Most challenging 1.3 hours so far

kevin47881

kevin47881

Final Approach
Joined
Sep 6, 2005
Messages
6,216
Location
Middle Tennessee
Display Name
Display name:
Time to fly!
Well, I finally quit talking about it and began my IFR training this evening. It was by far the most challenging 1.3 hours of my short six years of flying.

We started with some straight and level and moved into numerous other stages of flight. The one maneuver that broke my butt was steep turns. I just couldn't maintain altitude to save my life. We did them several times and each time I would adjust power and trim like during my private training but just couldn't manage to keep it at the right altitude. The CFII can't yet figure out where the snafu is but he says we'll figure it out.

I also need to figure out which scan works best. I tried several but kept finding myself focusing on the DG.

I'm just reminding myself that the first very numerous hours of my private were equally challenging and figure one day it will just click. At least that's what I'm telling myself right now.
 
steep turns under the hood are a great way to speed up the scan. thats pretty much the secret, scan fast, and interpret just as fast. its a shame they took them out of the PTS
 
Tony, they're still there- but on the ATP ride. NoWKevin, not only speed up your scan, but make correction early and often based on the most rapidly responding instrument, which is PRIMARY.....the Altimeter and the secondary, which is AIRSPEED. Choose a bank angle, and Freeze these other two.
 
i guess i havent done much ATP training lately. thinking about going for mine next spring though, ill be 23, might as well.
 
I'm not a big fan of playing with power and trim while trying to do a steep turn under the hood -- too much tinkering, not enough attention to spread over all those different things (attitude, altitude, power, trim). I'd much rather have the trainee identify the pitch attitude (pitch dot relative to horizon line on the AI) needed to hold altitude during the turn, and then just roll into the turn from normal cruise without changing power (speed will naturally decay to Va) and use back pressure to hold the necessary pitch attitude. However, these are issues that should be discussed on the ground prior to the flight in which steep turns are introduced, not taught in the cockpit during the maneuver.

As for scan, remember that attitude plus power equals performance, and since power isn't changed much during any particular instrument maneuver, the AI should be the instrument to which your eyes return each time they look at something else. If you know the attitude necessary for each particular phase of flight (climb, cruise, cruise descent, approach level, etc.), and strive to maintain it, your eyes will be naturally drawn back to the AI.

For more on the attitude-centered control and performance method of instrument flying in light planes, I highly recommend reading Chapter 3 of Peter Dogan's Instrument Flight Training Manual, widely available on the internet.
 
If you don't mind me asking, who's your instructor? I know a guy that is in your area and is a great person and instructor.
 
Ron Levy said:
I'm not a big fan of playing with power and trim while trying to do a steep turn under the hood -- too much tinkering, not enough attention to spread over all those different things (attitude, altitude, power, trim). I'd much rather have the trainee identify the pitch attitude (pitch dot relative to horizon line on the AI) needed to hold altitude during the turn, and then just roll into the turn from normal cruise without changing power (speed will naturally decay to Va) and use back pressure to hold the necessary pitch attitude. However, these are issues that should be discussed on the ground prior to the flight in which steep turns are introduced, not taught in the cockpit during the maneuver.

As for scan, remember that attitude plus power equals performance, and since power isn't changed much during any particular instrument maneuver, the AI should be the instrument to which your eyes return each time they look at something else. If you know the attitude necessary for each particular phase of flight (climb, cruise, cruise descent, approach level, etc.), and strive to maintain it, your eyes will be naturally drawn back to the AI.

For more on the attitude-centered control and performance method of instrument flying in light planes, I highly recommend reading Chapter 3 of Peter Dogan's Instrument Flight Training Manual, widely available on the internet.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the information Ron.

I've only flown with this CFI one time prior to yesterday and that was for a check out over a year ago. As such, I don't really know his style yet. He provided information when necessary but allowed me to do things "my way" at first just to see how I would handle the maneuver. After doing it "my way" he would recommend changes and we would perform the maneuver again. For me, this is a good way to learn as I learn by doing, screwing up and doing again.

Related to the scan; I will force myself to learn to use the AI as the to/from instrument.

Appreciate the heads up on the book!
 
