Adding flaps during the descent

[azure]

I could almost have just asked this in the Mooney thread because this is about the same question, when to slow down during the approach. But I've already hijacked a thread on the Red Board and didn't want to do that again, so I decided to start my own thread, FWIW.

Friends and wiser pilots, I'm up against my first real stumbling block towards the IR, and it's a biggie. I'm right at the edge of giving up, at least on trying to finish my training in this airplane. Here's the problem:

The airplane is a 1976 C-172M with a 150hp engine and the old-style Cessna flaps lever that you have to hold down. Cruise airspeed is 100-105 kts tops, but even at 2200 RPM level it still pulls 90-95 kts. Deploying any degree of flaps is strictly prohibited above 85 kts.

The airspace is... busy. Most of the airports with ILS approaches are busy Class C and D fields: FNT, DET, PTK. They suffer little bugsmashers only reluctantly and in the 172 we're asked to keep our speed up as often as not; which means, cruise speed. Even 95 kts is a pretty slow approach speed in this environment.

According to most of the wisest minds on the Red Board, there are two ways to fly the ILS in an airplane like that.

1. Reconfigure for approach speed, including 10* of flaps, before crossing the FAF, then keep that configuration all the way down to DH, or until breaking out.

2. Fly the entire approach down to where you break out without flaps. If you don't break out until DH, so be it. Land without flaps if necessary, the runways are long and the bird isn't that fast. If you break out high enough, add flaps.

Option 1 sounds like the best way to train for a lowly student like me, but I can testify to the fact that you will at least 50% of the time not make it to the bottom of the glideslope. ATC will tell you to break off early so that more important freight and other commercial traffic can land. And rightly so, as my CFII says, the system is designed for them. Bugsmasher vs freight dog, bugsmasher loses every time.

So Option 2 would be my choice.. though landing without flaps is harder on the tires and I wouldn't want to do it on a regular basis, and I'll be flying a LOT of ILSs down to DH in order to get ready for the checkride.

My CFII insists on Option 3: reconfigure for approach speed once established. He recommends 2200 RPM, which as I said gives about 95 kts level. Once you've intercepted the GS, pull power back to 2000 RPM or so and ride it down to a few hundred feet (no more than 500) above DH. Then get one dot below the GS, level off (without reducing power) and add 10* of flaps once in the white arc. Then use forward pressure to get the airplane back onto the GS.

I've tried this at least 10 times and only twice got anywhere near back to a stable descent along the GS. I've always blown through the glideslope to at least two dots high before even re-establishing a descent, and usually either wind up chasing the GS needle (due to excessive power reductions) or never catch up to it at all, and sometimes lose the localizer as well. Tonight at FNT was especially bad, the worst I've flown since we started shooting approaches. The 15-20 kt crosswind from the south didn't make it any easier, but the same thing happened a few nights ago at DET under friendlier conditions.

Everyone I've talked to, including one close instrument rated friend, tells me that this is a bad idea because descending on the GS in IMC is no time to be majorly reconfiguring the airplane. I agree, but my CFII says the reason I'm screwing it up so badly is because I'm trying to do it my way and not listening to him. Maybe so, but I've tried to do exactly as he says and I've found that with no power reduction, the GS needle goes through the basement PDQ. Pulling on the yoke (takes more than just "pressure") and holding that flaps lever down is quite distracting and I'm finding it very hard to even keep the wings level while doing it.

I'm about ready to hang it up or start over in a different airplane. Maybe even with a different CFII. Any thoughts would be much appreciated.

 

[poadeleted20]

Don't ever, ever, deliberately drive below the glide path on an ILS final approach segment. The clearances are small enough as it is without deliberately shaving them thinner.

As for the rest, it sounds like you've gotten a lot of good advice you don't want to accept. You're not likely to hear differently here than on the red board. I'd really like to get in the plane with you and try a few things so you can see why they're important, but it's a long way to Detroit from here.

 

[Let'sgoflying!]

