First Instrument lesson

DesertNomad

DesertNomad

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
2,464
Location
Northern NV
Display Name
Display name:
DesertNomad
I have a bit over 200 hours and took my first IFR lesson today (in simulated conditions).

Departure to a VOR hold and about 8 laps, then a VOR approach, followed by a missed back to the VOR for another hold lap, then vectors to the ILS and flew the ILS to 200'. That was followed by a crosswind landing (wind 20kts, gusting to 25, 90 degrees to the runway).

My VOR holds were difficult - figuring out the wind correction in increasing afternoon winds. The ILS was a bit easier except the yellow goggles make my MP digital gauge impossible to see (need to switch to clear or a hood). I was slightly above the glideslope for the first half of the approach while I figured out what throttle setting worked for the descent.

I felt like I was learning to fly all over again... about like when I had 10 hours and was in a 172.
 
The first part of the hold I was VFR eyes outside, then went eyes inside. I think it was an overview to get into it. I have flown the ILS under the hood twice before in my PPL training.

This same instructor had me doing landings from the very beginning of PPL along with other basic control stuff.
 
Last edited:
Walboy said:
I hate to say this, but I can't imagine an instructor starting you off with holds and approaches.

As I recall, the very first thing I did was to determine the power settings for the various phases of flight and then practiced constant speed climbs, descents. Constant rate climbs, descends. Turning climbs, descents. Very basic stuff.

Maybe teaching techniques have changed.
Click to expand...
Bingo. Why any CFII would start off with holds and approaches is beyond me. First couple of lessons was BAI, and getting to know the plane's power settings, and pattern A and B.
 
I agree with others that holds and approaches for first lesson is a abuse of your time and money.

You don't yet know your power/prop/pitch/flap numbers yet and you don't have the fundamentals of attitude flying. Gaining proficiency with these makes a world of difference when you are ready for the activities you did today.

Ask the instructor to review his written syllabus with you. And it's a red flag if he does not have or use one. An example of a decent syllabus for IFR is this one: http://www1.dcsdk12.org/secondary/chs/staff/mwkelly/teachers/kellyweb/aero/IFR/syllabus.htm

The Jepp system has another really good one. As does the PIC program.
 
Holds and approaches in the first lesson? Yikes.

That's like practicing crosswind patterns and landings on your discovery flight.

Your first lesson should be all about instrument scans in basic configurations such as straight & level or standard rate level turns.
 
As an experienced CFII I agree with what has been said here.

I always spend the first few hours on basic aircraft control. If that goes well we perform steep turns, slow flight etc to determine that the student has the basics down & to ascertain if there's any vertigo issues.

Once navigation is added in flying the airplane should be second nature under the hood.
 
I'll talk to my CFII about it but I think this was more of a "this is what instrument flying is all about" flight. My discovery flight for the PPL was a bit like that I think - though we didn't do steep turns or stalls.

I appreciate all the feedback. Given the situation, I was pretty happy with my ILS.
 
Last edited:
If in 5 hours they can do basic things as called out, they will almost always make IFR in 40 hours.... And by basic I mean hold altitude, heading, and change each of those. Maybe track a VOR.
 
My instrument instructor and yours were kindred spirits. My first lesson was right up into IMC. In for penny, in for a pound. Let's just say had he not been there, it probably would have ended badly after he first few minutes. But he worked me through my little "JFK Jr." moment, and put me back on the horse for the rest of the hour.

He was my partner in the airplane, so we had flown together for several hours previously, so he knew I could fly the airplane. Don't know if it's a good idea with a stranger.

But it definitely focused the mind that IMC was serious business.
 
My CFII is not not partner in the airplane, but we get along really well. I can only think of a handful of CFIIs in the immediate area. One of them is not a guy I really get along with, and since I have so much dual time with this guy, he knows me well.

I think part of it was to show me the seriousness of IFR flying - even though visibility was 100 miles yesterday, there is all sorts of terrain here. My CFI has about 16,000 hours and I do trust him. When I was early on in my PPL I had a lot of lessons that seemed a bit odd or out of place, but then one day it clicked and it all made sense. I am guessing he teaches Instruments the same way.

I probably have 100 hours dual with him as nearly all my 182 time is with him.. it worked out to be the best rental deal around but for insurance reasons I could not solo this particular 182.
 
Last edited:
It bothers me to hear these types of reports. When I hear that an instrument student was doing approaches on a first lesson my thought is always to "find another instructor".
 
write-stuff said:
It bothers me to hear these types of reports. When I hear that an instrument student was doing approaches on a first lesson my thought is always to "find another instructor".
Click to expand...