When I did my Instrument training we did a lot partial-panel work that when I got to fly with a full panel I neglected the AI.
 
kevin47881 said:
I've only flown with this CFI one time prior to yesterday and that was for a check out over a year ago. As such, I don't really know his style yet. He provided information when necessary but allowed me to do things "my way" at first just to see how I would handle the maneuver. After doing it "my way" he would recommend changes and we would perform the maneuver again. For me, this is a good way to learn as I learn by doing, screwing up and doing again.
Click to expand...
That works for some, but it's not my teaching style. I prefer to discuss the maneuver on the ground, determine the best method for the trainee to accomplish it (not always my first choice method, but what seems to be best for this trainee), and then fly it as discussed, i.e., "teach on the ground, practice in the air." Your experimental method may work for you, but it wastes time on techniques/procedures that don't work as well as violating the law of exercise by exercising ineffective methods, and since my PIC clients are paying $600/day for my time, I like to maximize training efficiency.
 
Ron Levy said:
That works for some, but it's not my teaching style. I prefer to discuss the maneuver on the ground, determine the best method for the trainee to accomplish it (not always my first choice method, but what seems to be best for this trainee), and then fly it as discussed, i.e., "teach on the ground, practice in the air." Your experimental method may work for you, but it wastes time on techniques/procedures that don't work as well as violating the law of exercise by exercising ineffective methods, and since my PIC clients are paying $600/day for my time, I like to maximize training efficiency.
Click to expand...

While I certainly don't discount the advantages of ground discussion, I just don't do as well within that environment. The way my brain is wired I need to "do" in order to comprehend and learn.:dunno:

For me, maximizing my dollar efficiency is screwing up as that imparts a memorable image in my gray matter (believe me when I say steep turn screw ups are permanently etched in my mind). Would ground discussion result in less expense? For most it probably would but for me it just doesn't work that way. I'm not being argumentative as I sincerely respect your experience, knowledge and input.

Thanks!
 
Last edited:
kevin47881 said:
Well, I finally quit talking about it and began my IFR training this evening.
Click to expand...

Congrats! It's a tough rating but well worth it.

It was by far the most challenging 1.3 hours of my short six years of flying.
Click to expand...

And so it shall be for quite some time to come... When it starts to get easy and your CFII doesn't have anything more to pile on you, then you're gettin' good. :yes:

We started with some straight and level and moved into numerous other stages of flight. The one maneuver that broke my butt was steep turns. I just couldn't maintain altitude to save my life. We did them several times and each time I would adjust power and trim like during my private training but just couldn't manage to keep it at the right altitude. The CFII can't yet figure out where the snafu is but he says we'll figure it out.
Click to expand...

I found that if I looked at the AI (more specifically, the little dot in the middle) while rolling into the turn, and as frequently as possible through the turn, that helped a ton. By the time you start seeing altitude changes via the altimeter or VSI, you are already moving in that direction. You'll see pitch changes in the AI first. You'll probably see airspeed increasing next, THEN altitude being 20 feet low, then descent on the VSI.

If you're not maintaining altitude and airspeed on the roll-in, you'll probably be chasing it the rest of the way around the turn. Get the roll-in right, and all you have to do is hold things steady until the end.

jdwatson said:
When I did my Instrument training we did a lot partial-panel work that when I got to fly with a full panel I neglected the AI.
Click to expand...

Same here. Used properly, it's a wonderful instrument.

One thing my CFII did that helped me a TON, however, was to fail almost everything. This was done on a long XC flight (BMG -> MSN). He started by going to standard partial panel, with the AI and DG covered. Next came the altimeter. Yikes! He said "If the VSI shows a hundred fpm descent for 5 seconds, make it show a hundred fpm climb for 5 seconds. Average it out." Since he was the PIC (we were under IFR), he peeked at the altimeter every several seconds to verify that I was doing OK.

Just when I started to get good at that, he covered the VSI up too. Yikes again! Now I had to use the airspeed indicator in the same manner - If it shows two knots fast for 5 seconds, make it show two knots slow for 5 seconds.

He also covered up everything except the AI for a while, and everything except the airspeed indicator and magnetic compass for a while too.

After being forced to use every single instrument as the sole pitch or bank source, I finally began to really see what they were telling me. I'd never really cared about the airspeed indicator and hardly ever looked at it - If I'm not gonna stall, who cares? - But it was amazing what I could see when he finally pulled all the instrument covers off and said "This should look like Day VFR to you now!" In fact, the new scan helped later on that same flight when I noticed a loss of about two knots on the airspeed indicator despite no changes in power or altitude. Hmmm... I turned on the carb heat (Dakota), and the engine ingested a slug of ice. So THAT's why we look at the ASI! :D

Just be sure that you're really ready for the partial panel before you get it. I still don't use the AI as much as I should. You need to be able to live without it, but not until you know what to do with it.

I also need to figure out which scan works best. I tried several but kept finding myself focusing on the DG.
Click to expand...