Is there no field nearby with an ils and no tower, not much traffic where you can do your initial training without atc concerns?

 

[wabower]

I don't like your instructor's approach to the problem, and wouldn't recommend it to any beginner. Or anyone else, for that matter. If that's how he insists on teaching, color me gone.

But if it makes your decision any easier, back in the day we learned to land 172's without flaps as a matter of course. Flaps were an afterthought, something you used to salvage a landing if your approach ended up too high to land without them. The airplane isn't going to land until it is slow enough to do so, so if you've got lots of concrete just ride it until it's ready. For the number of actual landings you'll make during IR training, I doubt if you'll use enough extra rubber to refill the eraser on a #2 pencil.

I could almost have just asked this in the Mooney thread because this is about the same question, when to slow down during the approach. But I've already hijacked a thread on the Red Board and didn't want to do that again, so I decided to start my own thread, FWIW.

Friends and wiser pilots, I'm up against my first real stumbling block towards the IR, and it's a biggie. I'm right at the edge of giving up, at least on trying to finish my training in this airplane. Here's the problem:

The airplane is a 1976 C-172M with a 150hp engine and the old-style Cessna flaps lever that you have to hold down. Cruise airspeed is 100-105 kts tops, but even at 2200 RPM level it still pulls 90-95 kts. Deploying any degree of flaps is strictly prohibited below 85 kts.

The airspace is... busy. Most of the airports with ILS approaches are busy Class C and D fields: FNT, DET, PTK. They suffer little bugsmashers only reluctantly and in the 172 we're asked to keep our speed up as often as not; which means, cruise speed. Even 95 kts is a pretty slow approach speed in this environment.

According to most of the wisest minds on the Red Board, there are two ways to fly the ILS in an airplane like that.

1. Reconfigure for approach speed, including 10* of flaps, before crossing the FAF, then keep that configuration all the way down to DH, or until breaking out.

2. Fly the entire approach down to where you break out without flaps. If you don't break out until DH, so be it. Land without flaps if necessary, the runways are long and the bird isn't that fast. If you break out high enough, add flaps.

Option 1 sounds like the best way to train for a lowly student like me, but I can testify to the fact that you will at least 50% of the time not make it to the bottom of the glideslope. ATC will tell you to break off early so that more important freight and other commercial traffic can land. And rightly so, as my CFII says, the system is designed for them. Bugsmasher vs freight dog, bugsmasher loses every time.

So Option 2 would be my choice.. though landing without flaps is harder on the tires and I wouldn't want to do it on a regular basis, and I'll be flying a LOT of ILSs down to DH in order to get ready for the checkride.

My CFII insists on Option 3: reconfigure for approach speed once established. He recommends 2200 RPM, which as I said gives about 95 kts level. Once you've intercepted the GS, pull power back to 2000 RPM or so and ride it down to a few hundred feet (no more than 500) above DH. Then get one dot below the GS, level off (without reducing power) and add 10* of flaps once in the white arc. Then use forward pressure to get the airplane back onto the GS.

I've tried this at least 10 times and only twice got anywhere near back to a stable descent along the GS. I've always blown through the glideslope to at least two dots high before even re-establishing a descent, and usually either wind up chasing the GS needle (due to excessive power reductions) or never catch up to it at all, and sometimes lose the localizer as well. Tonight at FNT was especially bad, the worst I've flown since we started shooting approaches. The 15-20 kt crosswind from the south didn't make it any easier, but the same thing happened a few nights ago at DET under friendlier conditions.

Everyone I've talked to, including one close instrument rated friend, tells me that this is a bad idea because descending on the GS in IMC is no time to be majorly reconfiguring the airplane. I agree, but my CFII says the reason I'm screwing it up so badly is because I'm trying to do it my way and not listening to him. Maybe so, but I've tried to do exactly as he says and I've found that with no power reduction, the GS needle goes through the basement PDQ. Pulling on the yoke (takes more than just "pressure") and holding that flaps lever down is quite distracting and I'm finding it very hard to even keep the wings level while doing it.

