Student Pilot - Video Report of my First Cross Country Solo in SoCal

[eetrojan]

Here are some annotated videos of the outbound and return legs of my first solo cross-country from John Wayne to Ramona. It was about 150 miles for the round trip.

Longer Versions
Leg 1 (20 mins) - http://youtu.be/hvfX-oBO-fI
Leg 2 (15 mins) - http://youtu.be/H5lkUkna17Y

The editing took more time than the flying, but the "longer" videos are still pretty long. Here are some much shorter versions too:

Short Versions
Leg 1 (5 mins) - http://youtu.be/37N03a7s3bo
Leg 2 (3 mins) - http://youtu.be/fAkKrIBUCaY

Leg 1 is from my home airport of John Wayne to Ramona, a small towered airport I had never flown to before.

This leg was planned as a coastal route, from John Wayne to the Newport Beach coast, then South along the coastline past Laguna Beach, Dana Point, San Clemente, and finally Oceanside, where I turned inland and flew toward Ramona airport.

After I shut down, it was VERY quiet at Ramona Airport. The wind was swinging a distant sign back and forth with a lonely squeaking sound. It reminded me of a ghost-town scene from an old western. Just needed a tumbleweed.

Leg 2 is an inland route over the relatively unpopulated terrain near the Santa Ana Mountains that separate Orange County from Riverside County.

On the learning side, I had a somewhat snarky flight services specialist who didn’t seem to like my school’s instructions to open my flight plan in the runup (wish I would have said, "five minutes from now, Zulu"), needed a little help from SoCal to find the airport, did a really poor job of communicating how I wanted to orbit Ramona field before landing (I need to learn to use compass directions, not inexact phrases like “half circle,” tower sounded frustrated with me), had a fairly crappy landing at Ramona, and decided to do a go-around on my first landing approach at home because I felt low.

On the good side, I managed to successfully confirm that the restricted area over Camp Pendleton’s coastline was "cold," saw some beautiful California scenery over the coastline and inland mountains, met some nice folks at Chuck Hall Aviation, managed to buy fuel, didn't break the plane, and made it home.

All in all, it was A LOT of fun.

 

[Shawn]

Best thing my instructor taught me...upon initial contact with any ATC always state "Student Pilot"...and once I pass to state "new pilot" or "unfamiliar with area" when entering a new area or towered airport if you are not 100% confident in the area. Most of the snippy ATC stories seem to be centered around ATC who assumes that the pilot knows or should know the local procedures and check points.

A little "unfamiliar" goes a LONG way with getting help and guidance. Doesn't mean you area noob, but rather that it sets up that they shouldn't assume that you know everything they are expecting.

 

[eetrojan]

Best thing my instructor taught me...upon initial contact with any ATC always state "Student Pilot"...

Good advice. Before the handoff to tower, approach was telling me to look for the airport at my 11 o'clock and it was actually at around my 9:30 where, it appears, I have a gigantic blind spot shaped like a runway. I need to expand my scan.

After being unable to find the airport, I responded with something like, "still looking, student pilot," and my reward was a VERY helpful heading. Perhaps I should have alerted them on initial contact rather than later.

In hindsight, tower may have been less frustrated with me had I advised them of my newbie status on initial contact too.

When I initially called Ramona ground to ask about flight following without being certain of how to establish it from there, I revealed my student status so that I was more likely to get some friendly help. The response was very kind.

 

[Concorde]

Congratulations !
You did good thanks for sharing .

 

[LJS1993]

Nice videos!!!!!!! How do you like that plane?

 

[charris911]

Great job on the video!!! Good flight and good decision on the go-around. The FSS briefer was rather snippy, if there is such a thing as "assumed departure time", I was trying to figure out what his issue was he was having. All in all, your self-critiques are on the money, I think about my last flight and jot down my mistakes or things to try to corrrect,, too.

Very cool, very good job.