I use the radial scan - AI, ASI, AI, TC, AI, DG, AI, etc. Don't forget the non-6-pack part of the scan too, though... Navs, vacuum gauge, engine gauges, wings (to check for ice), etc. These don't need to be checked as often as the primary instruments, but you don't want to forget them either...

Ron Levy said:
For more on the attitude-centered control and performance method of instrument flying in light planes, I highly recommend reading Chapter 3 of Peter Dogan's Instrument Flight Training Manual, widely available on the internet.
Click to expand...

Amen to that. Good stuff.

Have fun, Kevin... It's a heckuva challenge, but it's really neat when you start to master all the skills you need to fly instruments. :yes:
 
kevin47881 said:
While I certainly don't discount the advantages of ground discussion, I just don't do as well within that environment. The way my brain is wired I need to "do" in order to comprehend and learn.
Click to expand...

I hear you (pardon the pun); I work the same way. Still, to support Ron's advice, it does help to at least listen to the concepts before working them in the air. I think people who are wired to "do" as we are benefit greatly from having the advance notice. Prep the brain, then go out and do it.

Sounds like your steep turns in the PPL training were taught by my first instructor. It sure is easy to do a 45deg bank in the Archer by cranking in 2 turns of trim. Holding altitude is a non-issue. The trick (and the real piloting) comes from mastering the turns without pitch or power changes.

And, if steep turns under the hood are ATP maneuvers, how come I had to do them in IR training? No fair!!!:D
 
Pay close attention to the altimeter and do NOT attempt to use the VSI.
 
I appreciate the comments/suggestions/recommendations from each and every one of you!

Looks like this weekend will get me out from under the hood and into some actual!
 
Heh, heh, could be.

We also did partial panel work in full actual conditions - rain pounding the windscreen, plane bouncing around. Now that was a full workload!
 
Even though steep turns are no longer part of the IR practical test, they remain part of the PIC IR training syllabus because they give you a feel for the airplane in the sorts of extreme attitudes in which you can find yourself if your autopilot or electric trim runs away, or you get distracted and don't notice the airplane falling off into a diving spiral. I strongly encourage all IR trainees to get their instructor to include steep turns under the hood (full panel only -- the TC pegs out before you get to 45 bank) in their IR training syllabus before they get to unusual attitude recoveries.
 
Ron Levy said:
Even though steep turns are no longer part of the IR practical test, they remain part of the PIC IR training syllabus because they give you a feel for the airplane in the sorts of extreme attitudes in which you can find yourself if your autopilot or electric trim runs away, or you get distracted and don't notice the airplane falling off into a diving spiral. I strongly encourage all IR trainees to get their instructor to include steep turns under the hood (full panel only -- the TC pegs out before you get to 45 bank) in their IR training syllabus before they get to unusual attitude recoveries.
Click to expand...

My CFII has had me do them, and it is instructive. I agree that this should be included in the training, even if you won't be tested on them in the check ride. Besides, who wants to fly just to minimum standards?
 
Alright Ron, I did it your way tonight (I may be stubborn but I'm not stupid). Prior to flight we reviewed the local approach plate and steep turns for 45 minutes before heading out. The result...steep turns were much better and I recalled each step down on the plate without looking (the CFII had the plate in his lap and made me call it out all the way down). Wouldn't you know it, I took the hood off at DH and there was the runway!

Thanks to Ron and all others who provided input!
​
 
flyersfan31 said:
Heh, heh, could be.

We also did partial panel work in full actual conditions - rain pounding the windscreen, plane bouncing around. Now that was a full workload!
Click to expand...

I even did one better than that once: Partial panel, actual, unusual attitudes. :hairraise:

Of course, they weren't quite as unusual as they usually were :rofl: 'cuz I knew my CFII's name was on the flight plan and I knew he wouldn't bust ±100. :D
 
flyingcheesehead said:
I even did one better than that once: Partial panel, actual, unusual attitudes. :hairraise:

Of course, they weren't quite as unusual as they usually were :rofl: 'cuz I knew my CFII's name was on the flight plan and I knew he wouldn't bust ±100. :D
Click to expand...
Had I been your instructor, you would not have felt so smug, as I know how to get an altitude block. :evil grin:
 
Steep turns, as well as stalls and such, are a part of the basic instrument training in Chapter 5 of the Instrument Flying Handbook, FAA-H-8083-15.

The Handbook is the FAA's way of standardizing the training. It's too bad they don't test these maneuvers, because it is obvious that many instructors are not teaching these basic maneuvers because they are not in the PTS. Too bad for the student. I only post this in hopes that some instructors, and maybe some interested students, may know that the PTS isn't a training handbook or syllabus.

