Flying the localizer...

azure

azure

Final Approach
Joined
Apr 2, 2005
Messages
8,302
Location
Varmint Country
Display Name
Display name:
azure
I've been training like crazy for the IR and making a lot of progress, and it's been great fun, 11 hours of hood time so far. We've done basic attitude instrument flying, holds, VOR and RNAV approaches, and now we're starting on LOC approaches. Last night we did the ILS or LOC 13 into OZW, flying it as a localizer only approach. I didn't do too badly on that one, but did notice a tendency to drift off to the right as we came close to the MAP. We went missed just before the runway threshold and then started toward PTK to shoot the LOC 9R. That's when I started to lose focus and get majorly behind the airplane. Lansing approach switched us over to Detroit, who immediately gave us a heading to intercept the localizer. By the time I had finished dialing in PTK tower, loaded the approach into the GPS for situational awareness, and tuned in and identified the localizer, we had already blown through the localizer and were well north of it. Not a biggie since we were still several miles outside the OM at WAKEL, and I intercepted the localizer course without too much difficulty. It was only after crossing the OM that I really started to fall apart. The boundary layer was a bit turbulent and I had trouble holding heading. PTK tower was hinting that they might have to switch me to the parallel runway for traffic. Plus once the power was reduced, I noticed that I was drifting to the right again. I applied left pressure on the yoke to level the wings, then see how far off course I had drifted, but the DG was still showing a rightward movement. More left pressure. Still nothing. Then I remembered: left rudder! By then though, it was too late: I was at least 15º off my desired heading and the needle was nearly full scale deflection. We were still at least a mile from the threshold when my CFII said, that's it, go missed.

The next and last approach for the night was to be the RNAV 9 into home base which is VLL. Detroit Approach had us proceed straight to the IF/IAF OHEVU. Again I was slow loading the approach and overshot OHEVU but soon captured the FAC and flew well up to the FAF (LOFWY). Then again I fell apart. As soon as the power was reduced I could not hold heading but started drifting off to the right. Again I forgot about the rudder until it was too late. Plus, a comfortable 500 fpm descent turns out to be not fast enough on this approach and we were a mile final and still up at pattern altitude. I made a major mistake and started to reach for the flaps handle before slowing us down into the flaps range. CFII took the airplane and straightened us out while I flipped up the hood, pulled the power to idle and threw in 20º of flaps. We were at least 700 feet right of course. My only redemption was that I managed to salvage the landing and actually did a firm but gentle touchdown on the centerline.

This was by far the worst job I've done flying instruments since I started 3 weeks ago. I can't seem to stop drifting to the right in the descent, especially in close to the MAP though I think it is always happening, it may just be close in where it gets critical. I think my problem is forgetting to keep left rudder pressure but my CFII thinks I'm losing the DG and bank indicator and relying too much on the TRK on the default NAV page of the GPS. We're having a somewhat heated disagreement over that. He says he HATES that page and wants me to use the map page only. He's obviously right, especially on non-GPS approaches, that I have to learn to adjust my course based on the CDI and not rely on the GPS, which is for situational awareness only. I still don't understand how to figure out the heading I need to fly as the wind direction changes in the descent without a direct knowledge of my ground track. But really, that's all beside the point since I'm finding that I level the wings, relax pressure, check the other instruments, and the next time I glance at the TC I'm back again to almost a 1/4 standard rate turn to the right. So I have two points of frustration: I don't understand how to figure out how to make the course corrections needed to keep the CDI centered as th wind direction changes in the descent, and constantly fighting my right-banking tendency is stealing precious CPU cycles from the job of figuring out what heading I need to fly.

Sorry for the length of this post, I'm mostly thinking aloud and am not sure how much of this makes sense...
 
