VFR stuck on top, a confession

dmccormack said:
Take a VFR pilot up in the soup and say, "Your airplane."

Come back and let us know how long until you had to recover the airplane.
Click to expand...

Do you feel that will provide some insight as to how many VFR-only pilots land uneventfully after an inadvertent trek into IMC?
 
dmccormack said:
If I had time I could try this experiment with all 200,000 + VFR-only pilots, but I submit the results would be predictable...
Click to expand...

Perhaps. But while doing so would provide some data on the average length of time a VFR pilot maintains control of the airplane once in the soup, it says nothing about the number of VFR-only pilots that land uneventfully after an inadvertent trek into IMC.
 
I've never understood why that AOPA study put people who'd never flown the type through that. Seems like you'd want to see how they fare in the type they're used to flying, not something they've got almost no time in.

I always thought that orange plexi/blue goggles thing was nifty though.
 
I've read that the accident statistics for inadvertent entry into IMC are almost just as bad for IR pilots as for non-IR.
 
denverpilot said:
I've never understood why that AOPA study put people who'd never flown the type through that. Seems like you'd want to see how they fare in the type they're used to flying, not something they've got almost no time in.

I always thought that orange plexi/blue goggles thing was nifty though.
Click to expand...

My dad had the orange window covers / blue gogggles for one of his Navions. That was cool.

If you read the second reference, the main objective of the study was to find a way to train minimial experience VFR pilots how to do a U turn under IMC. The first part of the test was just the "baseline".

There then followed 4 periods of instruction in the 180 degree turn
technique (see below) that was the actual subject of the study

* By the end of this training, the subjects had between 1.5 and 3 hours
(mean 2 hours) simulated IF, practising the technique.

* The subjects were again tested by simulating instrument conditions, and
asked to transition from cruise to slow flight, make a 180 degree turn, and
establish a controlled descent. Each subject was tested 3 times.

* Of the 60 trials, 59 were successfully completed. The unsuccessful one
involved the failure to set power to maintain altitude and continued the
descent in a way that violated the success definition. It was considered
that control was not lost, and that if the aircraft had not become visual
below cloud, the impact would have been survivable.

The technique:

Throughout, center the turn needle using the rudder.
1) Hands off the control column
2) Lower the landing gear
3) Reduce power
4) Set trim to a predetermined position for slow flight (95 mph)
5) Adjust prop and power for approx level flight at 95 mph
6) Note the compass heading
7) Turn using the rudder
8) Roll out with appropriate lead or lag
9) Center the turn needle
10) Reduce power for a controlled descent
Click to expand...
 
I have nothing to back this up but my guess is that people lose control in IMC not because they can't maintain control with the attitude indicator but that they get distracted by trying to search through the clouds for a familiar piece of the ground.
 
roncachamp said:
Perhaps. But while doing so would provide some data on the average length of time a VFR pilot maintains control of the airplane once in the soup, it says nothing about the number of VFR-only pilots that land uneventfully after an inadvertent trek into IMC.
Click to expand...

Sure -- VFR pilots who maintained control and had a nice airport directly beneath them and in sight did very well.

The rest, not so much...
 
The study in the 50's was intended to prove that private pilot candidates should be required to have some hood time. But the methodology for the control was to cover up the HI and AI and then uncover them, provide the training, and look for improvement. Talk about a rigged test.

I flew into IMC myself unintentionally as a pre-solo student pilot doing pattern practice while in the climbing turn to crosswind when the ceiling suddenly lowered. I handed the airplane to the CFI level and in trim within the pattern... though still in IMC. I was much more worried about how we were going to get out of the clouds and where I was in relation to the buildings downtown than loss of control.

The 178 seconds thing is a sham, and when people realize it is, they think it's because of their superior natural skills and they've got what it takes to fly through clouds. In reality, it's because of a flawed study that accomplished what it was intended to do, but might have actually increased the amount of VFR into IMC in the long run by disguising why flying in IMC is dangerous.
 
