Can you see the horizon?

iflyforfun

iflyforfun

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Jul 15, 2010
Messages
321
Location
Hong Kong
Display Name
Display name:
iflyforfun
Question for the instructors out there. I once had an instructor who insisted that "If you can't see the horizon over the nose of the aircraft, you are IFR". He would never allow the nose of the AC over the horizon and would immediately bark if it occured.

During a long climb, I'll often not be able to see the horizon over the nose. With great side visibility, it isn't a problem of losing spatial orientation (in my opinion). Granted, for a long climb at a steep angle, I'll often make a small turn left and right to make sure someone else isn't doing the same thing and climbing into me, but I never understood his strong objection.

Thoughts? Opinions?
 
iflyforfun said:
"If you can't see the horizon over the nose of the aircraft, you are IFR"
Click to expand...

As long as he lets you log IMC time :rofl:


Sometimes depending on the aircraft you might want to do those left and right turns when climbing for traffic avoidance (as you said), but climbing slow in order to see the horizon is stupid. You can still look left and right to maintain your attitude.

If you'd be flying like that about the mountains it will simply become dangerous because you won't be able to clear them.

Did he explain why he didn't want you to do that?
 
MachFly said:
Did he explain why he didn't want you to do that?
Click to expand...

Yes he did, "Because if you can't see the horizon, it is instrument conditions."

This came to mind as I was writing a comment of the accelerated IFR thread. It was the same instructor. He never gave me satisfactory answer but INSISTED that I climb nose low. I never understood ...
 
iflyforfun said:
Yes he did, "Because if you can't see the horizon, it is instrument conditions."

This came to mind as I was writing a comment of the accelerated IFR thread. It was the same instructor. He never gave me satisfactory answer but INSISTED that I climb nose low. I never understood ...
Click to expand...

You might want to think about a new instructor.

There will be scenarios where you'll be flying VFR and the horizon will simply not be there, this can happen due to haze, mountains, clouds (not IMC, just scattered clouds), or night. Also if you will continuously be relying mainly on horizon itself to maintain proper attitude I believe you will be more likely to depart straight and level flight due to a false horizon.
If the real horizon is there then it's usually a good indication to keeping your wings level, however you can fly straight and level with reference to other things, such as terrain and sky. If you're climbing and can't see anything directly ahead of you then you can look to the sides and you'll know whether you're level or not. You can actually experiment this, start you're typical Vy climb, close you're eyes, and have the instructor drop one wing 5 or 10 degrees (soft of like unusually attitude), then look up and without seeing the horizon in front of you I'm sure you'll be able to level the wings and continue a straight climb.
 
iflyforfun said:
"Because if you can't see the horizon, it is instrument conditions."
Click to expand...

Just to add to my previous post, FAA defines instrument conditions very differently. I'm sure everyone here will agree.
 
The statement is WRONG in many ways.

First, you are not IFR unless you are operating under instrument flight rules. The weather doesn't make you IFR. IFR allows you to operate in weather less than those permitted for VFR.

Instrument flight time can be logged if you are operating solely by reference to the instruments in actual or simulated instrument conditions. Note here that "actual instrument conditions" is not defined as "weather less than is legal VFR". There are conditions that are legal VFR (i.e., you have the prescribed visibility and cloud clearance) but are bad enough that you can not operate except by instruments.

Note that the horizon isn't necessarily a determining factor. There's been plenty of time I've been VFR without a real good horizon, but you can see the terrain locally and that's all you need to keep the shiny side up.
 
Sounds a little ridiculous.
I'm just thinking of all the places I've been where the horizon would be visible right up to the time you flew into it.
Most of the airports I fly out of you are Vy on climbout to miss trees, hills, buildings, kids on curbs, etc.
 
That seems a bit far fetched to me. If you can't see the horizon "Over the nose" because you are in a climb, that is not instrument conditions.
 
iflyforfun said:
Question for the instructors out there. I once had an instructor who insisted that "If you can't see the horizon over the nose of the aircraft, you are IFR". He would never allow the nose of the AC over the horizon and would immediately bark if it occured.
Click to expand...

