Airspeed is... WTF... alive?

Phillip said:
Because you don't need it for a safe VFR flight. I was taught to fly via external references (ground/sky in the windshield, for ex), rather than by the instruments.
At takeoff various crucial things can happen. You can have a runway excursion(incursion?), you can have wildlife on the runway, wind gusts, birds.. I'd rather not be caught looking inside.
Click to expand...

Sure you can cover the whole panel up and be successful 99% of the time VFR. But what if you don't cover that panel up, glance at the oil pressure reading zero during takeoff roll, would you continue or abort? Point is it only takes a second to glance at instruments early in the takeoff roll and then return outside for the remainder of takeoff.
 
If you go fast enough, it will fly. Otherwise, it won't.
Pertains to every aircraft I've ever flown.

It's the journey from throttle up to rotate that can get exciting.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Of course not. And just how many people DO just that?
Click to expand...

Not many, but I wasn't exaggerating. I guess since my early flying years consisted of mostly flying old tube and fabric taildraggers, I was never too concerned about the ASI during the take off roll...or often even in flight and on approach/landing. ASI failure is a total non-event in VFR airplanes.
 
Last edited:
Phillip said:
Because you don't need it for a safe VFR flight. I was taught to fly via external references (ground/sky in the windshield, for ex), rather than by the instruments.
At takeoff various crucial things can happen. You can have a runway excursion(incursion?), you can have wildlife on the runway, wind gusts, birds.. I'd rather not be caught looking inside.
Click to expand...

No, this is not correct according to Sec. 91.205: (excerpted for brevity)

(b) Visual-flight rules (day). For VFR flight during the day, the following instruments and equipment are required:

(1) Airspeed indicator.

It's the FIRST thing indicated for VFR day operations. You must have an operating ASI before you can legally fly.
 
mscard88 said:
Sure you can cover the whole panel up and be successful 99% of the time VFR. But what if you don't cover that panel up, glance at the oil pressure reading zero during takeoff roll, would you continue or abort? Point is it only takes a second to glance at instruments early in the takeoff roll and then return outside for the remainder of takeoff.
Click to expand...

You can run an engine without OP for some time. Probably quite a long time, if we are talking your typical naturally aspirated 4,6 cyl Lycoming or Continental. Remember you've checked OP on runup, right? Why bother with the second check on takeoff? Now fuel starvation is whole different level of urgency.
 
So you'd continue takeoff after noticing zero OP early in the takeoff instead of aborting to be cautious?
 
labbadabba said:
No, this is not correct according to Sec. 91.205: (excerpted for brevity)

(b) Visual-flight rules (day). For VFR flight during the day, the following instruments and equipment are required:

(1) Airspeed indicator.

It's the FIRST thing indicated for VFR day operations. You must have an operating ASI before you can legally fly.
Click to expand...

I know the TOMATO FLAMES. My point was not the legality but rather the safe operation. VFR without ASI is safe, albeit illegal.
 
Phillip said:
You can run an engine without OP for some time. Probably quite a long time, if we are talking your typical naturally aspirated 4,6 cyl Lycoming or Continental.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily and certainly not without damaging your engine.
Phillip said:
Remember you've checked OP on runup, right? Why bother with the second check on takeoff?
Click to expand...
Did you bring it up to takeoff power/RPM during the runup?

I know people who had fine Oil Pressure on the runup and then it dropped to zero when they throttled up for the takeoff.
 
Phillip said:
I know the TOMATO FLAMES. My point was not the legality but rather the safe operation. VFR without ASI is safe, albeit illegal.
Click to expand...
So....if you KNOW that you are required to have it....why are you so against checking to see that you do indeed have it? You have not provided any valid reason not to, and you are clearly not flying a Pitts off a 30' wide runway....
 
mscard88 said:
So you'd continue takeoff after noticing zero OP early in the takeoff instead of aborting to be cautious?
Click to expand...
No, just like the ASI....he wouldn't check. See no evil.....hear no evil....

What you don't see, obviously isn't a problem and therefore nothing to stop you from committing acts of aviation.
 
mscard88 said:
So you'd continue takeoff after noticing zero OP early in the takeoff instead of aborting to be cautious?
Click to expand...