 

[eetrojan]

Nice videos!!!!!!! How do you like that plane?

I like it a lot. It’s great fun and, so I’m told, a good trainer relative to other options. It’s very light and very responsive, almost squirrely, and the bubble canopy gives me a great view of the world as I fly. My flight school has 172s, but they said I would save a little money (about $20 an hour less) and learn to “fly” the plane more if I trained in a SportStar. My hope is that if I ever MASTER landings in this little hummingbird of a plane (remains to be seen…), it will transfer to other planes.

Take this with a grain of salt as I don’t have any other experience. Other than a couple of hours of spin recovery training in the front seat of a Decathlon, all of my 40+ hours are in a SportStar.

I suspect that after I earn my ticket, I’ll quickly get myself checked out in other airplanes because the SportStar is pretty slow (90 knots is about max), and its useful load is only about 500 lbs. If you put two normal sized adults in it, you don’t have much capacity left over for fuel and baggage.

On the other hand, it’s like flying around on the back of a large bird, and it only burns about 6 GPH.

 

[frfly172]

Nice videos ,now you can use it as a learning tool.

 

[Randall45]

Wow. That video was fantastic. All the detail you added to it made is so much more enjoyable. Bravo!

I've never seen a flight plan opened on the ground though.

 

[ferrari-tech]

The editing took more time than the flying, but the "longer" videos are still pretty long. Here are some much shorter versions too:

.

Aint that the truth.

My school wont let me post the video's but they are a great learning tool to review again and again.

As a fellow student pilot couple of things I notice and would bring up.

I thought you radio work was 1st class, you where calm and didn't get rattled by the controllers. Great job, well done. I did think a couple of the controllers where cocks though

I thought you landings where good, and your decision to go around and not force the landing was a very professional choice.

Biggest thing for me though was watching you flip through charts and paper work etc, I have been criticized and admonished on this board for spending "extra" money on learning in a G1000 equipped aircraft, the comment " what could I possibly need a G1000 in VFR conditions for" springs to mind, watching you flip the chart about looking for the airport, while I would punch in 2 buttons and maybe twist a knob and its all right there makes the considerable extra $$ worth it, IMHO.

Bottom line you made it there and back safe and sound so that's a big feather in your cap.

Great job and thanks for sharing

 

[eetrojan]

Biggest thing for me though was watching you flip through charts and paper work etc, I have been criticized and admonished on this board for spending "extra" money on learning in a G1000 equipped aircraft, the comment " what could I possibly need a G1000 in VFR conditions for" springs to mind, watching you flip the chart about looking for the airport, while I would punch in 2 buttons and maybe twist a knob and its all right there makes the considerable extra $$ worth it, IMHO.

Thanks for your comments ferrari-tech.

It's funny you mention that. This plane has a Garmin 430 GPS unit. I know how to use some of its functions, but I have ignored it so much throughout my training that I didn't even think to turn to it when I was scanning about for the airport. My goal to date has been to force myself to keep a mental correlation between the chart and the ground, learn to use my arrival times, etc., but given that it's just one more tool, it's odd that I didn't even consider using it. Have to think about that...

 

[eman1200]

wow, great job and great vids!

 

[rottydaddy]

Thanks for your comments ferrari-tech.

It's funny you mention that. This plane has a Garmin 430 GPS unit. I know how to use some of its functions, but I have ignored it so much throughout my training that I didn't even think to turn to it when I was scanning about for the airport. My goal to date has been to force myself to keep a mental correlation between the chart and the ground, learn to use my arrival times, etc., but given that it's just one more tool, it's odd that I didn't even consider using it. Have to think about that...

There's no denying that the G1000 and G430 are very useful- flying with paper is by no means superior. Even VORs are like some magic "cheat" to anyone who's spend some time flying only by pilotage and DR. And all of these radio nav tools are very reliable.

