Disorientation on final

R

Rneuwirth

Pre-Flight
Joined
Jun 4, 2011
Messages
39
Location
Wyoming
Display Name
Display name:
Rneuwirth
Had my first long IFR flying lesson yesterday. Took off in (simulated) 0/0 conditions fromrunway 34 KGCC, flew to CZI, then to KBYG, did the missed approach procedure, a couple of turns around the published holding pattern, and back to KGCC for the ILS 34 procedure. All went well (at least for my first time), until I looked up on short final, saw the runway, right where it's supposed to be, and looked back down to re-check my airspeed indication. WOW!!! I would have had to go around for sure, except for the help of my CFII.

I've had momentary dizziness before, but this was different. Seemed like I was swimming in the cockpit!

My CFII says that with practice this resolves. Any recommendations?
 
How fast were you flying down the ILS? How fast were you going when you looked back at your airspeed? were you still on glideslope? What aircraft?

You could practice flying by yourself in VFR conditions (without the hood on :) ) down the ILS to minimums, give yourself a second or two then slow down and land.

I've never felt dizzy but it does take some time to transition from instruments to flying visually. The amount of time it takes will decrease as you progress! I do remember the first couple times ripping off the hood after a long flight being a "woah" moment
 
Try to keep your head movements to a minimum, and when you do move your head keep it slow and measured. The goal is not to get your inner ear fluids all disturbed.
 
C182P with the 280hp conversion, onj glideslope, at 70 KIAS, and really stabilized and ready to land. Had I not felt the dizziness, disorientation it would have been a textbook landing.

BTW when flying IFR for real, if you've got the landing environment clearly in sight and all the other pre-requisites met, but need to go araound for another reason (deer on the runway or whatever) do you need to do the entire missed approach procedure or can you simply tell the tower that you'll need to go around in the traffic pattern? What about at a non-towered airport?
 
That's a lot of hard flying. Were you hydrated and had enough food? That can contribute to dizziness as well. It's usually not much of a problem on 'regular' flights, but on training flights, you are so focused on briefing multiple approaches, misses, holds, etc. that you can go a couple of hours without realizing that you haven't had anything to eat or drink, and your brain has been calculating more than an average day behind a desk.
 
Rneuwirth said:
C182P with the 280hp conversion, onj glideslope, at 70 KIAS, and really stabilized and ready to land. Had I not felt the dizziness, disorientation it would have been a textbook landing.

BTW when flying IFR for real, if you've got the landing environment clearly in sight and all the other pre-requisites met, but need to go araound for another reason (deer on the runway or whatever) do you need to do the entire missed approach procedure or can you simply tell the tower that you'll need to go around in the traffic pattern? What about at a non-towered airport?
Click to expand...

If the ceiling is below circling minimums you definitely need to fly the missed approach procedure. If its above circling minimums you can fly a pattern. At a towered airport you'd need to be cleared first. If there is any delay or doubt just go missed.

I'm not 100% sure about that answer, i'm sure others will chime in.
 
Rneuwirth said:
Had my first long IFR flying lesson yesterday. Took off in (simulated) 0/0 conditions fromrunway 34 KGCC, flew to CZI, then to KBYG, did the missed approach procedure, a couple of turns around the published holding pattern, and back to KGCC for the ILS 34 procedure.
Click to expand...
I assume you had covered all these tasks individually in lessons building up to the big flight, right?
 
Actually no, this was my very first IFR lesson. I had thought that perhaps the intensity of the lesson as well as the length of time under the hood might have contributed to the problem, but up until that very last few seconds I actually felt just great.

Also, good point about not eating or drinking. I typically haven't worried about that on flights up to 2 hours long, but the level of concentration here is so much higher, and with the colder weather and using the cabin heat, dehydration could certainly have played a role.
 
Rneuwirth said:
Actually no, this was my very first IFR lesson.
Click to expand...
In that case, what you need is a new instructor who uses a reasonable training syllabus, because this wasn't a lesson, it was trainee abuse. You should have had about 30 hours of instrument experience before attempting a flight like that. Your first instrument lesson should have been basic instrument flying -- Four Fundamentals, configuration changes, etc. Basic radio navigation (orientation, interception, and tracking) shouldn't be introduced until the fundamentals are solid, and procedures such as holds and approaches started only when you have basic radio nav down pat.

Frankly, it's no wonder you came apart at the seams. I'm amazed you got as far as you said before your internal gyros tumbled.
 