Depends on the situation. If it is takeoff vs going into the trees/fence at the end of the short runway I'd go for takeoff. Remember that OP was checked on runup?
 
Fearless Tower said:
I know people who had fine Oil Pressure on the runup and then it dropped to zero when they throttled up for the takeoff.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Run-up is great, but you don't test things at full power. That's why you take the two seconds required to check again during takeoff roll.
 
Phillip said:
Depends on the situation. If it is takeoff vs going into the trees/fence at the end of the short runway I'd go for takeoff. Remember that OP was checked on runup?
Click to expand...

So you wouldn't be concerned about "gliding" (if you don't stall it) into those trees with a dead engine when you could have aborted and flown another day? :eek:
 
Cajun_Flyer said:
Exactly. Run-up is great, but you don't test things at full power. That's why you take the two seconds required to check again during takeoff roll.
Click to expand...
Learn about engine lubrication, you'll find things that will surprise and educate you.
 
mscard88 said:
So you wouldn't be concerned about "gliding" (if you don't stall it) into those trees with a dead engine when you could have aborted and flown another day? :eek:
Click to expand...

The engine will be fine for quite some time. It is not that easy to kill. Parts are lubricated. The oil film will stay for a bit. But you do it your way, and I'll do it mine.

Let me ask you a question in turn. You loose OP reading, how do you know it is the OP and not the gauge at fault? Why would you deliberately turn an inherently manageable situation into a crash due to a faulty reading?
 
Phillip said:
Learn about engine lubrication, you'll find things that will surprise and educate you.
Click to expand...

I have. I still prefer to cross all my t's and dot all my i's before going airborne. I also like listening to my CFI's advice, since I 100% trust him and his judgement. I also think at this point in my training I should be going by what the FAA says is safest. After all, I have two kids I want to go home to after I land (...preferably not on someone's farm or, worse, on someone's house).


Good luck and safe flying...
 
Phillip said:
Learn about engine lubrication, you'll find things that will surprise and educate you.
Click to expand...

Learn about engine failures at 300' AGL, you'll find things that will surprise and educate you.

Which concept is the one that will more aid in preventing an untimely demise?
 
Last edited:
Cajun_Flyer said:
I also like listening to my CFI's advice, since I 100% trust him and his judgement. I also think at this point in my training I should be going by what the FAA says is safest.
Good luck and safe flying...
Click to expand...

Sorry, but you've got it all wrong. FAA says you and you alone (PIC) are responsible for the safety of the flight. Can't hide behind "authority argument" here :) You alone get to decide what is safe, and face the consequences for the decision. FAA in turn allows you to break every single rule in the book should you consider it instrumental for the safety of the flight, i.e in emergency.
 
Phillip said:
Let me ask you a question in turn. You loose OP reading, how do you know it is the OP and not the gauge at fault? Why would you deliberately turn an inherently manageable situation into a crash due to a faulty reading?
Click to expand...

Very well could be the gauge. I'd still abort to check it out instead of rolling the dice and have the engine seize up, and quicker than what you're alluding to. Fewer options available to you and possible injury/death if you continue instead of aborting.
 
Phillip said:
Sorry, but you've got it all wrong. FAA says you and you alone (PIC) are responsible for the safety of the flight. Can't hide behind "authority argument" here :) You alone get to decide what is safe, and face the consequences for the decision. FAA in turn allows you to break every single rule in the book should you consider it instrumental for the safety of the flight, i.e in emergency.
Click to expand...

She's a Student Pilot and learning to be a safe pilot. Nothing wrong with listening to her instructor than go by your reasoning.
 
Phillip said:
The engine will be fine for quite some time. It is not that easy to kill. Parts are lubricated. The oil film will stay for a bit. But you do it your way, and I'll do it mine.

Let me ask you a question in turn. You loose OP reading, how do you know it is the OP and not the gauge at fault? Why would you deliberately turn an inherently manageable situation into a crash due to a faulty reading?
Click to expand...

Are you inferring that a takeoff cannot be aborted safely?
 
Cajun_Flyer said:
I also like listening to my CFI's advice, since I 100% trust him and his judgement.
Click to expand...

While I happen to agree with your CFI and the FAA, this is a dangerous mindset to get into. Better to verify that your CFI has given you proper advice, and follow your own advice once you have determined the correct path.