I'm about ready to hang it up or start over in a different airplane. Maybe even with a different CFII. Any thoughts would be much appreciated.

 

[azure]

What are you saying I don't want to accept, Ron? Is there an Option 4 I'm leaving out? Should I be firing my CFII without further ado? Maybe I've misunderstood what you've written, it's very possible. If so, please explain.

 

[azure]

Is there no field nearby with an ils and no tower, not much traffic where you can do your initial training without atc concerns?

There are two, OZW and PHN. But my instructor wants me to train in busy environments so I'll be ready to go in anywhere.

 

[wabower]

Strike 3.

There are two, OZW and PHN. But my instructor wants me to train in busy environments so I'll be ready to go in anywhere.

 

[poadeleted20]

What are you saying I don't want to accept, Ron?

That you can fly approaches in an appropriate configuration at an appropriate speed without getting kicked off the approach. You may not be able to train at your selected location at your desired time that way, but there are plenty of ILS's around the Detroit area where you can train the way you want to fly without problems with ATC. And if you're flying it for real, you can tell ATC what speed you'll fly, and as long as it isn't unreasonable (and 85-90 knots is not unreasonable), they will accommodate you.

OTOH, if your instructor is demanding that you fly these approaches at the busiest airports you can find, just file IFR -- then they have to accommodate you even if you're just training. You'll only get one approach at each airport, but it will be realistic. Of course, if you're still just learning how to keep the needles centered and stable, you should be practicing somewhere you can work on that without additional distractions, say, YIP or JXN. Once you get that down, you can go to PTK or DET or DTW and learn what "busy" is all about without having to worry about ILS fundamentals at the same time.

 

[CJones]

I don't have a ton of actual IMC experience, but I have a few hours under my belt. The last thing I want to be doing on an ILS is to reconfigure the airplane mid-glideslope. I have my hands full simply keeping the needles from bouncing around while fighting wind, ATC, etc. The last thing I need is a throw another wrench in the gears with a major configuration change.

I think it would be interesting for you to go out alone (or with a CFI) and fly the plane VFR and see how quickly you can get slowed down from a 95kt approach speed to landing speed. I think you might be surprised how quickly those draggy birds will drop if you kill their energy and add some drag. Go out to a less-busy airport and play in the pattern trying different configurations to landing. If you don't feel comfortable testing your limits alone, take along a CFI, but explain to them what you're trying to accomplish. I personally like to practice landing with a headwind, with a tailwind, with flaps, without flaps, slow, fast, steep, shallow, etc. Sure, it's great to teach the 'standard' configuration, but what happens when 'standard' isn't available!?

On top of everything else, teaching to purposefully go below the glideslope sounds like a deathwish to me.

Whatever you go with - configure for landing before FAF or configure after breaking out, learn to do it well and in varying conditions and you'll be good to go. Kick the 'configure mid-glideslope' method to the curb, though - especially this early in the ball game. Bad juju me thinks with that one..

 

[Everskyward]

Everyone I've talked to, including one close instrument rated friend, tells me that this is a bad idea because descending on the GS in IMC is no time to be majorly reconfiguring the airplane.

I agree with that, especially since you are just learning. But even more than that, I think it's a really bad idea to intentionally go below the glideslope.

 

[azure]

That you can fly approaches in an appropriate configuration at an appropriate speed without getting kicked off the approach. You may not be able to train at your selected location at your desired time that way, but there are plenty of ILS's around the Detroit area where you can train the way you want to fly without problems with ATC. And if you're flying it for real, you can tell ATC what speed you'll fly, and as long as it isn't unreasonable (and 85-90 knots is not unreasonable), they will accommodate you.

OTOH, if your instructor is demanding that you fly these approaches at the busiest airports you can find, just file IFR -- then they have to accommodate you even if you're just training. You'll only get one approach at each airport, but it will be realistic. Of course, if you're still just learning how to keep the needles centered and stable, you should be practicing somewhere you can work on that without additional distractions, say, YIP or JXN. Once you get that down, you can go to PTK or DET or DTW and learn what "busy" is all about without having to worry about ILS fundamentals at the same time.

