Circle to Land at Minimums

[Ted]

Probably wouldn't do minimums into a place I wasn't familiar with if there were mountains or obstacles near by.

I like Dave's answer. We did a VOR approach (on a perfectly clear day using foggles) up at Endicott/Tri-Cities near Binghampton, NY. That airport is fun, and has mountains (or to you people out west "hills") all around it, and is in a valley. Doing it at actual minimums would be interesting if you didn't know the area.

I'm not answering the question, since I don't have my IR yet and as such have zero actual experience to base an answer on.

 

[dmccormack]

I like Dave's answer. We did a VOR approach (on a perfectly clear day using foggles) up at Endicott/Tri-Cities near Binghampton, NY. That airport is fun, and has mountains (or to you people out west "hills") all around it, and is in a valley. Doing it at actual minimums would be interesting if you didn't know the area.

I'm not answering the question, since I don't have my IR yet and as such have zero actual experience to base an answer on.

Ted,

While our "mountains" are very different from those out west, more airplanes have succumbed in these "hills" than in the Rockies.

I'll also agree that a CTL at minimums at an unfamiliar field (especially in the mountains) is not on my to-do list.

Anyway, this should probably be a new thread, and I'll get slammed for this but....

I am no fan of foggles or hoods (at least any I've used so far).

No matter how you slice it, you can see the change in light intensity on the panel, which is a cue of the airplane's attitude you will not have in IMC.

Also you know that you can take off the foggles and make everything good if things really get bad, which takes away some of the very real sensations everyone has (at least initially) when flying in the clouds.

While foggles/hood may be good for learning flight-by-reference-to instruments, the sooner any IR student can get up in actual the better, and the more the better.

But what you'll find is the more actual you look for, the more VFR days pop up on the calendar....

 

[Ted]

While our "mountains" are very different from those out west, more airplanes have succumbed in these "hills" than in the Rockies.

That comment was made more jokingly since people out west tend to kid us about our "hills."

To your other point...

I am no fan of foggles or hoods (at least any I've used so far).

No matter how you slice it, you can see the change in light intensity on the panel, which is a cue of the airplane's attitude you will not have in IMC.

Yep. I agree 100%, I am much more a fan of actual than foggles, and I don't think that foggles are a good substitute. Fortunately, I have several hours of actual at this point, and will hopefully get more by the time I get my ticket.

The one thing I can say for foggles: Mine are not 100% perfect, and give me a bit of view besides the instrument panel. This actually contributes to getting disoriented, and that is good practice for me to rely on the instruments, especially when the corner of my eye is getting a source that I KNOW is good. That's why I haven't "fixed" the problem.

Interestingly, so far I haven't gotten disorientation in actuals... yet.

 

[dmccormack]

Interestingly, so far I haven't gotten disorientation in actuals... yet.

Luke: I won't fail you. I'm not afraid.
Yoda: You will be. You will be.

It's actually very good to have the experience of being disoriented. It's a test of self discipline to trust the gauges while commanding your hands to do what it takes to keep the airplane flying upright, even though you know you are turning/climbing/whatever.

I've experienced real, holy-cow-this-ain't-right disorientation a couple of times so far -- both were in actual, once with my CFII aboard during training, another time IMC solo.

About 10 hours into IFR training we were flying to a nearby airport in IMC to do some ILS approaches. I rolled out to the outbound heading on the VOR radial and heard him say, "Why are you turning?"

Hunh?

"Why are you turning?"

"Ummm..."

"WHY are you TURNING?"

Gene Hudson talks about "The Hand of God" as a factor in some accidents.

I found out exactly what that was -- my mind heard the words, my eyes observed the indications, and yet my hands would not do what they needed to do to fix the 5 degree bank.

It was a very good lesson, and I was able to test that lesson's effectiveness a few months later.

I was newly minted IFR pilot and decided to do a XC to log some time towards the Comm. I filed, even though it was basically a VFR day.

It quickly turned into a hazy, foggy, just-above-legal VFR day.

I was climbing out from PKB and suddenly I realized I was turning. I was above some ground fog, in some very heavy haze, and had no outside references visible in the climb.

I heard the question -- "Why are you turning?" in my head, verified that I was, indeed, turning, and then shifted position in my seat to make sure I was awake and paying attention and forced my hands to fix the problem.

I haven't had that problem since, but I think it's because I encountered it and had to face it down.

I'm sure some pilots never, ever have this problem.

I won't pretend I'm one of those.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Anyway, this should probably be a new thread, and I'll get slammed for this but....

I am no fan of foggles or hoods (at least any I've used so far).

No matter how you slice it, you can see the change in light intensity on the panel, which is a cue of the airplane's attitude you will not have in IMC.