A CFI is nothing more than a pilot that has an additional rating.

edit: - in fact, that is my new signature now. I inspired myself.
 
While we must be able to fly the airplane should an ASI malfunction occur, it is not recommended to fly with a dead ASI. Heck, it ain't even legal. :)

Phillip, when you train for your IR eventually, you will learn to call "airspeed alive" and once you lift off, you will check other gauges and call "altimeter and VSI alive". You better. Because if you don't check and enter IMC with these three inop, good luck to you, it won't be easy getting back down safely.

Is it required to call out instrument readings? Nope. Is it good practice to keep one sharp and on target? Sure.
 
mscard88 said:
Very well could be the gauge. I'd still abort to check it out instead of rolling the dice and have the engine seize up, and quicker than what you're alluding to. Fewer options available to you and possible injury/death if you continue instead of aborting.
Click to expand...
Not in the hypothetical situation we were discussing. If you abort you are virtually guaranteed injury or death. If you continue (remember, engine is pulling normally and all you have is zero OP reading) with takeoff you'll have a choice to do a 180, do a full pattern or (rather unlikely) go in the trees if you do loose it at 300. But at least you'll have options other than just binning it.
 
Phillip said:
Sorry, but you've got it all wrong. FAA says you and you alone (PIC) are responsible for the safety of the flight. Can't hide behind "authority argument" here :) You alone get to decide what is safe, and face the consequences for the decision. FAA in turn allows you to break every single rule in the book should you consider it instrumental for the safety of the flight, i.e in emergency.
Click to expand...

I'm only PIC when I'm solo and when I'm solo, I'm doing what I've learned from a very competent man. He'll be the first to attest that I don't hide behind his authority, as I question things at every chance and sometimes deviate from "his methods" to methods that work better for me. I'm not afraid to call him out on things if I don't think they are right. However, in the case of checking instruments and gauges during takeoff roll, I think he is correct to advise such and that it is unnecessarily dangerous to do otherwise.

By the way, anti-authority is one of the five hazardous attitudes we should be cautious of...

"Anti-Authority: aka, “Don’t tell me.”
This attitude is found in people who do not like anyone telling them what to do. In a sense, they are saying, “No one can tell me
what to do.” They may be resentful of having someone tell them what to do, or may regard rules, regulations, and procedures as
silly or unnecessary. However, it is always your prerogative to question authority if you feel it is in error."

There's nothing wrong with questioning things or figuring out what ways make most sense for us individually, but certain things are put in place for very good reasons.

Regarding the FAA - according to them (or at least one of the questions they have put on the written exam), you should trust your instruments over your senses. And, as someone else pointed out, a functioning ASI is required for all VFR flights. Sure, you can throw all the rules out the window in the case of an emergency, but the goal here is to avoid such emergencies. Most can be avoided by following those initial rules and carrying out appropriate safety checks.

Being that we are now going in circles and I don't care for beating dead horses, I'm going to join Timbeck2 and pull the ejection handle here...
 
Last edited:
Phillip said:
The engine will be fine for quite some time. It is not that easy to kill. Parts are lubricated. The oil film will stay for a bit. But you do it your way, and I'll do it mine.

Let me ask you a question in turn. You loose OP reading, how do you know it is the OP and not the gauge at fault? Why would you deliberately turn an inherently manageable situation into a crash due to a faulty reading?
Click to expand...

At constant throttle, this is true. The engine can last some time with no oil pressure.

However, with increasing throttle, the engine requires increasing oil pressure to maintain the film. If this is not present, you hope the rod gets thrown while still on the ground, but it might happen just a bit later.
 
Cajun_Flyer said:
I'm only PIC when I'm solo and when I'm solo, I'm doing what I've learned from a very competent man. He'll be the first to attest that I don't hide behind authority, as I question things at every chance and sometimes deviate from "his methods" to methods that work better for me. In the case of checking instruments and gauges during takeoff roll, I think he is correct to advise such and that it is unnecessarily dangerous to do otherwise.
Click to expand...

Are you sure this is true? Reference "logging vs. acting." I'm not saying one way or the other, but give it some thought.

By the way, anti-authority is one of the five hazardous attitudes we should be cautious of...