We filed the first time at DET, and were still broken off so that a Citation could land. We were barreling down the FAC practically at cruise airspeed and it wasn't enough. I don't know if it would have made a difference if it were real IMC, you would know that better than I. I'd hope it would, though.

Maybe I should insist we train at OZW or PHN, then, until I'm better at keeping the needles centered. JXN is too far away, and YIP... I'm really not sure how deserted that is these days, I hear DTW Approach working a lot of traffic on the ILS there.

I gather Option 3 is a non-starter with everyone here. Thanks for the thoughts everyone, maybe what I really need to do is stick to my guns with my instructor on that one.

edit: On second thought, I'm not sure whether the time we were sent around for the Citation was the first time (when we filed) or the second time (when we were VFR). We did get multiple approaches IFR though, and they did tell us to keep our speed up.

 

[jesse]

It's a 172 and is full of drag. You really don't need those flaps during the approach. If you have the flaps you just have to turn a higher RPM and burn more fuel. Fuel ain't cheap.

I dump flaps once I break out. Nothing I fly is slick enough to need them before that.

If your instructor demands you dip below the glide-slope to do anything -- I'd find a different instructor.

Deploying any degree of flaps is strictly prohibited below 85 kts.

Why is that? I don't seem to remember any issue with deploying flaps BELOW 85 knots in the 172M I flew. You can take a 172 from cruise to flap speed VERY quickly.

 

[azure]

Oops... brain fart. I meant to say above 85 knots.

 

[taters]

Whatever you go with - configure for landing before FAF or configure after breaking out, learn to do it well and in varying conditions and you'll be good to go. Kick the 'configure mid-glideslope' method to the curb, though - especially this early in the ball game. Bad juju me thinks with that one..

+1...CJones
I would have a disussion your CFII and make clear with him that you are more comfortable with no config change on the GS and no going below the GS purposefully in IMC... good luck and stick with it somehow/way..remember to have fun too

 

[gprellwitz]

Liz,
I don't have much to add here.

• DON'T go below glideslope on purpose (it happens too frequently unintentionally as it is! )

• Landing a 172 (or a 182 or even a 210) without flaps on approach on an ILS runway isn't a big deal. They'll lose the speed quickly enough, and you have a LOT of runway! You can add the flaps while over the runway if desired. Try it both ways and see what works for you.

• If they broke you off from an actual IMC approach for a plane behind you, I'd have a talk with ATC. They shouldn't be doing that except in an emergency. If, as you seem to indicate later, you were actually VFR, that's a different story.

BTW, thanks for your posts!

 

[TMetzinger]

First, never ever "duck" under the glideslope.
Second, practice flying approaches in the airplane in varied configurations at different speeds. These are the "tools" you want hanging on your belt when you're doing it for real.
Third, once you have the tools, know what situation the tool is appropriate for. Examples:

Flying into Detroit Metro with 1000 AGL overcast? Fly the approach fast and clean - you've got the vertical room to slow when you're visual, and you can trust the ceiling report because it's a human observer and a bunch of other airplanes have just flown in before you - they'd complain if it was really 200 and a mile.

Flying into Troy when it's 700 and a mile (very near minimums)? Be stable at the FAF, in the landing configuration, at the appropriate speed. You can't trust the AWOS/ASOS the way you'd trust a human, so it's quite possible things are worse than broadcast. You don't want to be doing ANYTHING other than flying the procedure and looking for the airport. Approaches in low weather should really be thought of as planned missed approaches, so that the "surprise" is when you can really land.

You'll never regret learning to fly the airplane to it's full range of capabilities, provided you ALSO develop the judgement of when and how to use those capabilities.

 

[tonycondon]

yea, what they said.

