IFR tools for VFR pilots?

[FlyGirlKHWO]

This may sound strange, but I'd to hear what you IFR folks consider some of the most useful ideas that can apply to VFR flying.

I'm not ready to train for IFR yet, but I do want to be a more consistent, precise flyer as I go along.

Any techniques, ideas or tips that have universal value to this low-hour gal and anyone else who is a weekend flyer?

thanks,

Allison

 

[jordane93]

find a person who is instrument rated and ask them to take you on an IFR x country and expose you to the system. remember you need 50 hrs PIC x country time for your instrument rating. try doing all your PIC x countries IFR if possible. this is pretty much what i did so i had a decent understanding of the system before i started training

 

[TangoWhiskey]

Hello Allison! Practice being PRECISE on the altitudes and headings you hold. If you're westbound at 4500', be AT 4500' and spot on 270 for the heading. Look outside, but then scan inside and trim the airplane to hold what you want, hands off. Try to accept no more than 20' either way on the altitude and 2 degrees on the heading. Once you get the airplane trimmed to hold level flight, note (WRITE DOWN) the power settings and pitch attitude (xx degrees above or below the horizon) it took to establish that level flight attitude.

Next time you fly at that altitude, try to replicate it. Establish that same power setting and pitch attitude, and trim away the control pressures.

If you can get that skill down now, you'll be MILES ahead on the instrument rating.

 

[TMetzinger]

I'd encourage you to start building your knowledge of the pitch/power/performance relationship on your airplane. Ron can probably cut and paste a "how to" on this, but the gist is to build a table of pitch attitudes and power settings that will give specific results, such as:

Straight and level cruise at 6000 = XX RPM YY MP ZZ degrees pitch
800 fpm descent at 120 KIAS = XX RPM YY MP ZZ degrees pitch
500 fpm descent at 90 KIAS = XX RPM YY MP ZZ degrees pitch
Initial climb at AA FPM and BB KIAS = XX RPM YY MP ZZ degrees pitch

When you have that figured out (and folks can probably give you good starting settings for similar airplanes to your tiger), you've got a large part of the homework for instrument flying or precise VFR flying done.

The funny part of this is once you've done that, and built up a lot of experience flying on instruments, you'll have the whole "changing one setting affects two others" firmly established in your head, and THAT means that when you go to new aircraft you'll be able to go through a drill that says:

"I'm at cruise and need to descend at 750 FPM to meet my crossing restriction at cruise speed. i'll start by pulling off 3 inches of MP and leave everything else alone. Ok, I've settled down and I'm at 600 FPM, let me pull back another inch of MP. There that's got it"

Edit: I see Troy and I are saying similar things.

 

[AggieMike88]

See this thread for another version (including a PDF of the table) of what Tim is speaking of.

http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1307567&postcount=2

 

[denverpilot]

Everyone covers the ones I wanted. Haha.

Precison. That is one I notice is a huge difference between weekend warrior and pros. Once a CFI joked with me...

"What altitude are you attempting to fly at?"

"8,500"

"You're at 8,470, level."

"Yeah, so?"

"If it'll fly level at 8,470, it'll fly level at 8,500, won't it?"



It applies to headings, pitch angles, whatever... If you want a specific number, make it be... that specific number.

It feels forced at first. That's why I use the word, "make". After practice, you just end up doing it without thinking about it.

Next phase after that is doing it in a hurry, VMC, with passengers when you see you're about to bust "your" altitude number. After you finish apologizing that you just floated them off their seat cushions, you realize you're VMC and there was really no reason to be that aggressive.

Heheh. But that needle stopped right where you wanted it to stop.

 

[SixPapaCharlie]

This may sound strange, but I'd to hear what you IFR folks consider some of the most useful ideas that can apply to VFR flying.

I'm not ready to train for IFR yet, but I do want to be a more consistent, precise flyer as I go along.

Any techniques, ideas or tips that have universal value to this low-hour gal and anyone else who is a weekend flyer?

thanks,

Allison

How frequently are you using Flight Following?