"Anti-Authority: aka, “Don’t tell me.”
This attitude is found in people who do not like anyone telling them what to do. In a sense, they are saying, “No one can tell me
what to do.” They may be resentful of having someone tell them what to do, or may regard rules, regulations, and procedures as
silly or unnecessary. However, it is always your prerogative to question authority if you feel it is in error."
Click to expand...

You'd have to say that a CFI is in a position of authority to apply this logic. They aren't. They are simply instructing you.

Regarding the FAA - according to them (or at least one of the questions they have put on the written exam), you should trust your instruments over your senses. And, as someone else pointed out, a functioning ASI is required for all VFR flights. Sure, you can throw all the rules out the window in the case of an emergency, but the goal here is to avoid such emergencies. Most can be avoided by following those initial rules and carrying out appropriate safety checks.
Click to expand...

This is the right point and attitude to combat Phillip's nonsense. Trust your instruments. Always.
 
Phillip said:
Not in the hypothetical situation we were discussing. If you abort you are virtually guaranteed injury or death. If you continue (remember, engine is pulling normally and all you have is zero OP reading) with takeoff you'll have a choice to do a 180, do a full pattern or (rather unlikely) go in the trees if you do loose it at 300. But at least you'll have options other than just binning it.
Click to expand...

Okkkkkkkkk, instead of aborting with enough remaining runway, or aborting and ground speed decreasing rapidly as you run off the end of the runway and possibly into your trees, and letting the wings take the punishment while the your safer in the fuselage.
 
BigBadLou said:
While we must be able to fly the airplane should an ASI malfunction occur, it is not recommended to fly with a dead ASI. Heck, it ain't even legal. :)

Phillip, when you train for your IR eventually, you will learn to call "airspeed alive" and once you lift off, you will check other gauges and call "altimeter and VSI alive". You better. Because if you don't check and enter IMC with these three inop, good luck to you, it won't be easy getting back down safely.

Is it required to call out instrument readings? Nope. Is it good practice to keep one sharp and on target? Sure.
Click to expand...

I understand IMC is different game altogether. While you have more protection against other traffic, due to airspace reservation, correct ASI/VSI/AI operation is essential for the safety of the flight. I'll get there, maybe even this year, cross my fingers.

So then your point is do the ASI callout because you'll do it in IMC and you may as well do it the same way every time? I can live with that line of reasoning.
 
Last edited:
I'm pretty sure that somewhere in the back of my head, I wondered if the airspeed was not only alive, but also strangely sentient when it was above zero on the ground with the aircraft shut down, and was changing on a -10F night in Nowhere, NE.

Enough so that unlike the phrase usually being used for TAA cockpits, and computers, I pointed at it and said to Jesse, "What the hell is that doing?!"

Haha. One of the most interesting static AND ram air system blockages I've ever seen. Best guess later was condensation that turned to ice and the warm cockpit was slowly cooling lowering the static pressure and causing the ASI to show faster and faster while the airplane cooled down.
 
Cajun_Flyer said:
Being that we are now going in circles and I don't care for beating dead horses, I'm going to join Timbeck2 and pull the ejection handle here...
Click to expand...

Oh c'mon Cajun, this is fun and you're presenting great arguments! :rofl:
 
Cajun_Flyer said:
Being that we are now going in circles and I don't care for beating dead horses, I'm going to join Timbeck2 and pull the ejection handle here...
Click to expand...



(yells from the ground) Make sure you grab your first aid kit before you punch out. The ground is rough and hard and I cut my knee on a rock. I'm down here doing the Peter Griffin thing.
 
It takes literally a half a second to look see your airspeed is alive. Takes another half second to make sure your gauges are green. Both of things are very critical to the first few moments of an IFR flight, or any flight. Not checking them is just flat negligent.

I have had the airspeed indicator not come alive before. I was in VMC, but catching it through 30-40 knots gave me plenty of time to safely stop the plane and fix the problem.

I have also had my the oil pressure drop to 0 on a takeoff run. Had a lose tube. Had I taken off, I would have probably been landing in the desert somewhere.

Not checking those things on the takeoff run to "keep my eyes outside" is just stupid. Fly the plane first, and in this case, make sure the plane wants to fly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top