But I think you are on the right track as a student, focusing primarily on learning how to do the looking and figuring yourself (with compass, clock, chart, and flight computer). I didn't watch all of the vids posted, but so far I see you working the paper with minimum heads-down time and pretty good accuracy throughout- very good.
But regarding not finding that airport when and where you expected, I'll offer a suggestion: remember that no matter what tools you have, in VFR nav looking outside should be a priority well above referring to a chart, be it paper or electronic. Obviously the chart should be used to tell you what to look for, and confirm what you think you see, but spending a little more time just looking for an airport is a smarter habit, IMHO. Keeps your eyes outside, and improves your airport-hunting skills.
By all means learn to use that 430, but decide before the flight just how stumped you need to be before you turn to it, and set that bar pretty high.
If you do use it, say, to locate your destination when you seem to be off-course at the anticipated time, just note the heading and distance it gives you, then go back to your pilotage.
For VFR flight, I put electronic nav (even VORs) in the same bag as autopilots: those gadgets can probably fly and navigate better than we can, but it's wise to not rely on them too much. It's not so much about being prepared for (unlikely) failure or malfunction of the nav gear or AP as it is about keeping your core skills sharp, and keeping your brain more active during the flight.
I subscribe to the old adage about navigation: to evaluate a navigator, blindfold him before takeoff, fly around a while, then take the blindfold off, hand him a chart, and ask "where are we?" If he looks outside first, he's a keeper.

 

[ksp_530]

Very nice, great job!

 

[eetrojan]

There's no denying that the G1000 and G430 are very useful- flying with paper is by no means superior. Even VORs are like some magic "cheat" to anyone who's spend some time flying only by pilotage and DR. And all of these radio nav tools are very reliable.

But I think you are on the right track as a student, focusing primarily on learning how to do the looking and figuring yourself (with compass, clock, chart, and flight computer). I didn't watch all of the vids posted, but so far I see you working the paper with minimum heads-down time and pretty good accuracy throughout- very good.
But regarding not finding that airport when and where you expected, I'll offer a suggestion: remember that no matter what tools you have, in VFR nav looking outside should be a priority well above referring to a chart, be it paper or electronic. Obviously the chart should be used to tell you what to look for, and confirm what you think you see, but spending a little more time just looking for an airport is a smarter habit, IMHO. Keeps your eyes outside, and improves your airport-hunting skills.
By all means learn to use that 430, but decide before the flight just how stumped you need to be before you turn to it, and set that bar pretty high.
If you do use it, say, to locate your destination when you seem to be off-course at the anticipated time, just note the heading and distance it gives you, then go back to your pilotage.
For VFR flight, I put electronic nav (even VORs) in the same bag as autopilots: those gadgets can probably fly and navigate better than we can, but it's wise to not rely on them too much. It's not so much about being prepared for (unlikely) failure or malfunction of the nav gear or AP as it is about keeping your core skills sharp, and keeping your brain more active during the flight.
I subscribe to the old adage about navigation: to evaluate a navigator, blindfold him before takeoff, fly around a while, then take the blindfold off, hand him a chart, and ask "where are we?" If he looks outside first, he's a keeper.

Thanks rd - I'm going to keep working on using my eyes. I definitely like KNOWING where I am in the old fasioned sense. Joe

 

[MAKG1]

Thanks rd - I'm going to keep working on using my eyes. I definitely like KNOWING where I am in the old fasioned sense. Joe

I agree wholeheartedly.

I've gotten to the point that I can navigate myself home from any point within 200 miles on a CAVU day with a dead panel and no charts. This is the ultimate backup. Something I hope never to need (and it's definitely not SOP), but it's there. Now, that's a bit easier in California than it is in some other places (even with an undercast or 5 mile visibility), as the topography is quite distinctive. The magnetic compass and a very rough pre-knowledge of direction (as in "I know I started at KPRB, and that's south of my destination") is needed for this, but those can be expected.