Thing is - a Bo will drop a wing and start a descending spiral in IMC quite easily. Until you're used to it, it's a bit of a transition. It absolutely wasn't a fair way to evaluate people's ability to survive when they're not used to a type that does that.

Often times on a flight review - for an unusuall attitude - I'll ask someone to get the trim as perfect as they can then look down and close their eyes and I won't do anything. It's interesting watching all the different types out there and how they respond to that. A Bonanza is one of the quicker ones for how quickly it'll drop a wing and go into a descending spiral. Whereas on a well rigged Archer I just give up because nothing exciting happens unless a wing catches a huge bump.
 
jesse said:
Thing is - a Bo will drop a wing and start a descending spiral in IMC quite easily. Until you're used to it, it's a bit of a transition. It absolutely wasn't a fair way to evaluate people's ability to survive when they're not used to a type that does that.

Often times on a flight review - for an unusuall attitude - I'll ask someone to get the trim as perfect as they can then look down and close their eyes and I won't do anything. It's interesting watching all the different types out there and how they respond to that. A Bonanza is one of the quicker ones for how quickly it'll drop a wing and go into a descending spiral. Whereas on a well rigged Archer I just give up because nothing exciting happens unless a wing catches a huge bump.
Click to expand...

V tail I'd agree IF the pilot doesn't have a yaw damper OR feet on the pedals with reflexes developed over time....
 
dmccormack said:
V tail I'd agree IF the pilot doesn't have a yaw damper OR feet on the pedals with reflexes developed over time....
Click to expand...
Try it with the straight tail as well. It just has the tendency to drop a wing, tighten up a bit, descend, and gain a lot of airspeed on its own. I'm not saying it's a bad thing - I'm just saying for pilots that aren't used to airplanes that require a little more attention it's not a fair test.
 
jesse said:
Try it with the straight tail as well. It just has the tendency to drop a wing, tighten up a bit, descend, and gain a lot of airspeed on its own. I'm not saying it's a bad thing - I'm just saying for pilots that aren't used to airplanes that require a little more attention it's not a fair test.
Click to expand...


Hmm....

I never noticed that tendency in an A36. But if you're comparing to stone-stable Cessnas, ok...

:dunno:
 
dmccormack said:
Hmm....

I never noticed that tendency in an A36. But if you're comparing to stone-stable Cessnas, ok...

:dunno:
Click to expand...
You tend to learn to correct it. Just try taking your hands off in various types and see how they respond. Time how long each type takes. It's an interesting experiment.
 
jesse said:
Try it with the straight tail as well. It just has the tendency to drop a wing, tighten up a bit, descend, and gain a lot of airspeed on its own. I'm not saying it's a bad thing - I'm just saying for pilots that aren't used to airplanes that require a little more attention it's not a fair test.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't call it a good thing. Sounds like bad manners to me.
 
jesse said:
Not really - just a matter of knowing your machine. I love Bonanzas.
Click to expand...

A friend of mine has a really, really nice V35B. He transitioned several years ago from an Arrow II. His first comment to me was that it could get away from you pretty fast. As long as you are properly trained, and know what to expect it isn't an issue. That is the price for higher performance, but it is not a difficult plane to fly by any means.
 
Anthony said:
Boy that brings back memories. I had made a flight of about 2 hours, and then decided not to top off before going back. As my plane has a 5 hour range, and I had a tailwind, I thought three hours of fuel for an 1.5 hour flight back would be plenty.
...
But, I was kicking myself for not topping off, and having even more flexibility to turn around or divert elsewwhere.
Click to expand...

The flight that taught me the most valuable lesson about fuel was the one where I topped off from the 6.5 hours of fuel remaining on board up to the 7.2 the plane was capable of carrying, and was really glad I did.
 
MSPAviator said:
I asked a DPE whether or not I could use an iPad with Foreflight. The answer was yes, but not on the checkride.
Click to expand...

Hmmm. Why not on a checkride? :dunno: If the FAA not only allows it for part 91 but has approved it for many part 135 operators, it should be allowed on a checkride.