Your right turn tendency sounds like a case of the 'leans'. "There is NO way I am turning right!".... 1 minute later ... "Well, crap.. How did I get 15* off course!?" You'll work your way out of it. You just have to tell your brain to quit listening to your butt telling you that you aren't turning, and trust the instruments. There was one night in particular that I had a horrible case of the leans. We were doing VOR approaches and I was all over the place. Luckily, Tony was still right-seat with me at the time, and he just sat and watched me struggle through it. Afterwards he made the comment "Now you know what the leans are all about and how to deal with it"

That's why you practice this stuff with an instructor before you do it on your own. :D

One thing helped when I started getting frustrated with multiple approaches was to realize that in the 'real world', the chances of you doing 3 different approaches within a few minutes of each other are pretty rare. In my limited IR experience, I have had a pretty good idea of the approach I would be doing at least 15 minutes beforehand. So if you start feeling overwhelmed with the multiple approach 'setups', just remember that you are intentionally practicing in a more difficult environment now so the 'real world' will seem much simpler.

Ain't it fun, though!? ;)
 
azure said:
once the power was reduced, I noticed that I was drifting to the right again. I applied left pressure on the yoke to level the wings, then see how far off course I had drifted, but the DG was still showing a rightward movement. More left pressure. Still nothing. Then I remembered: left rudder! By then though, it was too late: I was at least 15º off my desired heading and the needle was nearly full scale deflection.
Click to expand...
When you reduce power, the heading will drift right due to torque forces. When you add power above normal cruise, the nose goes left so you add right rudder. When the power goes below cruise, you add left rudder, ...not aileron. Flying the localizer is a good way to learn to use rudder to control heading to maintain alignment. Use the yoke to maintain wings level or make coordinating movements with rudder, but use primary rudder movements to align with the localizer.
 
This may sound like a silly question but I'll ask you anyhow: does your CFII weigh considerably more than you?
Do you find yourself drifting with the hood off? Just a thought. It looks from your avatar that you're flying a Cessna so fuel loading shouldn't be an issue.
 
What instruments you are scanning, in what order and at what rate will predict the success of the approach to a large degree. Improving your scan should be a major goal for you. I can't imagine that a GPS NAV page should figure into your scan at all.
#1 Keep the wings level. If you don't do this, even a very small bank close to the runway will take you off the localizer. One dot deflection is a miss and that ain't much at MDA.
#2 Know your power settings for various decent rates, 500fpm for the ILS and something between 750 and 1000 fpm for non-precision. Get that setting in there and you should only have to make minor adjustments for wind.
#3 Use the rudder to keep you on the localizer. Do not let your brain accept anything but being on it. If you are not, do something about it immediately. Stop the deflection and then work back towards the centerline.
This is challenging to be sure, but when you get it right it is very satisfying.
Have fun!
 
azure said:
I don't understand how to figure out how to make the course corrections needed to keep the CDI centered as th wind direction changes in the descent,
Click to expand...
A lot of folks have trouble tracking the LOC needle, usually because they’re chasing it to an unnecessary degree trying to center it. The fact is that centering the needle on a localizer approach is not absolutely necessary. It’s far more important to stabilize the needle, even if it’s a bit off center, than it is to have it in the center but swinging when you hit the missed approach point (MAP). I am indebted to long-time, now-retired, North Carolina Designated Examiner John McLain for this technique.

Let’s look at a typical LOC approach. The LOC antenna is at the far end of the 6000-foot runway, and the MAP is at the approach end of the runway at a typical 400 AGL. Now, we all know we don’t want to break out right at the MAP, so let’s say that the critical point is about 3/4-mile short of the runway – far enough out to let down comfortably from 400 AGL to the normal touchdown zone about 1000 feet down the runway. Thus, the visual descent point (VDP) is 6400 feet from the LOC antenna.

Let’s say you’re chasing the needle left and right, with increasingly large oscillations. You hit the VDP with the needle swinging through the center but your heading 15 or 20 degrees off. If you think enough to look in the correct direction (remember, the nose is pointed 15 or 20 degrees away from the runway), maybe you see the runway. Even if you do, you’re heading away from the runway, and by the time you react and turn back, you’re on very short final and well off centerline. Not good.

On the other hand, let’s say you’ve got a half-scale deflection, but it’s rock steady. Where is your ground track going? RIGHT AT THE LOC ANTENNA – right where you want to go. Oh, so you’re worried about being off centerline? Well, just how far off are you? Half-scale on a LOC is about 2½ degrees. One degree is one foot in 60, so 2½ degrees is 2½ feet in 60, so you’re about 270 feet off to one side, 3000 feet from the runway end – about a 5-degree angle off, but headed straight towards the far end of the runway. This is probably about lined up with the parallel taxiway – a piece of cake in a light plane.