Electronic gizmos can and occasionally do lie to you. They can either tell you nothing, or much worse, tell you something that's wrong. It's your own visual situational awareness and planned cross-checks that will tell you (and often quite early) that this is happening. I've seen 430s with broken CDIs do this quite obviously, more than once. Follow that CDI and you end up either going in circles or just in a really wrong direction (like following the wrong radial on a VOR or OBS mode target).

It's worth it to understand a 430, especially the flight planning menu and OBS mode. They are fairly common. And, the pre-glass 172SPs have KLN models, which aren't all that different. But, as you have figured out, it is not a crutch.

 

[asechrest]

Well done on the videos! Fun to watch.

Subtitles for the Morse code for HDF VOR were a nice touch.

 

[ferrari-tech]

There's no denying that the G1000 and G430 are very useful- flying with paper is by no means superior. Even VORs are like some magic "cheat" to anyone who's spend some time flying only by pilotage and DR. And all of these radio nav tools are very reliable.

But I think you are on the right track as a student, focusing primarily on learning how to do the looking and figuring yourself (with compass, clock, chart, and flight computer). I didn't watch all of the vids posted, but so far I see you working the paper with minimum heads-down time and pretty good accuracy throughout- very good.
But regarding not finding that airport when and where you expected, I'll offer a suggestion: remember that no matter what tools you have, in VFR nav looking outside should be a priority well above referring to a chart, be it paper or electronic. Obviously the chart should be used to tell you what to look for, and confirm what you think you see, but spending a little more time just looking for an airport is a smarter habit, IMHO. Keeps your eyes outside, and improves your airport-hunting skills.
By all means learn to use that 430, but decide before the flight just how stumped you need to be before you turn to it, and set that bar pretty high.
If you do use it, say, to locate your destination when you seem to be off-course at the anticipated time, just note the heading and distance it gives you, then go back to your pilotage.
For VFR flight, I put electronic nav (even VORs) in the same bag as autopilots: those gadgets can probably fly and navigate better than we can, but it's wise to not rely on them too much. It's not so much about being prepared for (unlikely) failure or malfunction of the nav gear or AP as it is about keeping your core skills sharp, and keeping your brain more active during the flight.
I subscribe to the old adage about navigation: to evaluate a navigator, blindfold him before takeoff, fly around a while, then take the blindfold off, hand him a chart, and ask "where are we?" If he looks outside first, he's a keeper.

All good valid points.
My school made me learn the charts and the G1000 at the same time and with the same emphasis on both. For two reasons, keep a track of where I am with paper, in case the glass fail's, and to keep and eye and a watch on the electronics, just to make sure I entered the data correctly.
I was told from the first lesson I will be tested on every piece of equipment in the aircraft so get comfortable with it.

Of course for my solo cross countries I made out a full paper nav log, then once that had been signed off by my instructor I entered it into the G1000, still on the way I took pictures of ground reference points out the window, then another with me pointing to it on the chart.
(autopilot flying plane, and SoCal giving me traffic advisories as well as the G1000 when pictures taken) Of course the plane knew where it was the whole time..

 

[MAKG1]

Don't take photos solo, as a student even with an autopilot. They do fail, sometimes suddenly, and can make unintended control inputs.

I'm concerned that you are much too trusting of a very complex system that almost certainly has thousands of bugs. Your airplane has a few hundred physical moving parts, and millions of electronic ones. It's not possible to put that many parts together correctly.

I disagree with rottydaddy that autopilot failures are rare, having personally experienced flying in circles, centering 30 deg off course, and S-turning, all in different airplanes. And they should ALWAYS be turned off in turbulence.

And with the Garmins, it's really easy to have the CDI switch in the wrong position. That can get you in a heap of trouble

If you think the airplane knew where it was and relied on that, you were a passenger, not a pilot.

 

[fiveoboy01]

I watched both of your videos and enjoyed them. Subscribed too!

