Angry [More Info]

On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 15:10:54 -0000, Dylan Smith
wrote:

On 2005-12-29, Ron Rosenfeld wrote:
Plus the effects on
your inner ear seem to be the most pronounced at this point too

I've never noted that in my instrument flying.

Are you sure? The pitch changes in the departure phase tend to be
greater, as well as acceleration effects. In most light planes, 10
degrees pitch up makes your initial climb. In the enroute phase or
approach phase, pitch changes are usually nowhere near 10 degrees or
large changes of speed in a short period of time while trying to
transition from looking out the windscreen to being on instruments. The
busiest times I've ever had single pilot IFR have been taking off in a
Bonanza in low IFR conditions to add to this. I'm not surprised that
non-proficient in IMC pilots get screwed up and crash on departure.

No question but that pitch changes may be greater on takeoff than enroute.
But I've not noted any equilibrium problems while flying IMC. Maybe that's
from practice relying on the instruments and ignoring body cues?



The equipment you're flying has much to do with it, too. I'd much rather
be in a high-performance aircraft in night IMC in the mountains than in a
C172, though.

I would out of principle too, but there's no denying it's a lot less
busy in a C172 especially on departure!

I suppose. But I don't seem to have a problem handling the few "extra"
tasks in my Mooney.


But I was wondering about the specifics of Hilton's objection to this
flight, in view of the fact that he wrote he was a CFII so shouldn't have a
problem with the IMC.

If I'm not mistaken, it was in the mountains in a fairly marginal plane
(a C172 loaded with people is pretty marginal when it comes to climb
rate). I'm not sure I'd want to launch at night in the mountains in IMC
in a C172 either! I'd want something that could climb _well_ and had
good instrumentation.

Concur!
Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)