So, what does this mean? We’re going to strive for a stable needle, even if it’s a bit off center. How do we do this? We use the needle movement, not the needle position, as a roll command. Very simply, if the needle is moving, we bank in the direction it’s moving, with angle of bank proportional to the speed it’s moving – slow movement, small bank; fast movement, larger bank (you’ll pick up the rate/angle correlation pretty quickly). When the needle stops, we level the wings, and keep them level until it moves again.

Once you’ve got the basics, you can start working on finer control by using this technique to make corrections to put the needle closer to center. If the needle is off to the right, roll into a right bank and hold the bank until the needle starts to move. Then roll wings level. The needle will continue to move left until you apply the original technique (needle moving left, bank left until it stops, then level the wings) to stop it. With a little practice, you’ll find this a very simple, natural technique.

You’ll notice the absence of one word you were probably expecting – “heading.” A lot of folks teach people to correct their heading by X degrees for Y amount of needle deflection, then try to compute in their heads a drift correction angle. Who cares? You’re not trying to compute the wind direction and velocity – you’re just trying to get to the end of the runway, and the one thing that will get you there is a stable needle. And winds change significantly between FAF and MAP, so what worked at 1500 AGL may be well off at 600 AGL.

This method also works in close to a VOR, say, for the last few miles of an approach to an airport with an on-field VOR, or for the inbound leg on a hold at a VOR.

Once you've got this down laterally, you can translate it into tracking the glideslope needle for ILS approaches, using pitch/power changes rather than bank angle changes. You'll find that using this technique produces a smoother, stabler, trip down final, and your passengers will appreciate it.
and constantly fighting my right-banking tendency is stealing precious CPU cycles from the job of figuring out what heading I need to fly.
Click to expand...
It's possible that part of your problem is due to the low power setting used for the ILS, particularly low if you fly it flaps-up. Because the rudder trim tab is set for zero foot-pressure in cruise, you get the reverse of the takeoff situation when flying at lower-than-normal power setting for your speed (e.g., when in a 500 ft/min descent at 90 knots). This means you need a touch of left rudder to counteract the lack of torque and p-factor so the nose doesn't yaw right with the wings level. It's just something you'll have to get used to.
 
The GPS does wonders for situational awareness but my .02 would be learn to fly the needles better only use the GPS as your instructor recommends. Dan said cover up the GPS and that would actually be the best thing if you instructor is comfortable with that. Information overload can happen quickly so by limiting the information to only that is needed is actually a good idea in my book. After you get comfortable flying the needles understanding them fully the GPS can be added.
 
My CFII told me to use every available resource. While he did have me fly partial panel using the compass only, he suggested that I use the track function of the GPS as an additional resource. I know we have had the MLOD discussion before, but if it's available for situational awareness why not use it?
 
vontresc said:
My CFII told me to use every available resource. While he did have me fly partial panel using the compass only, he suggested that I use the track function of the GPS as an additional resource. I know we have had the MLOD discussion before, but if it's available for situational awareness why not use it?
Click to expand...
Use everything you have, certainly, but focus on what's important. As Ron notes, on a localizer approach, what's important is a stable needle (first) close to center (second).

GPS should be an occasional glance on this type of approach, NOT part of the regular scan.
 
I started teaching the method Ron described about a year ago and it works well.

I do disagree with the GPS on the map page because I see too much tracking the magenta line instead of the needle.

Sounds like you flew very well for your first LOC approach.

Joe
 
vontresc said:
I know we have had the MLOD discussion before, but if it's available for situational awareness why not use it?
Click to expand...
No reason at all, except it's not always available, so you have to be able to fly without it as well as with it. In my experience of 1200 hours of instrument training given over the last few years, folks learn the basics better when not distracted by the GPS. Once they get the fundamentals down, then you introduce the GPS as an additional tool.
 
azure said:
Plus once the power was reduced, I noticed that I was drifting to the right again. I applied left pressure on the yoke to level the wings, then see how far off course I had drifted, but the DG was still showing a rightward movement. More left pressure. Still nothing. Then I remembered: left rudder! By then though, it was too late: I was at least 15º off my desired heading and the needle was nearly full scale deflection.
Click to expand...

