 degree heading correction; if that doesn't bring the needle
back in, you're probably getting right on top.


Thanks,
~Paul

P.S. I scored a 98% on my written and am a bit worried that this may
indicate I know nothing at all of real-world IFR flying! It also may
indicate that I think like the FAA, which scares me even more. Perhaps
I should retake and hope for a lower score?

I hope this is a joke. The "don't get too high a score on the knowledge
test" theory is yet another aviation myth. Hint: the examiner already
knowns you don't know anything about real-world IFR flying...you don't have
your rating yet.

The 3/4 scale deflection tolerance is only for tracking a VOR or ILS;
passing over a VOR will almost always get full scale deflection in the cone
of confusion.

Regards,
-Alan

PP-ASEL-IA
============
He correctly points out that the
standards call out 3/4 deflection as max deflection, and there seems to
be nothing to account for this type of thing. So, is this (passing
directly, I mean directly, over the navaid) a skill that I really should
have down by the time of the checkride? Just looking for a 2nd (and
possibly 3rd-150th) opinion here.

Thanks. It seems this is the consensus. Although what my instructor is
aiming for is possible (and I'm sure he can do it regularly), it's
awfully difficult in practice. He says the full deflection should be
for just an instant, while I usually have it for maybe 2s.

Thanks to everybody else who replied, too.

Alan Pendley wrote:
The 3/4 scale deflection tolerance is only for tracking a VOR or ILS;
passing over a VOR will almost always get full scale deflection in the cone
of confusion.

Regards,
-Alan

PP-ASEL-IA
============
He correctly points out that the
standards call out 3/4 deflection as max deflection, and there seems to
be nothing to account for this type of thing. So, is this (passing
directly, I mean directly, over the navaid) a skill that I really should
have down by the time of the checkride? Just looking for a 2nd (and
possibly 3rd-150th) opinion here.

P.S. I scored a 98% on my written and am a bit worried that this may
indicate I know nothing at all of real-world IFR flying! It also may
indicate that I think like the FAA, which scares me even more. Perhaps
I should retake and hope for a lower score?


I hope this is a joke. The "don't get too high a score on the knowledge
test" theory is yet another aviation myth. Hint: the examiner already
knowns you don't know anything about real-world IFR flying...you don't have
your rating yet.

Yes, it was certainly a joke. :-) It was funny, too, damn it.
Although, thinking like the FAA is something that would scare me a bit.

"Paul Folbrecht" wrote in message
...
Hello all,

I've made the appointment for my IR checkride, although it's still a
ways out, and had a couple things on my mind.

1) Concerning the heading standards (+- 10 degrees, of course), I find
that I still, at this point, _occasionally_ exceed them, _especially_ in

During my checkride my heading deviations exceeded 10d and altitudes +/-
100' but I was always correcting as this happened, so the examiner allowed
it.

Another point to keep in mind is to have a good structured process for
briefing the approach so that you do it the same way each time. This way you
will do it more quickly, make fewer mistakes, and maintain better control of
the flight overall. My process is as follows:

1. Find the FAF and put it into the GPS/Loran
2. Tune the VOR/NDB/LOC frequency and set the proper course on the OBS
3. Set radios with approach, tower, and ground in active/standby as
appropriate
4. Tune any available crossing radials or other fixes that can provide
additional information
5. Figure out the next altitude you need to be at and how far out you are.

My only other advice would be to get a good night's sleep, get up early and
have a good breakfast, and relax. Odds are if your CFI has signed you off
you're ready to pass and your goal is simply to not screw up too badly.

-cwk.

Paul Folbrecht wrote:
Thanks. It seems this is the consensus. Although what my instructor is
aiming for is possible (and I'm sure he can do it regularly), it's
awfully difficult in practice. He says the full deflection should be
for just an instant, while I usually have it for maybe 2s.

Your flight instructor doesn't understand very well how a VOR
transmitter works. The cone of confusion gets larger with increasing
altitude. If you fly over the VOR about 50' above it, then the
deflection would be for "just an instant." If you fly over at 10,000
feet, the full scale deflection can last for quite some time (several
seconds at least), depending on how fast an airplane you are flying.


Matt