 

[ScottM]

I don't have a ton of actual IMC experience, but I have a few hours under my belt. The last thing I want to be doing on an ILS is to reconfigure the airplane mid-glideslope. I have my hands full simply keeping the needles from bouncing around while fighting wind, ATC, etc. The last thing I need is a throw another wrench in the gears with a major configuration change.

I think it would be interesting for you to go out alone (or with a CFI) and fly the plane VFR and see how quickly you can get slowed down from a 95kt approach speed to landing speed. I think you might be surprised how quickly those draggy birds will drop if you kill their energy and add some drag. Go out to a less-busy airport and play in the pattern trying different configurations to landing. If you don't feel comfortable testing your limits alone, take along a CFI, but explain to them what you're trying to accomplish. I personally like to practice landing with a headwind, with a tailwind, with flaps, without flaps, slow, fast, steep, shallow, etc. Sure, it's great to teach the 'standard' configuration, but what happens when 'standard' isn't available!?

On top of everything else, teaching to purposefully go below the glideslope sounds like a deathwish to me.

Whatever you go with - configure for landing before FAF or configure after breaking out, learn to do it well and in varying conditions and you'll be good to go. Kick the 'configure mid-glideslope' method to the curb, though - especially this early in the ball game. Bad juju me thinks with that one..

I fully agree Chris. I get configured just before the FAF and at the FAF I add the 10 degrees of flaps and throttle back to 2000. I will come down the GS at 90knots. If I want faster I set power to 2200 rpm. But I don't touch anything until I break out, have the runway in sight and then configure for landing. Never purposefully go below GS is a very wise thing.

 

[Kelvin]

I am a newbie to instrument flying but I have to say I am astounded that your CFII would train you to go below the GS in IMC. I can't wrap my mind around that concept for a second.

One glaring issue that no one has touched on...

How will this technique transfer to other aircraft you will surely fly?

 

[Ted]

It sounds to me like you need to find a new instructor.

Going below the glide stope intentionally is a very bad idea. Frequently I ride one dot high intentionally. I don't know of any ILSs that have terrain above you that you might hit. However every one of them has terrain below that you WILL hit if you go too far down.

Training at busy airports is a bad idea at this point, too. If you're having trouble getting the basics down, then you need to go somewhere that's less busy until you're comfortable with it. The 172 is so slow that one should be able to shoot an ILS firewalled, and still get it on the ground in time (been there, done that - I was bored). But that's after you get a bit more experience.

You do NOT want to change the configuration while shooting the ILS if you can avoid it. At this point in your training you need to focus on the basics, not on the tricks that you can do to squeeze the bugsmasher into a busy airport without bothering the others too much. Really, you shouldn't be trying to squeeze a bugsmasher into a busy airport until you get more experience flying instruments.

Right now, I would say go with option 1 for technique. When you're ready to shoot it faster, go for option 2. I do not like option 3 at all, and would never suggest that to anyone.

Personally, I think your instructor is doing you and everyone else a disservice. He's advocating a potentially unsafe technique, and purposely getting you in the way of other, larger aircraft in the name of training when you need to get the basics nailed down solid. He's also creating problems for ATC and the other aircraft who are going 2x your speed if not faster. Don't give up, but if this instructor isn't working for you, find a different one.

 

[TMetzinger]

Addressing Kelvin's comment - when you move to a new airplane, you need to put the effort into practicing the basics (climbs, descents, turns, straight and level), then fly approaches for practice in VMC and working out the envelope of configurations and speeds.

As an example, I went from flying Socatas and Cessnas to the Mooney J. Insurance required 5 hours dual. That was nowhere near enough time to safely fly approaches for real. In the 5 hours I got comfortable flying VFR in the airplane. To be comfortable in IFR required another 5 hours of structured practice in VMC testing "fast" and "slow" variations for precision and non-precision approaches. I then limited myself to higher wx minimums and no circling until I got more experience.