You were close to me. OZW is my second home field.

I had this exact same problem during my training and I'm still not perfect with wind correction angles (mentioned on the checkride). I would track pretty well and then around the DA, I would take the foggles off, noticing an almost full scale deflection to the left and see the runway with me pointing way off to the right. Like everyone else said, you will learn to fly the needles. LOC approaches were the hardest for me to master, probably because of their increased precision and me wanting to chase the needle. My CFII did let me look at the nav or map page to see if I had the desired ground track but would frequently turn off the backlight so I would have to learn to fly the needles.

I figured out that very small corrections were usually all that were needed and a stable needle 1 or 2 dots off is not something to be worried about.

Dont worry. You are still having fun, right?
 
vontresc said:
My CFII told me to use every available resource. While he did have me fly partial panel using the compass only, he suggested that I use the track function of the GPS as an additional resource. I know we have had the MLOD discussion before, but if it's available for situational awareness why not use it?
Click to expand...


I'm just going off what worked for me and the Army didn't have GPS for their initial instrument training which really made me understand the needles. After flying the H-60 and airplanes with GPS I used it as a back up and really like it (who wouldn't). Its a great additional tool but I don't use it in my scan when flying the needles.

Azure...it does sound like you are doing fine. You see what is lacking and trying to correct it....that to me what the fun was. There are few natural instrument pilots out there....training is the key.
 
Sorry, Ron, I'm going to use the awful word...heading.

To the OP: When the needle stops moving but is anywhere other than pegged, note the heading and devote a lot of your attention to the heading indicator. If, on your next glance at the needle it has moved a tad, go back to the HI, use rudder to change heading a degree or two into the needle/wind and go back to the heading indicator. Repeat as necessary.

Note that I said "glance." A glance should take about one second. If you think one second is a short time, I volunteer to stick my finger in your eye and hold it there for one second.

Bob Gardner
 
bobmrg said:
Sorry, Ron, I'm going to use the awful word...heading.

To the OP: When the needle stops moving but is anywhere other than pegged, note the heading and devote a lot of your attention to the heading indicator. If, on your next glance at the needle it has moved a tad, go back to the HI, use rudder to change heading a degree or two into the needle/wind and go back to the heading indicator. Repeat as necessary.

Note that I said "glance." A glance should take about one second. If you think one second is a short time, I volunteer to stick my finger in your eye and hold it there for one second.

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...

similar relationship between VSI and glideslope.
 
Good suggestions here.

If you've only been doing this for 11 hours and 3 weeks, then I'd say you're doing just fine. Remember that training is significantly more intense than real-world instrument flying in general. The most important thing to remember is that all of this comes with practice.

Also, brief your plates prior to the flight if you don't have much of a cruise section to do that with. In reality, you'll get the weather however far out and have the "Expect [whatever]," so you have time to brief it. So, allow yourself time to brief it in your training. That's what you're supposed to do, and if you've done that then it should go a lot more smoothly.

Keep up a good scan, trust the instruments. I'd agree with Chris that you may be getting a bit of the leans. Happens to everyone, but I've found that it becomes less frequent and less severe with more practice and comfort. Also keep minimal adjustments on instrument approaches, as you're probably chasing it a bit. I had that habit until about 30 hours of training. Most importantly, keep at it. There's nothing abnormal about what you're going through right now. For me, at the end of my instrument lessons I was generally physically exhausted for the first half or 2/3 of the lessons. By the time I got towards the end of training it wasn't as tiring. Then once I started flying it for real it was a lot to deal with at first, now it's just normal.
 
The problem with heading, Bob, is that the required heading changes as you descend, and if you focus on that, you'll be chasing the needle every time the wind changes. If instead you focus on turning the plane to keep the needle steady, the wind corrections will take care of themselves.
 