 

[ferrari-tech]

Don't take photos solo, as a student even with an autopilot. They do fail, sometimes suddenly, and can make unintended control inputs.

I'm concerned that you are much too trusting of a very complex system that almost certainly has thousands of bugs. Your airplane has a few hundred physical moving parts, and millions of electronic ones. It's not possible to put that many parts together correctly.

I disagree with rottydaddy that autopilot failures are rare, having personally experienced flying in circles, centering 30 deg off course, and S-turning, all in different airplanes. And they should ALWAYS be turned off in turbulence.

And with the Garmins, it's really easy to have the CDI switch in the wrong position. That can get you in a heap of trouble

If you think the airplane knew where it was and relied on that, you were a passenger, not a pilot.

How do you navigate ? by the stars ??. I'm sure the aircraft you fly have very complex systems like, oh I don't know how about an internal combustion engine working at 75-95% power/load continuously, but I'm sure you still use it.
In life we use the talents and gifts god gave us, in complex equipment we use the systems we have at our disposal. Are you suggesting I don't use the G1000 or the auto pilot ?? It will be pretty hard to pass the check ride as I will be asked to use everything in the aircraft, including flying with the autopilot in "NAV" mode.
If you think for a second that snapping a picture with an i-phone takes any more time than folding a chart or looking for a frequency for VOR or radio, or finding a taxi diagram you are sorely mistaken

Have you ever flown a G1000 equipped aircraft ??, because you certainly seem to have a very clear understanding of all the faults and draw backs when ever I mention them in any thread on any forum

 

[MAKG1]

How do you navigate ? by the stars ??. I'm sure the aircraft you fly have very complex systems like, oh I don't know how about an internal combustion engine working at 75-95% power/load continuously, but I'm sure you still use it.
In life we use the talents and gifts god gave us, in complex equipment we use the systems we have at our disposal. Are you suggesting I don't use the G1000 or the auto pilot ?? It will be pretty hard to pass the check ride as I will be asked to use everything in the aircraft, including flying with the autopilot in "NAV" mode.
If you think for a second that snapping a picture with an i-phone takes any more time than folding a chart or looking for a frequency for VOR or radio, or finding a taxi diagram you are sorely mistaken

Have you ever flown a G1000 equipped aircraft ??, because you certainly seem to have a very clear understanding of all the faults and draw backs when ever I mention them in any thread on any forum

Internal combustion engines are among the most complex mechanical systems produced.

They have several orders of magnitude fewer moving parts than a large software system. Even when you count all the book specs as "moving parts" (like, say, cylinder taper limits or rod bearing clearances). The power setting affects settings and other design criteria, but not complexity. If anything, the continuous high power settings simplify the systems slightly (for instance, they can do without spark advance better than a system needing to run over a wider range of RPM).

I suggest you be competent in operating that aircraft with no autopilot and no G1000. Neither is an essential system. And it's a good bet that your checkride is going to include FAILURES of those systems.

I don't have direct access to a G1000; frankly I don't want to spend the extra $50/hour for nothing. But I do to a G500 and several Aspen/430s, and at least four different autopilot models. Are you claiming it's significantly different? Those all contain Garmin GPSs and interface in complex manners with autopilots. I've presumed that the G1000 has only one button for coupled nav; this is possible in principle. The Aspens have two and if either is misconfigured, you go the wrong way.

Taking a photo must always be second to flying the airplane. You're a student, and you cannot be that familiar with your limitations yet. Did you remember to clear the area of traffic before you did that? You're flying a Cessna; that's real important. While you are focusing on that nonessential, you are ignoring several other more important things, not the least of which is traffic scanning. Let the passengers or instructor take photos. Looking up a frequency is also something some passengers can do, and if not, it's more important to successfully flying an airplane than any photograph. You also often have the option of asking on your current frequency. I'll do that routinely at low altitude (Class B flyways) or in areas of heavy traffic when flying solo.