 

[AggieMike88]

How frequently are you using Flight Following?

This is a big help in improving your Comm skills. Especially in an active sector with a controller speaking 100 words a minute with gusts to 150

 

[FlyGirlKHWO]

I haven't done much Flight Following since I was training, most of my time lately has been local.

I will be doing it when I fly to TX next month, so I'll be getting in some "ear time" for sure! My comm skills are OK, I trained in a Delta airport, so not too intimidated by the radio... usually.

 

[Ted]

When flying at night, perform instrument approaches into airports. Gives you appropriate clearance for things you may not see.

 

[somorris]

Hi Allison. When flying, try to hold 2-2-20. That's within 2 degrees of heading, 2 knots of target airspeed and 20 feet of target altitude. Difficult to do, but master that and the IFR will be fairly easy.

 

[MarkZ]

Hi Allison. When flying, try to hold 2-2-20. That's within 2 degrees of heading, 2 knots of target airspeed and 20 feet of target altitude. Difficult to do, but master that and the IFR will be fairly easy.

 

[denverpilot]

Just shoot for 1-1-0 and 2-2-20 becomes easy. And the PTS standards then look "sloppy".

The IR is a huge mental game against yourself. Interestingly you don't really ever "win" and beat yourself, you just get better at it with practice.

And I'm grumpy I haven't practiced now for a long time. I don't think my co-owners quite get how useless a /U aircraft is. Sigh.

 

[Brad Z]

I agree with what everyone said but I'll add: strive to be a great VFR pilot. Don't try to teach yourself how to fly instruments. You may find yourself have to unlearn bad habits later.

 

[Ted]

Just shoot for 1-1-0 and 2-2-20 becomes easy. And the PTS standards then look "sloppy".

The IR is a huge mental game against yourself. Interestingly you don't really ever "win" and beat yourself, you just get better at it with practice.

And I'm grumpy I haven't practiced now for a long time. I don't think my co-owners quite get how useless a /U aircraft is. Sigh.

I go for heading and altitude in cruise, airspeed and heading in climb/descent (although I often find a pitch attitude is the best way to do that), etc.

As for /U, that's what the Aztec was for a while. It's not that it's useless, but /G is worlds better. It also has a cost associated with it.

These days, I'm finding that WAAS is the way to go for us little GA types. I've shot more LPV approaches than anything else recently, and am noticing the conventional approaches disappearing.

 

[redtail]

This is a big help in improving your Comm skills. Especially in an active sector with a controller speaking 100 words a minute with gusts to 150

Hahaha reminds me of a recent flight from Caldwell (KCDW) going home to Republic (KFRG). The controller was working traffic into Teterboro (KTEB.) and vectoring me around it while issuing machine gun instructions.
That was fun

 

[LDJones]

These days, I'm finding that WAAS is the way to go for us little GA types. I've shot more LPV approaches than anything else recently, and am noticing the conventional approaches disappearing.

Not to mention opening up so many more airports to you.

 

[Mistake Not...]

I'm in the same situation, so here's what I came up with.

* all the above. Hold heading / altitude precisely. It's a fun game. Treat it like that... don't get frustrated.

* Find every opportunity to talk on the radio. Get in-flight weather updates, open / close flight plans, flight following.

* Don't fly direct. Fly the airways, use the VORs.

* If you have a GPS, don't "fly the magenta line" (map). Use the CDI. I set one of the displayed parameters to be cross track error and try to get that as close to zero as possible. (I read about this here, was guilty of the magenta line problem, corrected and like the CDI much better now.)

Flight following is also nice because you get to listen to mostly IFR chatter while you're going somewhere. And, unfortunately (or fortunately?) you get to hear VFR traffic that sounds much less professional. Free lessons in what not to do.

 

[bobmrg]

ASA sells "IFR for VFR Pilots" by Richard L. Taylor, for $19.95...Amazon might have a cheaper used copy. Or check your local pilot supply shop.