Must make for some interesting takeoffs.
 
iflyforfun said:
Yes he did, "Because if you can't see the horizon, it is instrument conditions."
Click to expand...

The term "instrument conditions" does not appear in FAR Part 1 or the P/CG. Where it appears in the AIM it refers to meteorological conditions, not to aircraft attitude.

This came to mind as I was writing a comment of the accelerated IFR thread. It was the same instructor. He never gave me satisfactory answer but INSISTED that I climb nose low. I never understood ...
Click to expand...

Find a different instructor.
 
iflyforfun said:
Yes he did, "Because if you can't see the horizon, it is instrument conditions."
Click to expand...
That is a gross misstatement of the Chief Counel's definition of the term "actual instrument conditions." As for collision avoidance, if you're in the air, an aircraft on the horizon is below you plus you're climbing.
 
Must be former Army. If you can't see the horizon OR the ground and the aircrafts attitude is being controlled by reference to instruments, you can log "weather" time. Unfortunately the whole controlling the aircrafts attitude by reference to instruments usually negates the logging of instruments.
 
Dude obviously never lived in the East. If you must have a horizon to fly, you won't fly.
 
That is ridiculous.

What would he think of aerobatics then? Where you are constantly losing sight of the horizon and using the wingtip and other reference points for attitude...
 
I really appreciate threads like this.

Sometimes I feel like such a doof when I read the regulations and they lead me to draw what are (apparently) 100% wrong conclusions based on what I read.

Then, something like this comes along to make me feel better about myself.
 
So I guess practically all night flights are IFR too.

Ridiculus. Show your instructor this thread. If he doesn't change his tune, get a new one. [Instructor, not tune]
 
If I read the OP correctly, he is talking about an instructor he tried to use for accelerated IR training and then dropped for other reasons, not someone he's training with now.

While I agree with what everyone is saying, I'd add that I can think of a couple of situations where pushing the nose down would allow you to see a horizon, but without it, you'd essentially be in instrument conditions. One is climbing over a large body of water (e.g. Lake Erie) in hazy conditions where the far shore is within sight, but out the side windows you're looking down the width of the lake and sky and lake blend together, giving you no visual cues to keep the wings level. Another is a black hole takeoff at night -- you might have a horizon in the form of distant lights, but if your nose is above it and there are no lights below, you need to be on the gauges.
 
Giving the CFI every benefit, sounds like a somewhat silly way to make a point about climb visibility.
 
stomp the rudder and get the darn nose out of the way ... "there's the horizon - we're good!" :) :D :facepalm:
 
Wow. That's crazy. Go somewhere else for instruction.
 
steingar said:
Dude obviously never lived in the East. If you must have a horizon to fly, you won't fly.
Click to expand...

Yup...exactly right. Especially in the summer, you won't fly much if at all if you need the horizon. I've flown countless times with no horizon--soloed on a day without one. Sure, it makes some maneuvers like steep turns more difficult to do visually, but it's not dangerous at all...certainly not IMC.
 
iflyforfun said:
Question for the instructors out there. I once had an instructor who insisted that "If you can't see the horizon over the nose of the aircraft, you are IFR". He would never allow the nose of the AC over the horizon and would immediately bark if it occured.

During a long climb, I'll often not be able to see the horizon over the nose. With great side visibility, it isn't a problem of losing spatial orientation (in my opinion). Granted, for a long climb at a steep angle, I'll often make a small turn left and right to make sure someone else isn't doing the same thing and climbing into me, but I never understood his strong objection.

Thoughts? Opinions?
Click to expand...
Well... I'd agree with him IF the horizon wasn't there to see - like you were in clouds or flying at night in "dark hole" conditions, etc. Then of course, if you can't see the horizon then you are by very definition flying by reference to your instruments. However, as noted in the posts above, that certainly doesn't mean that anytime you can't see the horizon you are automatically IFR. That's silly. It might be time to consider other training options.
Remember, he works for you.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
I really appreciate threads like this.

Sometimes I feel like such a doof when I read the regulations and they lead me to draw what are (apparently) 100% wrong conclusions based on what I read.

Then, something like this comes along to make me feel better about myself.
Click to expand...

I hate to say it, but a lot of misinformation comes from instructors. My recommendation is to ask for documentation whenever a CFI says something a little off kilter. "Where does it say that in the regs/AIM/POH?" is a good conversation starter.

Bob Gardner
 
Shepherd said:
Sounds a little ridiculous.
I'm just thinking of all the places I've been where the horizon would be visible right up to the time you flew into it.
Most of the airports I fly out of you are Vy on climbout to miss trees, hills, buildings, kids on curbs, etc.
Click to expand...

I'm still a newbie student, but I've been taught to always climb Vy on takeoff. Granted, I have not been to another airport yet, but what would be the reason for not climbing at Vy? Obviously if there is an obstruction, best angle of climb Vx would be appropriate. I'm wondering if a shallow angle of climb as the OP describes is ever prudent.

Just curious. Sorry for the thread creep.
 
tangopapa said:
I'm still a newbie student, but I've been taught to always climb Vy on takeoff. Granted, I have not been to another airport yet, but what would be the reason for not climbing at Vy? Obviously if there is an obstruction, best angle of climb Vx would be appropriate. I'm wondering if a shallow angle of climb as the OP describes is ever prudent.

Just curious. Sorry for the thread creep.
Click to expand...

If your plane is equipped with engine instrumentation, high CHT's might be a valid reason not to climb at Vy or Vx. In which case you would want to climb at a shallower angle to help cool the cylinders.
 
bobmrg said:
I hate to say it, but a lot of misinformation comes from instructors. My recommendation is to ask for documentation whenever a CFI says something a little off kilter. "Where does it say that in the regs/AIM/POH?" is a good conversation starter.

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...

I tell my students, "Don't believe anything I say, verify it in your books after the lesson. I'm not Jesus, I don't preach the Gospel."
 
tangopapa said:
I'm still a newbie student, but I've been taught to always climb Vy on takeoff. Granted, I have not been to another airport yet, but what would be the reason for not climbing at Vy? Obviously if there is an obstruction, best angle of climb Vx would be appropriate. I'm wondering if a shallow angle of climb as the OP describes is ever prudent.

Just curious. Sorry for the thread creep.
Click to expand...

sometimes you might want the shallow angle climb for cooling over the engine. I usually climb vy until about 1000ft agl then pitch down for cruise climb. It helps to keep the CHTs under 400 in my plane
 
EdFred said:
If your plane is equipped with engine instrumentation, high CHT's might be a valid reason not to climb at Vy or Vx. In which case you would want to climb at a shallower angle to help cool the cylinders.
Click to expand...

OK, that makes sense. Thanks!
 
bobmrg said:
I hate to say it, but a lot of misinformation comes from instructors. My recommendation is to ask for documentation whenever a CFI says something a little off kilter. "Where does it say that in the regs/AIM/POH?" is a good conversation starter.

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...

So true, agreed 110%.
 
bobmrg said:
I hate to say it, but a lot of misinformation comes from instructors. My recommendation is to ask for documentation whenever a CFI says something a little off kilter. "Where does it say that in the regs/AIM/POH?" is a good conversation starter.

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...
I usually try I am confused can you explain why that is so to me. It seems to make them a little less defensive. It reminds me of a professor I had in college. It was a philosphy course in ethics and once one of my good friends(a philosphy major no less) disagreed with something he said to her that "there was something cognitively wrong with her because she disagreed with him."
 
tangopapa said:
I agree, time to find a new instructor.
Click to expand...

He is long gone. He is actually a somewhat well known accelerated IFR instructor. His statement NEVER made any sense, but there was no discussing it. He made it 3 days with me and was gone. I was just remembering this exchange (happened back in 2004) and I wondered if it was common at all or as odd as it struck me. Seems the general concensus is that it is simply an odd-ball statement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top