That said, the examiner should be allowed to fail it as well...
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Hmmm. Why not on a checkride? :dunno: If the FAA not only allows it for part 91 but has approved it for many part 135 operators, it should be allowed on a checkride.

That said, the examiner should be allowed to fail it as well...
Click to expand...
How many examiners "fail" their examinees paper charts? ("Oops, the door just popped open and sucked out the chart you had sitting on the right seat" or "your passenger just used your chart as an improvised sick sack") Certainly, one could argue about whether it's more likely that a door will pop open or that a battery will run down, but a failure is definitely possible for both electronic and paper.
 
And if the "failure" is a "dead battery" is one allowed to whip out a charging cable or plug in an inverter in a 12VDC aircraft with a cigar lighter plug? ;)

Kinda like pulling three flashlights from your bag... Haha.
 
Well, if the iPad is at 100% charge at takeoff it isn't likely the battery will suddenly go dead in flight. Of course electronic gadgets can fail unexpectedly in lots of other ways too. The door popping open and sucking out your chart is possible, but requires a pretty far-fetched coincidence to happen.

Probably best to carry a paper chart for backup on the checkride... or an iPhone if you have one.

Which reminds me... my vrotate subscription didn't come this cycle. I need to give them a call...
 
FWIW, my iPad and FF for gifts to myself after passing my checkride. I used paper. I found some people are resistent to change (coming into the digital age).
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Hmmm. Why not on a checkride? :dunno: If the FAA not only allows it for part 91 but has approved it for many part 135 operators, it should be allowed on a checkride.

That said, the examiner should be allowed to fail it as well...
Click to expand...
Probably for the same reason that other commercial flight planning software is not allowed. The student should be able to demonstrate an understanding of the concepts, button pushing/scrolling is not as effective as is going through the steps in manually planning.

For his commercial pilot checkride a 121 FE buddy of mine was pink slipped because he used software provided by his company dispatcher. Producing a sheet of numbers to the 3rd decimal wasn't good enough. :rofl:
 
Jaybird180 said:
FWIW, my iPad and FF for gifts to myself after passing my checkride. I used paper. I found some people are resistent to change (coming into the digital age).
Click to expand...
I love paper, I love the steps involved in planning. However, just like how crazy excited I got when I first used a 430/530, I suspect I'll react the same to FF when I get around to it.

And yes, I did lose half a sectional out a popped door. It was funny, I was able to quickly grab the chart as it was half way out the door. It tore in half but the part I did save turned out to be what I needed for that flight.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
The flight that taught me the most valuable lesson about fuel was the one where I topped off from the 6.5 hours of fuel remaining on board up to the 7.2 the plane was capable of carrying, and was really glad I did.
Click to expand...
This sounds like a fun story. Have we heard this one yet?
 
gprellwitz said:
How many examiners "fail" their examinees paper charts? ("Oops, the door just popped open and sucked out the chart you had sitting on the right seat" or "your passenger just used your chart as an improvised sick sack") Certainly, one could argue about whether it's more likely that a door will pop open or that a battery will run down, but a failure is definitely possible for both electronic and paper.
Click to expand...

My examiner didn't, but my primary instructor did about halfway home on my first cross country. He popped his door open for a distraction to see how I would handle it, the chart I was using went from its assigned position on the glareshield right out the door. Fortunately I was ahead of the airplane and in familiar territory, had all my frequencies set and was on a heading for home 40 miles away, was a non-event as a student but a teachable moment.
 
mikea said:
I've read that the accident statistics for inadvertent entry into IMC are almost just as bad for IR pilots as for non-IR.
Click to expand...

I file IFR even if its MVFR and I think being extremely well prepared and ahead of the aircraft/situtation is just as important skills as attitude instrument flying or recognizing illusions. I'm paranoid though in IMC I want to be talking to ATC, GPS(s) all on the FPL, VORs tuned, hell I would have the ADF giving me a RB to an NDB if they were around. Handheld is always charged. Of course in Southern New England icing and T-storms (depending inversely on the time of year) are a much bigger problem than navigation. I also check pitot heat and carb heat a lot and sometimes even use them preventatively if the OAT is in the yellow arc (near FRZNG LVL).