Bob Gardner

 

[EdFred]

Just get an autopilot installed with GPSS steering. That's all anyone ever wants to do anymore. "OK, I'm at 500' autopilot engage and now I'll play angry birds for 3 hours, and then disengage with 500' to go." You'll be as good as anyone else out there.

 

[bnt83]

Just get an autopilot installed with GPSS steering. That's all anyone ever wants to do anymore. "OK, I'm at 500' autopilot engage and now I'll play angry birds for 3 hours, and then disengage with 500' to go." You'll be as good as anyone else out there.

Might as well take an Airbus

 

[tehmightypirate]

When flying at night, perform instrument approaches into airports. Gives you appropriate clearance for things you may not see.

Very useful tip and this is fun to do even in the day time. You don't need to be instrument rated to shoot an approach VFR. Study up on how IFR approaches work, what the approach plate means, and practice them on a simulator or watch some videos online about those approaches.

Then, whenever you're flying somewhere with an approach; do it. If it's not a controlled field then you can do it without ATC but I would recommend flight following as you'll be entering the pattern from a non-standard direction (straight in) and there may be someone doing the approach as well and it's best to avoid any conflict with them. If it's towered then when you're in contact with approach specify you have a request and then ask to do an instrument approach of your choice under VFR. They'll vector you (or you can ask to fly it yourself if you feel up to it) around to the approach course. You'll want to be comfortable with the radio callouts that they'll make (Aircraft XYZ XX miles from ABCDE, turn left heading XXX, cleared ILS/GPS/etc approach to runway YYY. Maintain VFR.) so you can expect it and read it back. Tune in the ILS or setup your GPS or VOR for the approach and fly it down. It will be long and easy, good if you have passengers, you'll spend some fuel doing it but it's worth it if you ask me.

Bonus points if you can find a safety pilot and want to do it under the hood or with foggles. If you still like it after that then by all means start working towards that IFR rating.

If you still just want to stay VFR then get in the habit of treating the descent to land as you would if IFR. Do a checklist (GUMPS counts) for the descent and the landing. Review the approach you're going to do. Even if it's a standard pattern review the airport diagram and sectional. Any towers or hills? Frequencies you'll need? Traffic pattern left or right? Runway configuration? Other items? Mentally or verbally talk yourself through the approach and have a plan on what to do if you go around (missed approach). Practice making only standard rate turns in the pattern.

 

[EdFred]

Might as well take an Airbus

That's what I figure as well. But when you sell a plane without a does-it-all-for-you-autopilot it gives you a quite a good insight as to how many bad pilots are out there. And guess what, we're sharing the air with them.

Z0mG! I cant haz aut0pilt?!?!?!? I'm skurred!!!!!

If you need an autopilot, maybe you shouldn't be flying.

 

[Ted]

* Don't fly direct. Fly the airways, use the VORs.

* If you have a GPS, don't "fly the magenta line" (map). Use the CDI. I set one of the displayed parameters to be cross track error and try to get that as close to zero as possible. (I read about this here, was guilty of the magenta line problem, corrected and like the CDI much better now.)

Flight following is also nice because you get to listen to mostly IFR chatter while you're going somewhere. And, unfortunately (or fortunately?) you get to hear VFR traffic that sounds much less professional. Free lessons in what not to do.

I almost never fly VFR, and I also almost always fly direct. It's good to use airways to get an understanding, but unless you're in the mountains or else in congested airspace, you will rarely use VORs and airways.

If you need an autopilot, maybe you shouldn't be flying.

Agreed, but when you're buying an airplane you're looking at a combination of needs and wants, at least most people are. If I bought a "go places" plane without an AP, it would need to be severely discounted to make up for that. The things aren't cheap.

 

[EdFred]

I almost never fly VFR, and I also almost always fly direct. It's good to use airways to get an understanding, but unless you're in the mountains or else in congested airspace, you will rarely use VORs and airways.