Ron Levy said:
In that case, what you need is a new instructor who uses a reasonable training syllabus, because this wasn't a lesson, it was trainee abuse. You should have had about 30 hours of instrument experience before attempting a flight like that. Your first instrument lesson should have been basic instrument flying -- Four Fundamentals, configuration changes, etc. Basic radio navigation (orientation, interception, and tracking) shouldn't be introduced until the fundamentals are solid, and procedures such as holds and approaches started only when you have basic radio nav down pat.

Frankly, it's no wonder you came apart at the seams. I'm amazed you got as far as you said before your internal gyros tumbled.
Click to expand...

Trainee abuse... haha

The private pilot should be able to fly straight and level, make standard rate turns and simple climbs and descents under the hood. A private pilot should also know how to track and intercept radials and localizers. I agree this is ridiculous for a first lesson with only the minimum 3 hours under the hood. I had to get down the vertical S, practice patterns full and partial panel plus stalls and unusual attitude recovery before my instructor turned me loose on holds, cross country flights and approaches. But that did not take anywhere near 30 hours.
 
Last edited:
dell30rb said:
The private pilot should be able to fly straight and level, make standard rate turns and simple climbs and descents under the hood. A private pilot should also know how to track and intercept radials and localizers.
Click to expand...
I won't argue whether or not they should be able to do all that, but based on about 1500 hours of instrument training given, I can tell you that very few can, especially to the level of precision and the complexity required for an instrument rating.

For example, on instruments, a PP need only be able to determine what radial s/he is on and track it to the station in cruise speed/configuration while maintaining heading within 20 degrees and altitude within 200 feet without pegging the needle. An IR pilot must be able to determine where s/he is and then proceed expeditiously to smoothly join an assigned radial and track it in or out within half-scale deflection, all while maintaining desired heading within 10 degrees and altitude within 100 feet and to change configuration and speed in the process. It typically takes instrument trainees 10 hours of instrument work to get from the PP level of instrument competence to being able to do that orient/intercept/track task to IR standards.
 
Last edited:
Rneuwirth said:
Had my first long IFR flying lesson yesterday. Took off in (simulated) 0/0 conditions fromrunway 34 KGCC, flew to CZI, then to KBYG, did the missed approach procedure, a couple of turns around the published holding pattern, and back to KGCC for the ILS 34 procedure. All went well (at least for my first time), until I looked up on short final, saw the runway, right where it's supposed to be, and looked back down to re-check my airspeed indication. WOW!!! I would have had to go around for sure, except for the help of my CFII.

I've had momentary dizziness before, but this was different. Seemed like I was swimming in the cockpit!

My CFII says that with practice this resolves. Any recommendations?
Click to expand...

Move your eyes, not your head. This applies to checking the instruments on the right side of the panel as well. Learn to set power by sound, not by looking at the tach/MAP.

Bob Gardner
 
Sorry, posted before reading the rest of the responses. I agree with Cap'n Ron...your first several hours (at least five, but it depends on the student) should be devoted exclusively to control of the aircraft by instrument reference; no holds, no approaches, nothing but boring exercises...that will pay off in spades when you need to maintain heading, altitude, and airspeed without using too many brain cells.

Bob Gardner
 
bobmrg said:
Move your eyes, not your head. This applies to checking the instruments on the right side of the panel as well. Learn to set power by sound, not by looking at the tach/MAP.

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...
Best post this series. Eyes, NOT head.....
 
I agree with Ron. That is a ridiculous flight and the equivalent to doing S-turns, stalls, and 45 deg. banks on a student pilot's first flight.
 
N801BH said:
+1...

Ps... happy late birthday doc.....


Ben.
Click to expand...

+2 for both the eyes and happy birthday!

Thank You Ron!

Why are instructors and/or possibly students (not specifically the case from the OP, just saying) in such as rush to get this rating done?

What the OP went through in that flight is unnecessary.

I'm gonna see the usual responses: money, time, winter is coming, "my CFI sez that I can do it in the minimum time" etc. etc. Hey, it's your bacon in the pan....
 
Last edited:
DutchessFlier said:
+2 for both the eyes and happy birthday!

Thank You Ron!

Why are instructors and/or possibly students (not specifically the case from the OP, just saying) in such as rush to get this rating done?

What the OP went through in that flight is unnecessary.