All of it comes down to becoming "one with the airplane" or OWTA. Stephen Coonts in "Cannibal Queen" compared his familiarity with the A-6 after thousands of hours in it (where the airplane essentially followed his thoughts) and the Stearman (where he was constantly correcting). As long as you recognize when you're NOT OWTA and compensate, you'll be safe.

 

[Steve]

This is appears to be an opening for the pitch vs. power arguement.

Personally, I never intentionally push the nose down to maintain the glideslope (the autopilot might argue with that idea). That just adds more energy I'm going to have to kill later. I trim for approach speed and leave it alone. Power keeps me on the descent path.

A few smooth and very minor throttle adjustments to correct for sink or float on the g/s is about all I'll do if necessary. Once on the g/s I'm pretty much just waiting to land. I did a bad job of managing speed prior to capturing it if I have to do much of anything after I'm on it. On my plane it's drop the gear, 15" on the MP and down the chute we go.

As far as getting comfortable with an instrument approach, don't be too hard on yourself, it'll happen, just use the same technique one uses to get to Carnegie Hall.

As my CFII said on my first approach lesson...Don't Go Low!

My CFII insists on Option 3: reconfigure for approach speed once established. He recommends 2200 RPM, which as I said gives about 95 kts level. Once you've intercepted the GS, pull power back to 2000 RPM or so and ride it down to a few hundred feet (no more than 500) above DH. Then get one dot below the GS, level off (without reducing power) and add 10* of flaps once in the white arc. Then use forward pressure to get the airplane back onto the GS.

.

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

There is no shortage of instructors out there...

 

[EdFred]

OK, let's translate this to real world, and let's assume that you are always going to "have" to fly approaches at 90 knots in this 172. Which to me is perfect because during a non precision approach they've got a time for flying it at 90 knots (granted it's GS) on the plate. During my instrument training in the 172 and then the Warrior, 90kts was the target speed, specifically for this reason.

Now - in regards to the flaps. As Jesse said, a 172 is never going to be mistaken for a slick airplane. The worst case for flying an ILS is that you break out at 200 feet. I think that by the time you start instrument training, you should be able to make a 172 as dirty as possible in the last 200' on a 3 degree approach angle. What's your descent rate on a 3 degree angle at 90KIAS? 475' fpm - that's 25 seconds to get dirtied up. And that's a WORST case scenario.

I know, I'm going to hear from the "FAA is always right" crowd that "oooooh, you shouldn't make any major changes to anything inside the FAF or you will DIE!!!" Whatever.

Liz, never flown with you, so I have no clue what your comfort level or capabilities are or aren't when it comes to flying, but anyone who is flying instruments should be able to handle making a transition in the last 200 feet to lose 25knots in a 172 in order to touch down. Plus...with an ILS, you're probably going to have 5000' to land if you don't want to reduce power, slip, nose it up a little, and lower the flaps.

 

[TMetzinger]

Ed,

While you CAN alter the airplane configuration in the final 200 feet if you must, why would you want to do that in anything other than an abnormal situation?

The envelope for "safe/normal" operations is smaller than the envelope for "possible/abnormal" operations for a reason. It let's you make small errors and live.

 

[EdFred]

Ed,

While you CAN alter the airplane configuration in the final 200 feet if you must, why would you want to do that in anything other than an abnormal situation?

The envelope for "safe/normal" operations is smaller than the envelope for "possible/abnormal" operations for a reason. It let's you make small errors and live.

What's abnormal for someone is completely normal for another. I'm still getting used to the Comanche, but when I had the Cherokee down cold, I never flew a base leg (unless you count the apex of a turn as a leg), and the length of my final was less than a 1/4 mile - unless there were "goalposts" in the way. That was normal for me. Freaks the crap out of some people, but the power off 180 was my normal landing. I don't think that losing 10 knots to get to flap speed is outside the envelope of safe and normal.

Then again, I am an awesome pilot.

 

[RMCN172RG]

Is there no field nearby with an ils and no tower, not much traffic where you can do your initial training without atc concerns?