Agreed, but when you're buying an airplane you're looking at a combination of needs and wants, at least most people are. If I bought a "go places" plane without an AP, it would need to be severely discounted to make up for that. The things aren't cheap.

If you want sit there like a turd in a seat doing nothing, that's a lot of airline tickets you can buy for the price of the plane, the maintenance, storage, fuel, etc...

 

[Clark1961]

That's what I figure as well. But when you sell a plane without a does-it-all-for-you-autopilot it gives you a quite a good insight as to how many bad pilots are out there. And guess what, we're sharing the air with them.

Z0mG! I cant haz aut0pilt?!?!?!? I'm skurred!!!!!

If you need an autopilot, maybe you shouldn't be flying.

You sound just a little bit (okay, a lot) bitter...

 

[Mike5250]

I don't have my instrument rating yet, but have about 15 hrs dual and meet all of the cross country requirements. Flight following is good, and ask for VFR practice approach. Very rarely will they turn you down and it keep you from having to get oriented with a new airport and finding the runway is much easier! Just keep your eyes outside during the process.

 

[Ted]

If you want sit there like a turd in a seat doing nothing, that's a lot of airline tickets you can buy for the price of the plane, the maintenance, storage, fuel, etc...

None of those airline tickets will do what I want them to.

Besides, I don't use my autopilot much anyway. Doesn't change the fact that I want the plane to have one and will discount the purchase price of most planes without them enough to install one.

 

[EdFred]

None of those airline tickets will do what I want them to.

Besides, I don't use my autopilot much anyway. Doesn't change the fact that I want the plane to have one and will discount the purchase price of most planes without them enough to install one.

I think wanting 80% off the price because it doesn't have an A/P is a bit much.

 

[jordane93]

These days, I'm finding that WAAS is the way to go for us little GA types. I've shot more LPV approaches than anything else recently, and am noticing the conventional approaches disappearing.

yep. i did a short IFR x country in IMC from KFRG to KBDL in a /U Cherokee and was given a clearence with radar vectors to bridgeport then direct destination. i had to tell the clearence that i was unable to accept and they said expect vectors to bradley. when i was talking to NY approach after i had crossed over brdigeport VOR he proceeded to tell me go direct bradley and i told him i was a /U which then he confirmed and said,"you dont have gps". nowadays a lot of the approach controllers assume that we have gps but thats not always the case

 

[Ted]

I think wanting 80% off the price because it doesn't have an A/P is a bit much.

Lowballing is a practice that occurs regardless of equipment and should be differentiated as such.

yep. i did a short IFR x country in IMC from KFRG to KBDL in a /U Cherokee and was given a clearence with radar vectors to bridgeport then direct destination. i had to tell the clearence that i was unable to accept and they said expect vectors to bradley. when i was talking to NY approach after i had crossed over brdigeport VOR he proceeded to tell me go direct bradley and i told him i was a /U which then he confirmed and said,"you dont have gps". nowadays a lot of the approach controllers assume that we have gps but thats not always the case

New York approach I've found typically expects you are either /G or else have a VFR GPS and will just use that instead if they give you direct. It's not right and I did the same as you with my /U Aztec - I forced them to do it right. But it's how it is.

I didn't think WAAS was all that great until I started flying it. Now, I wouldn't put a non-WAAS GPS in a plane.

 

[EdFred]

I didn't think WAAS was all that great until I started flying it. Now, I wouldn't put a non-WAAS GPS in a plane.

If no WAAS approaches at any of the fields you frequent, what is the benefit?

 

[Sac Arrow]

"What altitude are you attempting to fly at?"

"Do you mean at what altitude are you attempting to fly?"

"Um, yeah that."

"8,500"

"You're at 8,470, level."

"Yeah, so?"

"If it'll fly level at 8,470, it'll fly level at 8,500, won't it?"

"It is flying level at eighty-five hundred."

Haha fixed it for you.

 

[Brad Z]

If no WAAS approaches at any of the fields you frequent, what is the benefit?