I'm gonna see the usual responses: money, time, winter is coming, "my CFI sez that I can do it in the minimum time" etc. etc. Hey, it's your bacon in the pan....
Click to expand...

It's called "Get There itis"
 
gismo said:
I'm pretty sure I could assuming it works, but I don't know if you could.:D
Click to expand...

:rofl:

Actually, I no longer can. Because it's been many years since I flew with a fancy radio like that... But I was wondering (since the localizer works nothing like a VOR) if I could have back in the olden days. (Obviously, I didn't)
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
:rofl:

Actually, I no longer can. Because it's been many years since I flew with a fancy radio like that... But I was wondering (since the localizer works nothing like a VOR) if I could have back in the olden days. (Obviously, I didn't)
Click to expand...
Oh, that was a serious question then? I've never seen a VOR receiver that didn't include the ability to tune localizer frequencies (interspersed with VOR channels). Both VOR and localizer signals are transmitted on carriers in the 108-120 MHz range, they differ only in the type of modulation. VOR signals use a combination of AM and FM with the angle of a line between the receiver and ground station represented as a phase difference between the two modulations. Localizer signals use only AM (actually a suppressed carrier AM scheme) with the relative strength of two different modulation frequencies indicating the receiver's lateral angular delta from the course centerline.

So chances are if you could tune in a VOR you could also tune in a LOC.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
:rofl:

Actually, I no longer can. Because it's been many years since I flew with a fancy radio like that... But I was wondering (since the localizer works nothing like a VOR) if I could have back in the olden days. (Obviously, I didn't)
Click to expand...


Must be a huge variation between teaching styles for private pilot instructors 30 years ago... Before my flight instructor would even sign me off to solo I had to be able to intercept the glideslope and localizer at the Sanford Fla airport and fly it inbound within 1/2 scale deflection... His thought process was if for some reason I really screw up and get caught on top I have a fighting chance of continuing lessons with him by staying alive..... To this day I am VERY thankful of his teaching style too..:yesnod::yesnod:.
Thanks Glen Perkins.... wherever you are. :):)

Ben.
 
Last edited:
Rneuwirth said:
Had my first long IFR flying lesson yesterday. Took off in (simulated) 0/0 conditions fromrunway 34 KGCC, flew to CZI, then to KBYG, did the missed approach procedure, a couple of turns around the published holding pattern, and back to KGCC for the ILS 34 procedure. All went well (at least for my first time), until I looked up on short final, saw the runway, right where it's supposed to be, and looked back down to re-check my airspeed indication. WOW!!! I would have had to go around for sure, except for the help of my CFII.

I've had momentary dizziness before, but this was different. Seemed like I was swimming in the cockpit!

My CFII says that with practice this resolves. Any recommendations?
Click to expand...

Back in the 70's before all the automation, British Airways had a procedure that the PF would fly the approach while the PNF would look outside and when the aircraft broke out of the clouds, the PNF would take the controls and land the airplane. The transition from approach to landing is very different in IMC.
 
GCA319 said:
Back in the 70's before all the automation, British Airways had a procedure that the PF would fly the approach while the PNF would look outside and when the aircraft broke out of the clouds, the PNF would take the controls and land the airplane. The transition from approach to landing is very different in IMC.
Click to expand...
That's a great procedure for multicrew aircraft operating in near-minimum weather, and BA isn't the only airline using it. However, to earn your IR in a light plane, you have to demonstrate single-pilot proficiency, including being able to remove the hood just above DH, acquire the runway, and land on it -- without help from anyone else.
 
Up to half of all the instrument instructional hours should be devoted to basic attitude instrument (BAI) flying, including partial panel, and it should be the prerequisite for any approach procedure training. Learning how to do a 180 to exit IMC is a good skill to master in a PPL program but approach procedures are an entirely different animal altogether. Without BAI mastery even the simplest of non-precision approach in IMC is ill-advised. It is better to first learn how to avoid IMC, how to maintain control when in the soup, then how to get out if inadvertently flying into it. When all of that is truly mastered, then approach training can begin. Any instrument approach training before that is setting up the student for a false sense of security that will increase the probability that they will make the highly probable fatal decision to continue flying in IMC without adequate preparation.
 