You can come out to KPHN (Port Huron) it fits that bill.

I did my IR at PTK which meant a daily flight up to FNT and back with approaches at both. Since you're practicing and low priority the stay above xxx or break off early is part of playing in the real world.

On a real approach in IMC you'll be given the time you need and want to fly the approach right.

YOU NEED TO BE CONFIGURED AND STABLE BEFORE THE FAF!!!!

YOU DO NOT DROP BELOW THE GS ON AN ILS.

I don't see how you could possibly pass the check ride using those as your "normal" procedures.

 

[poadeleted20]

I know, I'm going to hear from the "FAA is always right" crowd that "oooooh, you shouldn't make any major changes to anything inside the FAF or you will DIE!!!" Whatever.

You are unlikely to die, but you are likely to have a lot more trouble keeping the needles centered and stable at this stage of your training. Save the Fancy-Dan stuff for when you have the simple stuff down pat and have your IR check ride passed.

 

[RMCN172RG]

Ed, it's not that you shouldn't make late changes. It's that you want to avoid having to make them so you can concentrate on other things.

 

[TMetzinger]

You are unlikely to die, but you are likely to have a lot more trouble keeping the needles centered and stable at this stage of your training. Save the Fancy-Dan stuff for when you have the simple stuff down pat and have your IR check ride passed.

So, to the OP, when you're as awesome a pilot as Ed is , you can leave configuration changes to the end of the approach. Until then, the advice you've gotten will keep you safe while you learn and progress towards awesomeness.

 

[dmccormack]

This is appears to be an opening for the pitch vs. power arguement.

Personally, I never intentionally push the nose down to maintain the glideslope (the autopilot might argue with that idea). That just adds more energy I'm going to have to kill later. I trim for approach speed and leave it alone. Power keeps me on the descent path.

Yep, but this is another one of the oldest arguments in IFR circles, but most experienced IMC pilots will respond with the famous aviation cliche: "It depends."

Let's say you're configured, everything is smooth, you're at 450 FPM descent, 90 knots ground speed, needles are centered, life is grand!

Then you fly over the powerplant near the OM (which, by the way, is the case at KMGW).

Would you adjust power after that momentary lift caused by the heat from the stacks?

Probably not -- you'd push down a moment, then you'd pull back a wee bit, wait for everything to re-stablize, and go on your way.

While I practice and teach power = altitude, pitch = airspeed on approach IMC or VMC, it's not absolute to the point of confusion. Like all rules of thumb it's based on presumptions, and when conditions change, you deviate as necessary.

I too am confused by Liz's CFII's insistence on "busy airports." The objective is to learn to fly IFR in the ATC system and the weather -- busy airports, broken stuff, distractions, and the rest are added only after the fundamentals are mastered and it's time to up the ante.

If you're to the point of quitting, Liz, it's time to have a frank discussuion with your instructor and let him know he needs to adapt to you.

 

[EdFred]

You are unlikely to die, but you are likely to have a lot more trouble keeping the needles centered and stable at this stage of your training. Save the Fancy-Dan stuff for when you have the simple stuff down pat and have your IR check ride passed.

Ed, it's not that you shouldn't make late changes. It's that you want to avoid having to make them so you can concentrate on other things.

Why am I worried about keeping the needles centered after I have transitioned to visual? When I see the lights or the numbers, I quit looking at any instruments except the ASI. What's left to concentrate on at this point? You are back to a private pilot training for the last 200 feet.

 

[Steve]

What???? Are you telling me every approach is different? OMG, I just didn't know!!

btw, a thermal is going to affect every plane differently, mine is going to be less affected than, say a C150. I guess that's why I put "Personally" at the beginning of the paragraph. That power plant might be shutdown for a maintenance outage when I fly over it, anyway.

Yep, but this is another one of the oldest arguments in IFR circles, but most experienced IMC pilots will respond with the famous aviation cliche: "It depends."

Let's say you're configured, everything is smooth, you're at 450 FPM descent, 90 knots ground speed, needles are centered, life is grand!