Honestly, it bothers me more to hear stories of pilots getting the rating without ever getting the wings wet.
 
I agree with all of the above. Let us know how your next flight goes and if he has you working on basic attitude flying - it really is the fundamentals that set set the stage for the rest of the training.

DesertNomad said:
except the yellow goggles make my MP digital gauge impossible to see
Click to expand...

Yellow goggles? Never seen those in the stores for IFR training. Was this a homemade "foggles" set up?
 
Put me down as one of those who thinks initial lessons should focus on attitude flying and not approaches or holds. However, I'm all for launching into actual from the get go.

I ended up with just over 6hrs actual out of the 35 total I had when I took my check ride (part 141). Of course, the first 14hrs were in a sim (Redbird FMX) so I didn't get into real IMC until much further along in training after I had transitioned to the airplane.
 
Just checked my first training flight. It was " Basic instrument patterns, timed turns, VOR tracking and Holding".. did more of the same the second and threw in an RNav approach. Didn't toss an ILS in there till the 6th lesson.
 
It seems to me like the responses saying some variant of "Not on a first instrument lesson. No way, no how." are not taking into account that the instructor and student have flown together a lot and the instructor may be taking into account knowledge of the student.

My primary instruction covered flying an ILS because my instructor said "This is a great way to find the airport on a hazy day." He knew (when we started instrument flying instruction) that I had flown a good deal of attitude flying both on his sim setup and in the airplane as part of my primary instruction. So we started a bit deeper in the pool.

Random first time student? Definitely start easy. Known student? Adapt to their skill level.

John
 
I will often do the 1st IFR lesson similar to what the OP describes, especially if we are flying an airplane I am not familiar with. But as he suggests it is more of an intro flight for both of us, him to IFR flying me to the equipment we are using.

Circling around the VOR for 30 minutes or so isn't a bad way to get him doing instrument scans and turns without having to make power and configuration adjustments. We have to go back to the airport anyway, why not cap it off with an ILS to verify all the radios, MB and etc are working properly. There have been a number of times I have sent owners off to the avionic shop after the 1st IFR lesson to get something fixed for when we actually start needing it.

2nd or 3rd Lesson, you bet we are going to start learning power settings, and shortly working on on Pattern A and B. But we will usually end each lesson with an approach of some sort to start familiarizing you with the approaches. There is no reason to fly back to the airport VFR when we are doing instrument training.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEl
 
brcase said:
why not cap it off with an ILS to verify all the radios, MB and etc are working properly. There have been a number of times I have sent owners off to the avionic shop after the 1st IFR lesson to get something fixed for when we actually start needing it.
Click to expand...

Good point. I think my DG my be precessing too much. I need to check it by time and drift. I have heard 3 degrees in 15 min is ok, that would be 12 per hour but I would think the Earth's rotation would make it 15 per hour.

Should the DG precess more during turns and other maneuvers than during straight flight? I would think so.
 
Earth rotation is 15 deg/hour in yaw if a celestial pole is at zenith. It's much smaller away from that. You're only at 40 deg latitude, so you'll need a 50 deg pitch angle to get that rate.

Precession CAN be a function of throttle if your vacuum pump isn't so good. That is, more precession at low throttle.

Iron gyros can precess given a continuously applied torque orthogonal to yaw.
 
Last edited:
Walboy said:
I hate to say this, but I can't imagine an instructor starting you off with holds and approaches.

As I recall, the very first thing I did was to determine the power settings for the various phases of flight and then practiced constant speed climbs, descents. Constant rate climbs, descends. Turning climbs, descents. Very basic stuff.

Maybe teaching techniques have changed.
Click to expand...

This was my first thought also. Talk about throwing a lot at you at once!

I started off by determining power settings and then flying a few patterns of increasing complexity that my instructor drew up on paper that included turns to headings at standard and 1/2 rate, climbs and descents at various rates with and without turns etc., and practicing callouts like "1000 feet to go" and so on. It was all about my getting used to controlling by instruments only and developing precision. I think he initially even worked the radios while I did all this.

We then progressed to tracking, then holds, then DME arcs, then approaches, then the IFR XC. We generally followed the Jeppesen IR syllabus (including stage checks), but not formally - and we modified as needed. I think that syllabus would take 70 hours if you followed it formally but maybe not.

I finished the rating with 40.0 hours of instrument time so this approach certainly didn't slow me down.
 
jsstevens said:
It seems to me like the responses saying some variant of "Not on a first instrument lesson. No way, no how." are not taking into account that the instructor and student have flown together a lot and the instructor may be taking into account knowledge of the student.