Ron Levy said:
The problem with heading, Bob, is that the required heading changes as you descend, and if you focus on that, you'll be chasing the needle every time the wind changes. If instead you focus on turning the plane to keep the needle steady, the wind corrections will take care of themselves.
Click to expand...
I don't see the disagreement here. (not the first time I missed the obvious)

The HI is used to fly a straight line despite the leans. The numbers on the HI are only good for the first guess of what direction to roll out on. Then depending on what the needle is doing the HI is used to judge how much to turn.

I don't think Ron is saying don't include the HI in your scan and I don't think Bob is suggesting calculating the heading to fly (other than current ± 5 or 10°)

Joe
 
Ron Levy said:
Let’s look at a typical LOC approach. The LOC antenna is at the far end of the 6000-foot runway, and the MAP is at the approach end of the runway at a typical 400 AGL. Now, we all know we don’t want to break out right at the MAP, so let’s say that the critical point is about 3/4-mile short of the runway – far enough out to let down comfortably from 400 AGL to the normal touchdown zone about 1000 feet down the runway. Thus, the visual descent point (VDP) is 6400 feet from the LOC antenna.
Click to expand...

Ron,

Although it doesn't really change the point you were making, your math is a little off. If the runway is 6000 feet long, then you can expect the location of the Localizer antenna to be another 500 to 1000 feet off the end of the runway. If you are 3/4 of a mile from the threshold, that is another 4,557 feet. So at that point, you would be as far as 11,557 feet from the antenna, horizontally.

If the VDP is based on a 3 degree slope and a 40 foot TCH, the VDP would occur at 1.13 NM from the threshold for a MDH of 400 feet, or about 6880 feet from the threshold. This would be 13,888 feet from the antenna.
 
Liz, I've been at my AI for over a year, but can sympathize with what you are describing.

Very good advice from everyone above, but I thought I'd throw in two other things:

1. Re: the heading questions, I use my HI but really the focus is on the heading bug, not really the heading being flown. Once I intercept the LOC, I set my heading bug for an estimate of the wind correction angle, and see what happens to the needle. If the needle is drifting, I move to the outside of the bug. If that is insufficient, I establish a new heading to make the needle stop. When that happens, I move the bug to center over that new heading that made the needle stop. That is the heading needed to keep the needle centered, at that point in the approach. Then, it should only take moving to the inside or outside of the heading bug to accomodate wind changes as you descend down the approach. That is the approach taken by John and Martha King, and my CFII uses the same method.

2. Where do you begin to slow down for the approach, and what power settings do you use to configure yourself for the approach?

Your picture looks like a Skyhawk - is that what you're flying? I fly a 160hp 172R, and when I slow down as I'm being vectored, 2000 rpm will give me about 90kts level.

For a non-precision approach, before I hit the FAF, I put in 10 degrees of flaps, @ 2000 rpm. Once I hit the FAF, I pull power to 1,000 rpm, and that configuration gives me a 700-800 fpm descent rate @ 80 kts. That seems pretty solid, and I generally only tweak pitch or power slightly if things aren't quite right.

On a precision approach, when I intercept the glide slope, I pull power to 1500 rpm, 10 degrees of flaps, and I get a solid 500 fpm descent at 80 kts. Tweak as necessary.

Finally, the crappy King GPS is not in my scan, and I typically use it for DME information only, whether from the LOM, VOR, or whatever I'm measuring.

Good luck! I appreciate reading the debriefs of your IR flights.
 
Thanks everyone, I appreciate the feedback.

I do think my right turning problem is due to the rudder trim tab being set for cruise. In descent at low power I notice the ball is way off to the left. It takes more than a touch of left rudder to center the ball, and after finding the right amount of pressure I tend to relax my foot and yaw right again. My other problem is that in even light chop, quick glances at the bank indicator aren't enough to tell me whether my wings are level, since it's constantly wobbling. I've found the AI to be not sensitive enough to level the wings with, which leaves the DG, and I'm throwing myself off with that by constantly wrestling with the rudder. I think I need to get a feel for the exact pressure needed and HOLD it there.