Steep turns and stalls increase scan and cross-check and aircraft control, so that the PTS maneuvers will be much easier to achieve.

Flight Instructors are responsible to teach basic maneuveres which are not on the PTS, but are in the Flying Handbook as basic prep maneuvers for the advanced checkride maneuvers.
 
nosehair said:
Steep turns, as well as stalls and such, are a part of the basic instrument training in Chapter 5 of the Instrument Flying Handbook, FAA-H-8083-15.

The Handbook is the FAA's way of standardizing the training. It's too bad they don't test these maneuvers, because it is obvious that many instructors are not teaching these basic maneuvers because they are not in the PTS. Too bad for the student. I only post this in hopes that some instructors, and maybe some interested students, may know that the PTS isn't a training handbook or syllabus.

Steep turns and stalls increase scan and cross-check and aircraft control, so that the PTS maneuvers will be much easier to achieve.

Flight Instructors are responsible to teach basic maneuveres which are not on the PTS, but are in the Flying Handbook as basic prep maneuvers for the advanced checkride maneuvers.
Click to expand...

We're continuing with steep turns as well as power on/off stalls under the hood. I agree that this is helping me in aircraft control and scan!
 
Ron Levy said:
Had I been your instructor, you would not have felt so smug, as I know how to get an altitude block. :evil grin:
Click to expand...

Oh, so does mine, and he did lots of that... Just not that particular time.

You CFII's all have such evil grins. ;)
 
Quick progress report:

Things are moving ahead a little slower than I wanted due to work trips and a sinus infection.

We flew last night and did about an hour of partial panel. First he covered the AI and had me do some straight/level flight and timed turns. Than the DG "failed" along with the AI. Flew with both gauges covered and did better than expected.

After he realized I wouldn't kill us with the 4 pack, it was time to shoot the ILS partial panel. It wasn't perfect but the runway was right in front of me at DH!

So far I seem to have decent control of the bird but I anticipate hitting a plateau like I did during my PPL.

Tomorrow is tracking airways and intercepting intersections. Should be a good day.
​
 
26.6 hours in the book and things are finally starting to feel somewhat comfortable, if that's the right word. The GPS and ILS approaches are the most successful right now.

The Localizer puts me in line with the runway but I REALLY like the glide slope function of the ILS. Still need some work on nailing my speed/time better.

The VOR/DME approaches are first done twisting the OBS and then I do them again using the GPS. Can't say one is easier than the other but the GPS does minimize the work load. Fortunately I'm well within PTS on the arcs.

We did an NDB approach today and it went pretty well as when I went visual the runway environment was where it should have been.

I still think I'm not smooth enough on the controls but it is a lot better than it was a month ago. Hopefully more time will result in smoother control inputs.

We hope to schedule the check ride mid-October.
​
 
Last edited:
Fun (most of the time) and challenging are probably the best two words I have to describe it Adam.
​
 
Well, the minimum time (40 hours) has been met.

Last night the wx finally participated and we got an hour of actual in the books. Ceilings of 800' and vis about 2.5 made for an interesting hour.

The first approach was absolute junk. I got behind and ended up S turning the rest of the way in. The second approach was much more stabilized. The winds at 3,000 were about 50k :hairraise: Downwind was about 155k g.s. Inbound was about 60k g.s. with a 15 degree crab to keep the needle centered.

I must be a glutten for punishment as we're going to do it again tonight since the pea soup has settled in around us.

Oh well, the only way to get better is to ride that ride again.:eek:
 
You weren't unstable with S-turns. You were providing separation for the imaginary C-152 on the ILS ahead of you. :D

That sounds like a fun transition with the winds. I hope it's a bit smoother tonight. Good luck with it... and have fun!

I couldn't get enough actual during my instrument training. It was almost always clear. But, come time for my commercial training... we had to cancel a number of times due to IMC. :rolleyes:
 
It's all worthwhile when you break out at minimums and the runway is where it's supposed to be.
 
Tonight was much better than yesterday. We did about 6 trips around the hold and two ILS approaches. The circuits were timing out right at a minute and the approaches were stabilized.

The only snafu was when I advised ATC I was going to go missed (about 10 minutes prior to landing) he provided the heading and altitude. That's what he said. What I heard was the heading and altitude and began changing course until the II asked what the he** I was doing. Oops, heard the heading and altitude correctly just missed the fact it was for the missed.

Still learning.:yes:
 
kevin47881 said:
What I heard was the heading and altitude and began changing course until the II asked what the he** I was doing. Oops, heard the heading and altitude correctly just missed the fact it was for the missed.

Still learning.:yes:
Click to expand...

BTDT :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top