My primary instruction covered flying an ILS because my instructor said "This is a great way to find the airport on a hazy day." He knew (when we started instrument flying instruction) that I had flown a good deal of attitude flying both on his sim setup and in the airplane as part of my primary instruction. So we started a bit deeper in the pool.

Random first time student? Definitely start easy. Known student? Adapt to their skill level.

John
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I don't buy it. No matter how much flying an instructor/student unit has done together, the student is not ready for "Slow to 90 knots. Give me a 90 degree standard rate turn without changing altitude. Accelerate to 120 without changing heading or altitude. Slow to 90 knots. Transition to a 500 fpm climb without changing heading or airspeed." That ability comes with learning "the numbers" for a given airplane, and that is to be accomplished in the first two or three hours.

Bob Gardner
 
bobmrg said:
Sorry, but I don't buy it. No matter how much flying an instructor/student unit has done together, the student is not ready for "Slow to 90 knots. Give me a 90 degree standard rate turn without changing altitude. Accelerate to 120 without changing heading or altitude. Slow to 90 knots. Transition to a 500 fpm climb without changing heading or airspeed." That ability comes with learning "the numbers" for a given airplane, and that is to be accomplished in the first two or three hours.

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...
This.
 
My first instrument flight was actual with a 777 captain as CFI to visit Dr BRUCE to get my medical. Picked up rime ice. Next was a short autopilot & gps automation above the clouds to show me what a relaxing ifr flight was like.
 
bobmrg said:
Sorry, but I don't buy it. No matter how much flying an instructor/student unit has done together, the student is not ready for "Slow to 90 knots. Give me a 90 degree standard rate turn without changing altitude. Accelerate to 120 without changing heading or altitude. Slow to 90 knots. Transition to a 500 fpm climb without changing heading or airspeed." That ability comes with learning "the numbers" for a given airplane, and that is to be accomplished in the first two or three hours.

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...

I did that in my finish up hours prior to my PPL check ride
 
bobmrg said:
Sorry, but I don't buy it. No matter how much flying an instructor/student unit has done together, the student is not ready for "Slow to 90 knots. Give me a 90 degree standard rate turn without changing altitude. Accelerate to 120 without changing heading or altitude. Slow to 90 knots. Transition to a 500 fpm climb without changing heading or airspeed." That ability comes with learning "the numbers" for a given airplane, and that is to be accomplished in the first two or three hours.

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...

You are right of course. I flew the hold at about 110kts indicated at 9500'. ATC did have me club to 10K at one point and I did that while maintaining a heading but just climbed at my cruise climb of 100kts. I did all the above in a 172 for my PPL but have not done them in my plane - which I have about 35 hours in. I think that maintaining a heading was harder for me than an altitude. Standard rate turns while maintaining altitude were pretty easy but I was not trying to maintain a specific speed either
 
Last edited:
No business getting in a plane until you do the stuff in a simulator first. Waste of money to try to teach and learn in a plane.
 
timrj said:
No business getting in a plane until you do the stuff in a simulator first. Waste of money to try to teach and learn in a plane.
Click to expand...

I don't really agree with that. In principle, it ought to be true, as you can practice the scan in a sim.

But in practice, you spend all your time fighting with the %#$*^ trim, and it's a very different fight from the one you might have in a real plane.

Where the sim is really useful is in instrument failures. And maybe for repeated approaches, but that works a whole lot better with an autopilot. For the scan, it really ought to be useful, but it's marginal at best. Practicing scanning with an autopilot running is a waste of time outside the context of failures.

But you do need to use the plane efficiently. As in, at 500 AGL, the foggles go on and you do the rest of the flight under the hood, get yourself up to a good altitude and bang on patterns.

Something that helps WAY more than it has any right to in establishing and practicing your scan is flying at night.
 
timrj said:
No business getting in a plane until you do the stuff in a simulator first. Waste of money to try to teach and learn in a plane.
Click to expand...

There are no local simulators here that I know of. There was until about two years ago, but the guy moved out of state. I think there is one at Minden which is 40 miles away but they are an expensive Cirrus school... $480/hr for an SR22 and $280/hr for an SR20.
 
Last edited:
timrj said:
No business getting in a plane until you do the stuff in a simulator first. Waste of money to try to teach and learn in a plane.
Click to expand...

I thought so too at one time. Then I tried a simulator.

I hate simulators because every one I've tried has absolutely sucked (except United's A320 sim - that one rules). :D

I did all but 2 hours of my training in the airplane. The two hours in the sim were completely wasted because the sim was horribly unrealistic. I still finished in 40.0 hours.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top