Banking to the right might be the leans, thanks Chris and Ted. I had that problem at first when we were practicing holds. Constant turning to the right in a standard pattern eventually set my inner ear thinking a right turn was normal. Maybe this is a little different? With the ball on the left side, my butt is telling me that I'm banked to the left. Instead of using rudder, maybe I'm unconsciously banking slightly to compensate. It's more than that though since at low power settings I find it's actually hard to level the wings, much less turn back to the left, using only two fingers on the yoke. My CFII is about 100 lbs heavier than me but I kinda doubt that's it :D, since I don't have this problem at cruise power.

I'm definitely not chasing the needle, but I have been trying to fly the approach course the way I do enroute, which is to use the TRK indicator on the default nav page to help me figure the correction angle needed to parallel the course, and then turn left or right whatever amount I need to intercept the course, depending on how much CDI deviation there is. Clearly that won't work for a LOC or even a VOR, since paralleling the course to one side results in a larger and larger angular deviation. Ron, thanks for the technique of turning to steady the needle. I think that's what my instructor is trying to teach actually, though he doesn't express it as clearly as you do.

The argument I'm having with my CFII isn't over using vs. not using the GPS... he WANTS me to use it, but the map page. He is actually a fan of the MLOD I think, he says it makes navigation easier. I don't think the little airplane gives an accurate enough picture of the ground track. Enroute with DTK/TRK and the CDI, I can tell pretty exactly how much correction I need. But for approaches he does want me to just fly the needle and use the map for situational awareness only, which I can't argue with.

We do have another "religious" dispute going on though: he thinks track up is better and hates North up. I prefer north up because that's the way I look at the approach plate. He thinks if I'm flying south I'll get my left and right confused. But if I fly the needle and not the MLOD, how would that be a problem?

We seem to have a stormy relationship ahead of us...

edit: Stan and I cross-posted but re: a heading bug... I WISH I had a heading bug!!! More than once I've let myself go exactly 10 degrees off heading and only realised it after a few rounds of scanning.

My avatar is OLD. The club I'm with now has two 172's and a 182. I've used them all for training, but am settling now on the 150 hp 172M as it has the fewest mx issues.

I slow down to about 2300 rpm after intercepting the FAC, except when descending. For descent I use whatever gives me a 500 fpm descent at 100 kts (cruise airspeed). I originally found that 2100 rpm works best, but I'm using anywhere from 1900 to 2200. Slowing down when being vectored sounds like a good idea; I think 2200 will give me 90 knots level but I'll need to check that. My CFII has definitely not made a point of flying by the numbers, which is something I'll have to discuss with him.
 
Last edited:
Areeda said:
The HI is used to fly a straight line despite the leans.
Click to expand...
Maybe this is a quibble, maybe not, but the HI is used to fly a constant heading, not necessarily a straight line (over the ground). The CDI needle tells you if you're flying a straight line.
The numbers on the HI are only good for the first guess of what direction to roll out on. Then depending on what the needle is doing the HI is used to judge how much to turn.
Click to expand...
McLain doesn't teach it that way, and I follow his lead on that. In his method, the amount to turn is whatever it takes to stop the needle from moving. This had the distinct advantage of allowing corrections in partial panel ops without worrying about that dancing MC or timing small turns.
I don't think Ron is saying don't include the HI in your scan
Click to expand...
No reason not to include it, but it becomes a lower priority than watching the turn rate indicator (TC or T&B) along with the CDI needle.

Note that this method works only if you've already more or less established yourself on the LOC by heading, and provides only the fine corrections to keep yourself on course to the touchdown zone.
 
A few thoughts here.

The leans takes all different forms. It wouldn't surprise me if this was just a light form. You can get heavy leans that cause you to put (or want to put) the plane into a major bank (make sure to cross check the AI, TC, and DG to make sure you don't have an instrument failure, plus the vacuum gauge). That's more obvious. But you can have a subtle case of the leans, or alternately just not holding the plane quite right. Main thing is to look at and trust thine instruments. But question them to the point of making sure that you don't have a failure, and know how to diagnose it. A good example: I had my pitot heat go out on me and the pitot tube iced up (it was icing conditions). I started to watch my airspeed drop with my ground speed remaining the same. By the time I was indicating 0 mph with a 155 kt GS it was pretty obvious that I happened. Knowing that my static port is also in the pitot tube, I hit the alternate static just in case and flew on that for the rest of the flight. By the time I got down low near the ground with greater than freezing temps, the airspeed came back on and all was right with the world. That's just one example, and you can diagnose them easily enough if you know how the systems work and what the symptoms of each kind of failure are.