Then you fly over the powerplant near the OM (which, by the way, is the case at KMGW).

Would you adjust power after that momentary lift caused by the heat from the stacks?

Probably not -- you'd push down a moment, then you'd pull back a wee bit, wait for everything to re-stablize, and go on your way.

While I practice and teach power = altitude, pitch = airspeed on approach IMC or VMC, it's not absolute to the point of confusion. Like all rules of thumb it's based on presumptions, and when conditions change, you deviate as necessary.

I too am confused by Liz's CFII's insistence on "busy airports." The objective is to learn to fly IFR in the ATC system and the weather -- busy airports, broken stuff, distractions, and the rest are added only after the fundamentals are mastered and it's time to up the ante.

If you're to the point of quitting, Liz, it's time to have a frank discussuion with your instructor and let him know he needs to adapt to you.

 

[DGlaeser]

....
I'm about ready to hang it up or start over in a different airplane. Maybe even with a different CFII. Any thoughts would be much appreciated.

I'm also based at VLL (Troy Air Experience), so feel free to give me a call and we can discuss the situation. 248-953-0374.

 

[Ted]

Hold on a second - making changes inside the FAF is fine. That's what I do every time I break out of the clouds, like what Ed's recommending. I never have more than partial flaps on during an approach.

Making changes while on a glide slope (and still in the clouds) is probably not the best idea, and I don't think anyone's advocating that for a student.

Two completely different things here, let's not get them confused.

 

[EdFred]

Hold on a second - making changes inside the FAF is fine. That's what I do every time I break out of the clouds, like what Ed's recommending. I never have more than partial flaps on during an approach.

Making changes while on a glide slope (and still in the clouds) is probably not the best idea, and I don't think anyone's advocating that for a student.

Two completely different things here, let's not get them confused.

Yeah, I think some people thought I was talking about making changes while still IMC. Nope. I do everything at the FAF and don't touch anything until I break out. In the Comanche that's pretty much dropping the gear, and maybe 9° of flaps. But I've also flown an approach in the Cherokee at VNE-5 because I had a KC-135 behind me.

 

[bobmrg]

What are you saying I don't want to accept, Ron? Is there an Option 4 I'm leaving out? Should I be firing my CFII without further ado? Maybe I've misunderstood what you've written, it's very possible. If so, please explain.

Method #3 will never pass the scrutiny of an examiner, in addition to being dumb on many fronts.

Bob Gardner

 

[SkyHog]

Wait, I'm confused....

I've never seen a C172 that couldn't deploy flaps above 110knots, not 85 knots...

 

[Ted]

But I've also flown an approach in the Cherokee at VNE-5 because I had a KC-135 behind me.

It did it once in a 172 because I was bored.

 

[poadeleted20]

Why am I worried about keeping the needles centered after I have transitioned to visual?

I thought we were talking about the final approach segment, not inside the MAP.

When I see the lights or the numbers, I quit looking at any instruments except the ASI. What's left to concentrate on at this point? You are back to a private pilot training for the last 200 feet.

I've seen way too many folks try to get slowed and configured at that point go high and long. If it's an ILS runway and you're in a 172, long isn't usually a problem, but ballooning up can put you right back in the goo, and I've seen folks go 100 feet high doing that. For a 172, if you have 10 flaps and a good speed all the way down, the addition of full flaps doesn't make nearly the pitch moment change that going 0-to-full does, and is much more easily controllable.

Remember, when doing IR training (and I do a lot of it), we're usually not dealing with 1000-hour aces. Rather, we're dealing with low-time PP's who have only a minimal mastery of the aircraft going in, and don't need to have things more complicated than necessary while they're trying to master new skills. Note that their VFR training has probably involved slowing and configuring on downwind and base, and adding full flaps turning final at about 400 feet. Having them try to go from 90 KIAS clean to landing speed (with or without flaps) at 200 feet is generally beyond their skill level, and only complicates and slows their IR training.