<---<^>--->
 
Richard said:
This sounds like a fun story. Have we heard this one yet?
Click to expand...

Yup, at least a couple times. The short version: Arrow III KMSN-KAMW, widespread IFR, OVC022 or so at departure, forecast for OVC010 at the destination. About 40nm out I tune in the AWOS, it said OVC001. Tuned in DSM ATIS (~30nm away) and they said scattered at 9,000 so I figured maybe the AWOS was broken. Shot the approach AWOS wasn't broken after all. Went missed off the ILS, diverted to KDSM. In the 15 minutes between going missed and getting handed off to DSM tower on the ILS there, they cut FOUR new ATIS's, quickly going from that 9,000 scattered and 10SM vis down to 3/4SM OVC003. That is when I was VERY glad that I had enough fuel to fly all the way home and plus reserves, plus extra.

I made it in, the jet behind me made it in, and then the airport was below minimums for most of a day.
 
denverpilot said:
And if the "failure" is a "dead battery" is one allowed to whip out a charging cable or plug in an inverter in a 12VDC aircraft with a cigar lighter plug? ;)

Kinda like pulling three flashlights from your bag... Haha.
Click to expand...

I think it'd be funnier to pull three iPads from your bag. :rofl:
 
Richard said:
Probably for the same reason that other commercial flight planning software is not allowed. The student should be able to demonstrate an understanding of the concepts, button pushing/scrolling is not as effective as is going through the steps in manually planning.
Click to expand...

The only thing ForeFlight is going to do for you is draw a line, put in winds aloft and spit out Time/Distance/Fuel per leg. Anyone with a plotter and an E6B can learn how to do this quite easily, but after that it's just busywork. IMO, the important part of IFR flight planning is knowing all your minimum altitudes, knowing where ice/TStorms/VFR weather should be, and knowing what all your outs are.

I use ForeFlight to draw me a line and give me distances. I still use my brain for the rest. Maybe I'm a nerd, but I want to know the minimum OROCA's for my entire route, even if I'm on airways, so I know if I can accept the seemingly-inevitable-except-in-the-northeast "Cleared Direct"... So, I'm still going over the charts in detail, even though they happen to be on the screen of my iPad instead of on paper. I'm also more likely to have all the necessary charts for an unplanned diversion...
 
I got cleared direct every single time in the midwest with Jesse (except in KC), but I have yet to get cleared direct somewhere down here.
 
DavidWhite said:
I got cleared direct every single time in the midwest with Jesse (except in KC), but I have yet to get cleared direct somewhere down here.
Click to expand...

Ha different world. Here in the Northeast you file the TEC or preferred route and you probably get as filed. Otherwise they read you the TEC route.

<---<^>--->
 
p1l0t said:
Ha different world. Here in the Northeast you file the TEC or preferred route and you probably get as filed. Otherwise they read you the TEC route.

<---<^>--->
Click to expand...
The other day we got direct DBL (Red Table, in the Colorado Rockies) from NY Center. I couldn't believe it.
 
Route from HFD to PNE (Hartford to N.E. Philly) goes first Southeast to GON (Groton, CT) then West CCC JFK South to DIXIE and back north a bit adds like 30mi to the trip. They usually give you shortcuts along the way though if there isn't too much other IFR traffic.

<---<^>--->
 
Same thing happened to me just after getting my private certificate. Flew to Austin, TX and could not get out of the clouds. Called approach and was instructed to do a 180. Told them I could not do that and I was only 25 miles from the destination air port. They gave me flight followning and brought me in safely. I landed and called my wife to get me and the passenger I had flown in to pick up. Left the plane at the GA business there. Next day, I flew back with a flight instructor ( I was training for my instrument rating) and recovered the plane without incident except a angry wife.
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top