Also you know that you can take off the foggles and make everything good if things really get bad, which takes away some of the very real sensations everyone has (at least initially) when flying in the clouds.

While foggles/hood may be good for learning flight-by-reference-to instruments, the sooner any IR student can get up in actual the better, and the more the better.

But what you'll find is the more actual you look for, the more VFR days pop up on the calendar....

Why would you get slammed for that? I don't know of anyone that thinks the foggles are a realistic substitute. They're not. I've never found a view-limiting device that really works.

 

[KennyFlys]

Why would you get slammed for that? I don't know of anyone that thinks the foggles are a realistic substitute. They're not. I've never found a view-limiting device that really works.

It really depends on how disciplined the person is in keeping their scan on the instruments. That being said, a normal scan takes your eyes in several areas of the cabin away from the six pack so you may still have glimpses of the outside environment.

 

[dmccormack]

It really depends on how disciplined the person is in keeping their scan on the instruments. That being said, a normal scan takes your eyes in several areas of the cabin away from the six pack so you may still have glimpses of the outside environment.

Especially with Gyro failure -- the compass is usually mounted up on the dash or suspended from the top somehow-- hard to miss that glimpse of the sky and ground.

 

[dmccormack]

Why would you get slammed for that? I don't know of anyone that thinks the foggles are a realistic substitute. They're not. I've never found a view-limiting device that really works.

Well, there are some Part 141 Flight Training Schools that do not permit IR student dual in actual.

 

[Everskyward]

Well, there are some Part 141 Flight Training Schools that do not permit IR student dual in actual.

That's one of the dumbest things I've heard lately.

 

[KennyFlys]

That's one of the dumbest things I've heard lately.

Mari, recall my description of the Indian ticket mill in Atlanta? One location uses the same route for every single cross country, both dual and solo. I heard it directly from the owner's lips when I questioned the value of repetition... "It's to limit liability." I thought the purpose of the school was to teach skill and safety?

 

[Everskyward]

Mari, recall my description of the Indian ticket mill in Atlanta? One location uses the same route for every single cross country, both dual and solo. I heard it directly from the owner's lips when I questioned the value of repetition... "It's to limit liability." I thought the purpose of the school was to teach skill and safety?

OK, so that's the second dumbest thing I've heard lately....

 

[flyingcheesehead]

It really depends on how disciplined the person is in keeping their scan on the instruments.

Not really. Your brain will take the cues it is given, regardless of your intent to use them or not. (That's why we carry instrument covers.) I got to find this out the hard way - After not having any actual for quite a while, I had an instrument lesson with some actual, and I didn't fly as well as I did under the hood.

Well, there are some Part 141 Flight Training Schools that do not permit IR student dual in actual.

Really??? What the hell would be the point of that prohibition, other than an inbred instructor pool that didn't know how? That's awful.

 

[tonycondon]

Really??? What the hell would be the point of that prohibition, other than an inbred instructor pool that didn't know how? That's awful.

insurance...Im pretty sure UND doesnt allow IFR or Grass runway ops.

 

[poadeleted20]

Considering the extremely limited actual instrument flying experience of many of the flight school instructors out there, it's probably a good idea not to let them teach in actual conditions until they have more actual time in their logbooks.

 

[dmccormack]

Considering the extremely limited actual instrument flying experience of many of the flight school instructors out there, it's probably a good idea not to let them teach in actual conditions until they have more actual time in their logbooks.

...and that is precisely why I'm waiting for the CFI-I. I want more expereince in actual in a wide variety of situations before presuming to teach someone else.

 

[Dwight B. Van Zanen]

I remember one post by a guy who was in IR training, and they did an ILS close to minimums. They get on the ground and the CFI-I says, that was his first time taking an ILS to minimums before breaking out. I went through training with a professional CFI-I, not someone who just passed last week wanting experience to get to the regionals. We were training in the winter, so several opportunities for actual; including once when we could not get home and had to use the ILS at BFI [not quite to minimums] to wait for clearing. Helps give the student confidence to do it in actual, but it REALLY helps when you know your right seat guy has been there and done that - a lot.

 

[W. Stewart]

One of my more rewarding flying moments was early in my instrument experience. I was doing the NDB 25 approach into my home airport, flying along at MDA in the bottoms of the clouds, waiting for time to expire, was in the act of pushing the throttle forward to do the missed when I caught a glimse of the runway over to my right. I thought "this is my home airport, I know it well, there are no obstructions, and I have done simulated engine outs power-off 180's numerous times", so I turned immediately right over the field, entered a tight downwind to runway 7, then turned a very short base to 7, so as to not lose sight of the runway, and got her down. Minutes later a professionally flown King Air could not get in. I know that my slower airspeed enhanced my chances over theirs, but still I felt good about my instrument skills.

If I were not at my home airport, I would not have attempted that.

Wells