Stupid Pilot Tricks

P

p1l0t

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Oct 4, 2011
Messages
562
Location
West Hartford, CT
Display Name
Display name:
p1l0t
A great pilot (USAF Ret. And currently AA) taught me this cool little trick called "The Rule of Two." Makes me wonder how many more are out there.. I thought it would be cool to have a whole thread of neat things like it.

BTW: The rule of two, for those of you who don't know, is a simple way to figure out the reciprocal heading or runway without looking at the DG. You simply carry 2 from on place to the next. For example 09 9-2=7 0+2=2 so you get 27. 36/18 24/06 15/33 ext... :D

<---<^>--->
 
p1l0t said:
BTW: The rule of two, for those of you who don't know, is a simple way to figure out the reciprocal heading or runway without looking at the DG. You simply carry 2 from on place to the next. For example 09 9-2=7 0+2=2 so you get 27. 36/18 24/06 15/33 ext... :D
Click to expand...
The 19/01 is an exception, right?

P.S. I thought it was about old wife things like manifold pressure in inches versus RPM.
 
Silly me. I always thought the rule of two was, "Think carefully. Do I want to do this maneuver twice?"
 
zaitcev said:
The 19/01 is an exception, right?
Click to expand...
Nope, this is a "new math" thing where 0+2=1.

Personally I've never had a problem with add 200 subtract 20 or add 20 subtract 200. Too bad there isn't a "metric angle unit" i.e. 360°= 1000millMA. OTOH, I suppose that if we used radians calculating an inverse heading would be as simple as adding or subtracting 1. Might make the runway numbering system a bit tricky though. Getting a clearance for what used to be runway 28 would become: "Cleared for takeoff runway 4.887"
 
zaitcev said:
The 19/01 is an exception, right?

P.S. I thought it was about old wife things like manifold pressure in inches versus RPM.
Click to expand...

Yes that is an exception. 02/20 works though. Trouble is 19 becomes 37 and if it's larger than 36 you must subtract 36 like the adf questions on the written..

<---<^>--->
 
gismo said:
Nope, this is a "new math" thing where 0+2=1.

Personally I've never had a problem with add 200 subtract 20 or add 20 subtract 200. Too bad there isn't a "metric angle unit" i.e. 360°= 1000millMA. OTOH, I suppose that if we used radians calculating an inverse heading would be as simple as adding or subtracting 1. Might make the runway numbering system a bit tricky though. Getting a clearance for what used to be runway 28 would become: "Cleared for takeoff runway 4.887"
Click to expand...

I just call out an overhead break and say the airport is now mine. "Any traffic please advise after getting out of my way" :eek: :rofl:
 
Here's one that generally works pretty well: True airspeed = indicated airspeed + (2 X altitude).

Example: 130 Kts indicated + (5,500 ft. X 2) = 141 Kts. TAS (5,500 being 5.5)
 
Judging distances.

Don't know how true for everyone, but an instructor told me once that as a landmark goes under the cowl, it's as many miles away as you are thousands of feet AGL.
Ex: You're 6,000'AGL and an airport disappears under the nose. It's 6 miles away.

Seems to me that there are too many variables for this to work: Pilot height, seat position, how big is the cowl, etc. - but oddly in my 172 it's pretty close. (As confirmed by GPS.)

YMMV
 
Last edited:
just Bill said:
Here's one that generally works pretty well: True airspeed = indicated airspeed + (2 X altitude).

Example: 130 Kts indicated + (5,500 ft. X 2) = 141 Kts. TAS (5,500 being 5.5)
Click to expand...

I like it! Somebody is getting how this thread works. :)

<---<^>--->
 
upstateny said:
Judging distances.

Don't know if how true for everyone, but an instructor told me once that as a landmark goes under the cowl, it's as many miles away as you are thousands of feet AGL.
Ex: You're 6,000'AGL and an airport disappears under the nose. It's 6 miles away.

Seems to me that there are too many variables for this to work: Pilot height, seat position, how big is the cowl, etc. - but oddly in my 172 it's pretty close. (As confirmed by GPS.)

YMMV
Click to expand...

I'm going to test this one out.

<---<^>--->
 
gismo said:
Nope, this is a "new math" thing where 0+2=1.

Personally I've never had a problem with add 200 subtract 20 or add 20 subtract 200. Too bad there isn't a "metric angle unit" i.e. 360°= 1000millMA. OTOH, I suppose that if we used radians calculating an inverse heading would be as simple as adding or subtracting 1. Might make the runway numbering system a bit tricky though. Getting a clearance for what used to be runway 28 would become: "Cleared for takeoff runway 4.887"
Click to expand...

<---<^>--->
 

Attachments

  • uploadfromtaptalk1323724902143.jpg
    uploadfromtaptalk1323724902143.jpg
    64 KB · Views: 15
The "rule of two thing" makes my brain hurt a little, and the exception renders it useless.
I'll either look at the DG or vertical card compass, if available- that's easy and foolproof. If neither is available, I'll conjure up a compass rose in my head and visualize that, adding or subtracting 180 as needed. If that ever fails me, I'll realize that I'm not fit to be flying that particular day. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top