To be as safe as you can possibly be??
All of them..
If I am not perfectly safe with none of them, I need to hang it up as I'm not fit for duty.
To be as safe as you can possibly be??
All of them..
that are working! :wink2:
With the history of AF 447 & Colgan, can you demonstrate to me where instruments buy you any safety without having basic resolution skills?
Yup! And that's where instrument training is so helpful!And that's why you learn to recognize failures and how to fly partial panel!
If I am not perfectly safe with none of them, I need to hang it up as I'm not fit for duty.
Training to land with a dark panel is great for emergencies. A normal landing is not an emergency.
If your circling at night at minimums, (runway is in sight, so it meets your "no instrument needed for landing" criteria)and you're not looking at the instruments, how do you know that 1) you're not busting minimums, and 2) you're not climbing above MDA to put you back in the clouds??
The issue was not what I wanted, I want SVT & FLIR; the issue is what you need to be safe.
You didn't answer my question. On a circle at minimums, where anything lower is a bust and anything higher puts you back in it, how in the world do you stayed nailed to the altitude without the altimeter? Also, how do you're not landing on the wrong runway without the DG??
Your quote:
"That would be an accurate statement, once you see the runway, there is no longer a need for any instrument."
And, you must be the only person on the planet that's not susceptible to spatial disorientation.
I can't understand why someone wouldn't use that big 'ol panel just sitting there in front of them. It's free and it's really easy to look at.
Did you read Tim's "Black Hole" excerpt?? Referencing gauges/runway would help keep you from becoming a statistic..
What part of VFR night have you been missing? You said it cannot safely be done without instruments, I say that many PP candidates did it dark panel during their night training.
I don't resist using a panel, you over reached into idiocy when you said it couldn't be done because that's not true.
As for the above highlighted, there are multiple methods, how many can you think of?
What part of VFR night have you been missing? You said it cannot safely be done without instruments, I say that many PP candidates did it dark panel during their night training.
I don't resist using a panel, you over reached into idiocy when you said it couldn't be done because that's not true.
As for the above highlighted, there are multiple methods, how many can you think of?
+1 to this. In fact, at unfamiliar airports I do it in day (or especially dusk) VFR as well, just so I'm sure that I'm about to maneuver to line up on the right runway, and don't have to do an "oops, that should be 18, not 21" (which I've done before).One more thing, if you don't reference your DG on final, how do you know you're not landing on the wrong runway??
+1 to this. In fact, at unfamiliar airports I do it in day (or especially dusk) VFR as well, just so I'm sure that I'm about to maneuver to line up on the right runway, and don't have to do an "oops, that should be 18, not 21" (which I've done before).
On the rest of it, I'm with those who say to use everything you have. I'm all for training to be able to land with no panel, just like I understand the need to train partial panel for IFR. That doesn't mean I'm going to do it regularly. I've been fooled by the sound of the engine and the pitch attitude before and not realized that I was getting below my target airspeed (typically, when passing through a shear layer). Sure, my sink rate told me something was up, but when I'm going into a black hole and all I have is a 2-PAPI, I want to know enough to be able to correct accurately before I have two reds.
I do NOT go into unfamiliar fields on a dark night without glideslope information.
How do you think people without DGs manage to land on the right runway? People with em land on the wrong one all the time. Too many runways with very similar headings that will make identifying by DG alone impossible.One more thing, if you don't reference your DG on final, how do you know you're not landing on the wrong runway??
The indecent/accident reports are FULL of "wrong runway" reports. The airlines are known to do it, too.
If i was evaluating you for a job and we were landing at night VFR and if you ignored the panel, you would be packing for your trip home!!
How do you think people without DGs manage to land on the right runway? People with em land on the wrong one all the time.
The most important thing to landing on the right runway is constantly asking yourself, "Does this make sense", pay attention to all the details of the airport and the runway and the surrounding city if present. Best way to do that is to look out the damn window.
A mag compass is required for VFR flight. Look at it for runway verification. (provided you know how to use it correctly)
There are too many wrong runway icedents/accidents and can be avoided with a simple verification that you are actually landing on the correct runway.
I'll bet if you asked anyone that has landed or taken off on a runway they'll tell you that it made sense at the time..
I'll also bet if ask them if they could go back in time and check the DG, they would say "yes"..but, that's just my opinion..
Use everything, and I mean everything, at your disposal to manage the flight safely.
Ignoring the DG on final is not good management..
Correction:
I'll bet if you asked anyone that has landed or taken off on a wrong runway they'll tell you that it made sense at the time..
Well that piece solidly shows that having the instrument is not important since even with it the pilots still don't use it.
[snip]
If you can't land without your panel on a nice VFR night on a lit runway safely -- you're too dependent on your panel.
Henning,
Your logic is baffling. I've argued (along with others) that during VFR conditions, reference to instruments may be warranted regardless of ceiling and visibility especially during the night. Someone points out an accident where the crew did not reference a basic instrument resulting in an accident and you state that having the instrument is not important since the accident occurred anyway? Duh. Did you miss the point of the crew having to reference the instrument for it to make a difference?
When did you become a troll?
... a complete set of basic flying skills....
You don't need any instruments landing VFR day or night if you have a complete set of basic flying skills, end of story.
The day I was told I needed an instrument to land on a VFR night and then when I countered that I keep getting told about IFR situations and situations where if the pilots had proper training and ability in basic stick and rudder skills they could have avoided an accident that they had the "required" instrument for.
You don't need any instruments landing VFR day or night if you have a complete set of basic flying skills, end of story.
The day I was told I needed an instrument to land on a VFR night and then when I countered that I keep getting told about IFR situations and situations where if the pilots had proper training and ability in basic stick and rudder skills they could have avoided an accident that they had the "required" instrument for.
You don't need any instruments landing VFR day or night if you have a complete set of basic flying skills, end of story.
I guess all those 10,000 hour ATPs that crashed in the night VFR simulator study lacked basic flying skills. I never posted anything about IFR scenarios, others did. I've always contended that on particularly dark nights in perfect VMC where there aren't a lot of lights on the ground, just seeing the runway lights and never crosschecking your instruments is a recipe for CFIT. You basic stick and rudder skills won't save you if you succumb to a night-time illusion and never realize it until you're a smoking hole in the ground. It's happened to better stick and rudder pilots than you, believe me.
Yes, I think the current batch of ATPs is lacking in basic skills, it's proven over and over, the ones in current contention are Colgan and AF447. The FAA it seems is also coming to this determination. My bet is that if aviation continues in the current vein spins will be required training again within 2 decades.
You can put in the time and practice to learn the visual cues and guard against the "illusions" which are mostly because of unfamiliarity.
It's happened to better stick and rudder pilots than you, believe me.
...but they have everything to do with inadequate skills....The Colgan and AF447 accidents have absolutely nothing to do with night illusions and spatial disorientation. Pilots make errors for a multitude of different reasons, poor stick and rudder skills are only one. The danger of an illusion is your mind is tricked into thinking you know what is happening when you do not..
...but they have everything to do with inadequate skills....
Just turn off the panel lights. I've flown many patterns that way, because that's all we had to do. Even went to different airports, turned off the lights, and flew pattern with many different scenerios. I logged about 20 hours night, because that's the only time I could fly during the week, before my checkride. Even did a bunch of short soft field, engine out, practice with no panel lights. The 360* power off approach to land on a spot, with no instruments, in the pitch black, is interesting.If he came to me -- I'd cover up his attitude indicator, DG, airspeed indicator, and altimeter...and we'd master the pattern just like that.