No need to do RAIM checks (assuming anyone is actually doing them)
No need to have VOR equipment on board
More alternate choices for IFR
Resale value

 

[Ted]

If no WAAS approaches at any of the fields you frequent, what is the benefit?

A bit over 4 years ago when I put the KLN94 in the Aztec, I said the same thing. I think at the time that was a good decision, especially given what became of the plane. When we got the 310 with a straight 530, we didn't do the W upgrade until our home field got WAAS, and the LPV 30 had lower mins than the ILS 27.

Now living with WAAS, I notice a two major benefits:

1) More and more of the fields out there are getting LPV approaches. So most fields frequented will get them. Putting non-WAAS in today with this continued proliferation doesn't make a great deal of sense, especially for piston GA planes that will see the biggest benefit, going into small fields.

2) I really like the terrain feature.

 

[azure]

I didn't think WAAS was all that great until I started flying it. Now, I wouldn't put a non-WAAS GPS in a plane.

+1. My very first solo IMC flight, I would not have gotten in at KPTK without WAAS. Winds were too strong out of the west for the ILS 9R, they were using 27L and offering the LOC BC. I figured it would be marginal and asked for the RNAV (which has LPV minimums) -- and didn't acquire the runway environment until about 100-200 feet below the LOC BC MDA.

 

[coma24]

Hold your altitude to the foot (within the resolution of the altimeter) and within 0.01nm cross track error reported on the GPS for the course you're tracking. You will truly get to know your airplane.

Other than that, getting to know the power/pitch combos for descent, level and cruise would be a good idea, too.

Truth be told, the stick and rudder skills of IFR aren't that hard. Most of it is comms, situational awareness, staying ahead of the plane and being able to interpret the instruments.

 

[Approach_controller]

This is a big help in improving your Comm skills. Especially in an active sector with a controller speaking 100 words a minute with gusts to 150

Not going to lie. I just laughed my 6 off at that comment.

 

[Clark1961]

Not going to lie. I just laughed my 6 off at that comment.

Aint nothin' 'til you git a 600 wpm clearance just after you fly through the localizer...BTDT got multiple T-shirts...Denver can suckwhen IMC.

 

[denverpilot]

New York approach I've found typically expects you are either /G or else have a VFR GPS and will just use that instead if they give you direct. It's not right and I did the same as you with my /U Aztec - I forced them to do it right. But it's how it is.

I didn't think WAAS was all that great until I started flying it. Now, I wouldn't put a non-WAAS GPS in a plane.

DEN TRACON asked where I was going on one flight inbound to KAPA...

"Flying the filed transition route over FQF."

"Cleared direct Centennial."

"Unable, the aircraft equipment is slant uniform."

"Oh.... Ok... Resume own navigation. Direct Centennial when able."

I noticed the revisions this summer removed the transition route from FQF to CASSE. Heh. Maybe I got enough in the way the TRACON asked someone to remove it. You're really in the way going from FQF to APA when they're landing northbound at DEN. Cutting across their conga line, so they have to slam dunk the airliners after they cross overhead. Now that I live out here at the top right corner of the approach plate, I see the pattern as they go over the house.

If and when we get back to /A or /G, I'm hoping someone accidentally gives me "direct FIRPI" sometime. Heh. "Unable, we can't maintain 210 knots." The line under the 210K is stupid. There's plenty of folks vectored onto the final just inside FIRPI who aren't doing anywhere near 210.

They usually spin you if a jet is coming up behind you if you're outside CASSE... "Make a left 360 for traffic in trail, re-intercept the 35R localizer."

The new RNAV approaches look fun. Note that the RNAV calls out the FIRPI restriction as a maximum of 210 only. The minimum on the ILS approach isn't there. I believe that was the original intention and someone added the underline accidentally. I think it's interesting the RNAV 17L specifically calls out 7 mile legs in the hold on the missed, too. Wonder why specifically 7 miles...

Always interesting stuff to wonder about on charts.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk