|
-
POSTING RULES

-
Donate yearly (please).
-
Advertise in here!
-
Today's Posts
|
Insert Pics
|

12-01-2014, 08:57 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Meridian ID, Aspen CO, Okemos MI
Posts: 2,645
|
|
Mike,
It was good seeing you the other day. One thought I have after reading this thread is - do you want to learn to fly in IFR conditions with an instructor that does not know your equipment enough to teach you? This is a good discussion for all parts of learning to fly.
There is no way an instructor can know every combination of systems we install in experimental airplanes. I believe there is a market for instructors that specialize in GRT, Dynon, Garmin, etc, systems. When I learned ACAD, I didn't ask a Microsoft instructor to teach me. They could show me how to get into the program but they can't teach me specifics.
If a person or the manufacture set up a system that they could instruct on, I would go to them to learn how to use it. I just spent a bucket of money on a Garmin system that I was thrilled can now display the "6 pack"! A day of instruction by someone that knows the system would make our flying safer and we would get full use out of the systems we buy.
Good luck on your IFR training.
__________________
rockwoodrv9a
Williamston MI
O-320 D2A
Awaiting DAR Inspection
|

12-01-2014, 09:49 PM
|
 |
Senior Curmudgeon
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Dayton Airpark, NV A34
Posts: 15,420
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockwoodrv9
Mike,
It was good seeing you the other day.
|
You too Rocky  , anytime.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockwoodrv9
One thought I have after reading this thread is - do you want to learn to fly in IFR conditions with an instructor that does not know your equipment enough to teach you? This is a good discussion for all parts of learning to fly.
|
I started this thread to get people thinking-------both the students, and the instructors. After reading the thread about using the accelerated course I saw a trend where it looked like folks had expectations that were all over the map concerning IFR training--------specially with non standard panels.
As it turns out, I have been extremely lucky to have Bob Turner close by, and to be able to pick his brains. Bob happens to fly a RV 10, and has GRT EFIS like I do, so he is my obvious choice to do at the early portion of my instruction with.
For those who do not have a Bob to help, this is something that should be on your radar-------at least IMHO.
__________________
Mike Starkey
VAF 909
Rv-10, N210LM.
Flying as of 12/4/2010
Phase 1 done, 2/4/2011 
Sold after 240+ wonderful hours of flight.
"Flying the airplane is more important than radioing your plight to a person on the ground incapable of understanding or doing anything about it."
|

12-02-2014, 01:40 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Posts: 671
|
|
We worked it out
I got my IFR in the VOR/NDB/glide slope days, then quit using it during a very slow build process. I needed some instruction to learn to use the GPS and get my Competency. Between me and my new/younger instructor, we had the panel pretty well figured out after a couple of VFR flights with me wearing a hood. He obviously had flown behind other EFIS type equipment and had no trouble adapting to my Trutrak. I think we both enjoyed the process. (He was glad to get out of the 172 for a while.) I'm drawing social security, but the hardest part of IFR to me is not the technology, but learning the system, staying ahead of the plane, being mentally flexible and keeping my skills up. My instructor showed great adaptability because he flys a lot of different equipment and has to adapt all the time. I think you're better off letting the instructor get some learning in on your dime and doing it in your own plane while he teaches you IFR. Besides, it's priceless when he/she has to ask you how to do this or that. (Never happened in my instructor's plane.)
John
Last edited by jpowell13 : 12-02-2014 at 01:47 AM.
|

12-02-2014, 02:17 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: North Tustin, CA
Posts: 63
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobTurner
All this button pushing - the EFIS, the autopilot, the GTN, .... - has to be practiced over and over until it's second nature. Remember that in the air, you'll devote 90% of your time to just watching the flight instruments, so all the button pushing has to be done in the other 10%. (and talking to ATC and engine management squeezed in too.) So the actual flight training will go much smoother if you've really mastered the button pushing first.
|
I've taught many people to fly instruments in both glass and analog airplanes, and I think the button pushing gets major focus from most people. That's where they start.
I also think it's the wrong approach. It's exactly opposite of where you should start. If you're devoting 90% of your time and energy to scanning instruments and essential flying, I hope there's an instructor on board.
When teaching an instrument student, I always start with basic aircraft control. I don't care if they know how to operate any of the systems. I don't care if it's glass or round gauges. I just want to see them flying level, making turns, climbing, descending, and doing those things in combination. No talking to ATC. No navigating. No button pushing of any kind. Just fly and learn to do it really well. Drill it until it's second nature.
Once that's truly mastered, I'll add in constant rate and speed climbs and descents. They key there is to know the power settings that give you specific speeds and performance. Once that's mastered, we can move on to tracking and intercepting courses. Then holds. THEN maybe we'll start talking about approaches.
It's a building-block method. In fact, it's very similar to private pilot instruction that way.
I don't understand instrument instruction that starts with flying approach procedures. That's like starting primary instruction with a solo cross country. It makes no sense. You must first establish a solid foundation of basic flying proficiency. Everything else is secondary.
Flying instruments is kind of like driving a manual transmission. You need to be proficient enough that it doesn't require major mental bandwidth, because you need that mental capacity for things like navigating, communicating, and so on.
If you're dedicating 90% of your mental focus to basic aircraft control, you're barely in control of the aircraft at all. Sadly, I see that a lot during recurrent instruction, IPCs, and so on.
Just my thoughts on it, of course.
--Ron
|

12-02-2014, 09:40 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Markham, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 220
|
|
and don't forget partial panel
Ron
Agree with everything you've said. My instructor spent the bulk of the initial time getting me straight and level under the hood
and doing exactly the same with partial panel was very beneficial.
Not much point trying to navigate your destination if you happen to be spiraling downward in the process.
Cheers.
Michael B.
College fund contributor 2014
|

12-02-2014, 12:36 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: North Tustin, CA
Posts: 63
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1bigdog
Not much point trying to navigate your destination if you happen to be spiraling downward in the process.
|
That was very philosophical!
Yes, partial panel is very important, especially with glass because the scan is typically much different after the failure than before it. With analog, you're simply omitting instrument(s) that don't work. The remaining gauges are still in the same place. But with glass, the standby source of information are often in a different place. Then you're probably using ground track in lieu of heading, and that comes from a different place than the HSI. You might have to navigate off a moving map, default nav page, or other source. Sometimes people don't appreciate the challenge until they've tried it.
|

12-02-2014, 01:17 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Livermore, CA
Posts: 6,797
|
|
Ron,
I agree with most everything you said about flight instruction (except perhaps you misinterpreted my "90%" comment - that was aimed at new students, and I think you will agree that it does take time until flight control runs in 'background mode'). But you didn't say when and where you would introduce the 'button pushing' stuff. I advocate doing that on the ground, before it's needed in the air. I think that saves the student time and especially money. You can do it all up front, or just before the lesson where it's needed. However, if you do it just before the lesson where it's needed, the student won't have mastered it yet. So again he will be 'practicing' in-flight, where training is most expensive.
I have another reason for doing all the ground training up front. I think it's very important for students to get some actual IMC experience. Unfortunately the local wx is frequently vmc. So I am willing to jump ahead in the syllubus to take advantage of an actual IMC day, even if it means I need to 'help' the student more than normal. But it is best if he has the button pushing needed mastered, so that he does as much of the flying as he can.
|

12-02-2014, 06:04 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: SoCal
Posts: 36
|
|
As a CFII, if you ask for something that I don't know, in some cases you will be paying for me to do my homework and figure it out. But I bring experience to the table and can usually get there quickly.
And if I don't know something I will tell you...that is a rare commodity.
I suggest treating your training like a construction contract. Here are the existing conditions and here is what I want it to look like in the end. How much it will it cost and how long will take? Any change orders (usually unforeseen conditions) will cost extra which can be agreed upon prior to authorization.
|

12-03-2014, 12:59 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: North Tustin, CA
Posts: 63
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobTurner
But you didn't say when and where you would introduce the 'button pushing' stuff. I advocate doing that on the ground, before it's needed in the air.
|
Definitely. As we've all discovered, a pilot's IQ drops by 10 points the minute he or she hits the starter.  So it definitely saves time and money to figure out the avionics on the ground. If you can hook up a GPU, so much the better.
The button pushing comes little by little. If the student is new to glass and doesn't know the panel at all, I work with them on the ground a bit, and when we first fly it's a VFR experience. When the instrument training starts, I help them with the buttonology if they need it.
It helps tremendously that IFR flying is very procedural. Eventually I start to help them less and less and they have to figure it out on their own.
I love IMC days. They're a wonderful opportunity for students to experience The Real Thing. Much better than leaving them to fly in actual IMC for the first time on their own! I'll bend my training plan considerably in order to get them actual IMC experience. It's valuable, and of course we can't control the weather so some flexibility is required.
|
| Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:11 AM.
|