DrMack said:
Up to half of all the instrument instructional hours should be devoted to basic attitude instrument (BAI) flying, including partial panel, and it should be the prerequisite for any approach procedure training. Learning how to do a 180 to exit IMC is a good skill to master in a PPL program but approach procedures are an entirely different animal altogether. Without BAI mastery even the simplest of non-precision approach in IMC is ill-advised. It is better to first learn how to avoid IMC, how to maintain control when in the soup, then how to get out if inadvertently flying into it. When all of that is truly mastered, then approach training can begin. Any instrument approach training before that is setting up the student for a false sense of security that will increase the probability that they will make the highly probable fatal decision to continue flying in IMC without adequate preparation.
Click to expand...

You mean half of the 15 dual required, which would be 7.5? That is a good number, I think. Half of the 35 would be excessive.
 
Ron Levy said:
That's a great procedure for multicrew aircraft operating in near-minimum weather, and BA isn't the only airline using it. However, to earn your IR in a light plane, you have to demonstrate single-pilot proficiency, including being able to remove the hood just above DH, acquire the runway, and land on it -- without help from anyone else.
Click to expand...
I have my IR and I know and have met the requirements, but I also know that the transition from approach to landing is a difficult one for some. I'm just giving an example of how some people/crews remedy the difficulty. Now days a 747 can land its self, so I'm guessing (without really knowing) that almost 90% of approaches to minimums are done using autoland. I could be wrong though.
 
GCA319 said:
I have my IR and I know and have met the requirements, but I also know that the transition from approach to landing is a difficult one for some. I'm just giving an example of how some people/crews remedy the difficulty. Now days a 747 can land its self, so I'm guessing (without really knowing) that almost 90% of approaches to minimums are done using autoland. I could be wrong though.
Click to expand...

According to the retired airline captain who writes the "Ask the Captain" column for USA Today, you are wrong. His columns are archived on the site, so you could look it up.

Bob Gardner
 
bobmrg said:
According to the retired airline captain who writes the "Ask the Captain" column for USA Today, you are wrong. His columns are archived on the site, so you could look it up.

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...

Again, I made my post based on an assumption, not facts. Being a part 91 piston driver, I have no idea how an autoland system works. I'll look up the articles.
 
Friend of mine flies Capt for a major legacy carrier...he has told me that their op specs require hand flying the plane in the last phase of the approach, and the even in a CATIII approach, which BTW he says are very rare, they need to have the visual at a 50ftDH above the runway to land.
 
DutchessFlier said:
...and the even in a CATIII approach, which BTW he says are very rare, they need to have the visual at a 50ftDH above the runway to land.
Click to expand...
That would be a company requirement, not a basic Cat III requirement. United has something similar, with a company requirement for 300 RVR for their Cat IIIc approaches in their ops specs even though the basic FAA rules for IIIc have no minimum vis. And I don't believe anyone's Cat III ops specs permit manual handling of the controls at any point other than a missed after a system failure.
 
Ron Levy said:
That would be a company requirement, not a basic Cat III requirement. United has something similar, with a company requirement for 300 RVR for their Cat IIIc approaches in their ops specs even though the basic FAA rules for IIIc have no minimum vis. And I don't believe anyone's Cat III ops specs permit manual handling of the controls at any point other than a missed after a system failure.
Click to expand...

United Airlines certificate actually falls under CALA (Continental Airlines) and looking under OpSpec C060 it specifies different RVR's for fleet type and as well as type of landing system and Rollout Control System (Fail Passive or Fail Operational) so it can vary.
 
The use of two pilots to accomplish a landing at/near minimums is a good safety procedure when you have two suitable pilots. I have had a few instances where I would have had to go missed were it not for the fact that my copilot was focused on looking for the runway while I was focused on the instruments. There's a big difference between removing the hood into what's typically P6SM and clear vs. near-min vis and cloud cover, especially around here where the cloud cover is not always very well-defined.

Sure, I've broken out at 200 AGL on an ILS and landed just fine single pilot in the Aztec and 310. Doesn't mean it would've been nicer with two pilots. When you get into jets, keep in mind your approach speed is much faster than in a 172 and thus you also have less time to transition from instruments to visual and execute the landing.
 
Rotor&Wing said:
United Airlines certificate actually falls under CALA (Continental Airlines) and looking under OpSpec C060 it specifies different RVR's for fleet type and as well as type of landing system and Rollout Control System (Fail Passive or Fail Operational) so it can vary.
Click to expand...
Are any of them under 300 feet? In any event, I suppose I should have said my information was current before the merger, and may have changed since, but that's what a UAL pilot told me, and I have no reason to believe he doesn't know the rules which apply to his flying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top