Ok, enough rambling on that subject. Next subject to rable on: I absolutely agree that using the TRK function on the GPS is a nice tool for helping you (I do that all the time myself), but I think you should start your training not doing that. I'd encourage you to focus on needle flying without the GPS before adding it, and focus on the VOR, ILS/LOC, and NDB approaches (if you can find an NDB approach to do) as they, to me, require more skill, especially as you're shooting an ILS approach down to mins. The GPS is a great tool, but I'd suggest that you get (and keep) your needle skills sharp before adding it in. This is more proficiency than anything. I'll tell you that in reality for the instrument flying I do (about 200 hours in the past 6 months) I mostly do ILS and GPS approaches (if it's not visual), I rarely fly victor airways (and when I do I normally plug them into the GPS, but I live in an area where "cleared via direct" is normal), and it's really a lot easier than training. But take away my GPS box and I can still find my destination just fine and have no issues flying on a pair of VORs and an ADF. You want to be able to do the harder stuff without issue in case you have to, and it makes the easier stuff that much easier.

Hope this provides some help for you, rather than just rambling. :)
 
azure said:
We do have another "religious" dispute going on though: he thinks track up is better and hates North up. I prefer north up because that's the way I look at the approach plate. He thinks if I'm flying south I'll get my left and right confused. But if I fly the needle and not the MLOD, how would that be a problem?
Click to expand...
I flew without any kind of moving map for years but when I started to use one I liked north up. However, it seemed like many pilots liked track up so we were always having to switch the display around. Then I got into airplanes where the only choice is track up. Now I would never want to go back to north up. These days we only have dual cue (cross pointers) vs. single cue flight directors to argue about...

As far as using the MFD for reference goes, I like it for general orientation but I would never try to follow the line. It is more useful when you are getting set up for the approach than after you are already lined up on the localizer. I can say that I very rarely if ever look at the MFD inside the FAF.
 
At the risk of thread creep.....I was taught to make major use of the TC in my scan. Actually GATTS covers up the AI for the whole program. However, jets don't seem to have a TC at all. So I had to "unlearn" some of my primary instrument training.
Why is this? Are the AIs on the bigger planes just that much better (they are), is it the redundancy of copilot's instruments, or something else?

I personally would want to fly the needles ok before adding GPS into the scan. In real life, yes, use all the info you can possible get. In training, learn the basics first.
 
Lance F said:
However, jets don't seem to have a TC at all. So I had to "unlearn" some of my primary instrument training.
Why is this? Are the AIs on the bigger planes just that much better (they are), is it the redundancy of copilot's instruments, or something else?
Click to expand...
You have a standby attitude indicator powered by an independent source.
 
Everskyward said:
You have a standby attitude indicator powered by an independent source.
Click to expand...
...and 91.205(c) says that for IFR flight, you need a "Gyroscopic rate-of-turn indicator, except on the following aircraft: (i) Airplanes with a third attitude instrument system usable through flight attitudes of 360 degrees of pitch and roll and installed in accordance with the instrument requirements prescribed in §121.305(j) of this chapter;" (121.305 being the section with the independent power source requirement).
 
Ron Levy said:
...and 91.205(c) says that for IFR flight, you need a "Gyroscopic rate-of-turn indicator, except on the following aircraft: (i) Airplanes with a third attitude instrument system usable through flight attitudes of 360 degrees of pitch and roll and installed in accordance with the instrument requirements prescribed in §121.305(j) of this chapter;" (121.305 being the section with the independent power source requirement).
Click to expand...

Please refer to AC91-75

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/list/AC%2091-75/$FILE/AC91-75.pdf
 
Last edited:
Ron Levy said:
The problem with heading, Bob, is that the required heading changes as you descend, and if you focus on that, you'll be chasing the needle every time the wind changes. If instead you focus on turning the plane to keep the needle steady, the wind corrections will take care of themselves.
Click to expand...

...but it does not change instantaneously, so a glance every once in awhile is adequate to monitor changes in drift rate. One or two degrees at a time avoids the windshield-wiper effect. It's always worked for me and my students.

Bob
 
Everskyward said:
You have a standby attitude indicator powered by an independent source.
Click to expand...
True, but I was thinking of this from the primary instrument training aspect rather than the regulatory. There the TC is as big as the other instruments and is considered a very important part of the scan. The standyby gyro is a tiny little thing tucked under the glareshield that the pilot generally never looks at.
 
Ron Levy said:
...and 91.205(c) says that for IFR flight, you need a "Gyroscopic rate-of-turn indicator, except on the following aircraft: (i) Airplanes with a third attitude instrument system usable through flight attitudes of 360 degrees of pitch and roll and installed in accordance with the instrument requirements prescribed in §121.305(j) of this chapter;" (121.305 being the section with the independent power source requirement).
Click to expand...

So for a transport category bizjet, where you have pilot and copilot attitude instruments, the third standby instrument meets it.

For smaller airplanes under 12.5 and operated under part 91 only, then you probably only have a single AI and the AC 91-75 provides for replacing the TC/T&B with an independently powered AI.

I know several mooney owners who've put in the "lifesaver" AI or similar unit to replace their TC and are very happy.
 
Lance F said:
True, but I was thinking of this from the primary instrument training aspect rather than the regulatory. There the TC is as big as the other instruments and is considered a very important part of the scan. The standyby gyro is a tiny little thing tucked under the glareshield that the pilot generally never looks at.
Click to expand...
But then you need to consider why the TC was an important part of the scan. You used it to get your rate of turn, which the flight director does for you now. You also used it in the event the attitude indicator was inop, in which case you now use the standby. So really the turn coordinator is not necessary any more in these airplanes. I'm thinking you would have a hard time flying the Lear with needle, ball and airspeed anyway. :eek:

Wait until you fly something that is all glass and you need to get used to a whole new scan!
 
Ron Levy said:
No reason at all, except it's not always available, so you have to be able to fly without it as well as with it. In my experience of 1200 hours of instrument training given over the last few years, folks learn the basics better when not distracted by the GPS. Once they get the fundamentals down, then you introduce the GPS as an additional tool.
Click to expand...

I learned Instruments without a GPS. Now the GPS DTK/TRK function is perfect to help (assist) with Ron's "stable needle" scenario. If the TRK is left of DTK and the needle is left, it's only going to go farther left in a hurry.
 
bobmrg said:
...but it does not change instantaneously, so a glance every once in awhile is adequate to monitor changes in drift rate. One or two degrees at a time avoids the windshield-wiper effect. It's always worked for me and my students.

Bob
Click to expand...

That's pretty much the way I learned it but Ron's method works just as well on PP as it does with a HI. Also works with a HI that has no bug. That said, at the very least setting the heading bug (assuming you have one on a working HI) does give you a better idea of both how much change in heading you've made and how far you are from the inbound heading. My take on the use of a HI is that you set the inbound course and then maintain the offset from that heading which keeps the needle still. If the wind changes as you proceed (which is unlikely BTW, if you're flying a LOC approach at the MDA), you just adjust the offset and keep track of that mentally.
 
One possibility that hasn't been mentioned is that whenever you look over at the GPS (which is on the right) you will have a natural tendency to turn the plane in that direction.
 
FWIW, here are some of my thoughts:

1) GPS - great for situational awareness. Fly the needles, confirm with the GPS. Even if you don't have GPS, you'll always have needles in an IFR plane.

2) One second rule - agree with Bob. Things can go awry quickly, especially at nite, IMC, single pilot. Keep moving on the scan. Don't fixate. Do one thing at a time, then back to the needles. Check, correct, confirm. Do something else. Check, correct, confirm.

3) Track up - my preference. I hear you on the plate. If you can reference yourself even when flying "upside down" (to me, flying south on North Up), then stick with it. What matters is what you can understand without thinking about it. If North Up is what you understand intuitively, keep it.

4) Finally, and the reason for your post - don't worry, it'll come. The method to which Ron refers works well for me. It''s not nearly as complicated in practice. Relax, and concentrate. You'll be fine!!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top