I always use pilotage and ded reckoning as a backup. Every time. Landmarks abound in my region and in yours, and there is no need whatsoever for any GPS just to determine position. And yours is almost certainly going to "fail" during your checkride, if not IRL. FYI, it's legit for the examiner to test you on anything in the aircraft, but turning the autopilot on is very unlikely. If YOU turn it on, it's quite likely to "fail" right away.

What do you do if smoke starts coming out from under the panel? Die? I'd turn off the master, override the glass panel battery, and land visually at the nearest airport. If turning off the master doesn't kill the smoke, land immediately, wherever I can. Glass panels burning out like that is not unheard of.

 

[ferrari-tech]

but turning the autopilot on is very unlikely.

.

That is just plain wrong. The examiner I will be taking my check ride with makes the students not only turn the auto pilot on but use all its functions at various stages of the test. His most common practice is to make you divert to a different airport using the GPS and auto pilot in nav mode.

I'm sure the GPS functions of the G1000 are similar to other garmin products, not sure if the smaller products have one soft key performing multiple functions depending on what menu you are using. The biggest difference is in the PFD, it has much more information available than the six pack.

Of course I scan for traffic constantly, even more when I'm on my solo, and when ever I fly I am always on with the controlling agency getting flight following and traffic advisories

I know several professional pilots and they all advised if the cost wasn't a concern and I had the chance to learn on glass. I certainly didn't get into this to save money.

I emailed my friend yesterday who is the senior Check Capt currently flying the 747-800 to see what he thought about the use of glass his response is pasted below.

"I'm all for the glass. It's the present as well as the future. While its definitely not required, is sure is nice. The few guys I know learning to fly are all using the glass

It really makes instrument flying easy. Great situational awareness.


I love technology. I flew the 747 classic for 10 or 15 years. The whole time I was hoping to be on a 400 with glass. When I moved onto it, it was so nice. Still is.

Everything is at your fingertips. What's not to like! That said, I have yet to fly a single engine with glass. Someday.
My first experience with glass was in a Brasilia 25 years ago. They were new then. Fastest commuters out there at 300 kts. Great airplane. Hard to go from glass back to a basic panel. Went to Jetstream 31 which was basic. Hated it.
We use iPads for Jepp charts.
the 747-8 makes every approach look like an ILS.
The -8 creates a false GS that connects those dots. Displays it the same as an ILS.

Sorta hard to explain it all in a few words



We are in testing with the iPad, but its what most guys use exclusively, even during testing. "

Then he sent me this taken somewhere over the pacific, I better tell him to be careful taking pictures

Like I said, its not for everyone, I am more aware than anyone that any system can fail at anytime and take all the precautions I can. That's what the check lists are for after all.
But I wouldn't knock it until you've tried it.
To not do something because it might fail is just foolish IMHO, I think on any flight there is more chance of pilot error than electronics failure, and there will never be a system to prevent that.

 

[MAKG1]

Misconception #1 is rather important.

That glass panel shows THE SAME information as steam gauges, with one exception -- trend lines. Those trend lines are great if you need to keep your head down; it makes you really precise. But in VMC that precision requires heads down time you don't otherwise need. The presentation with a large AI has really obvious benefits for an instrument scan. Once again, heads down. You don't need any AI VFR.

Your 747 captain is making statements about instrument flight and doing things with a SIC. It's not the same. He's also not learning to fly (yes, he almost certainly has recurrent training -- not the same).

I don't "not" use things because they might fail, and if you think that's my objection, you're missing the point. I don't use G1000 only because I have no reason to spend $50 more per hour; I can get a basic steam gauge 172 adequate for fair weather mountains for $115/hour, and I can get a basic retractible (with a 17000 foot service ceiling -- that's a real big deal with mountain peaks up to 14500 and passes at 11000 in the region) with steam gauges for less than the cost of a G1000 172 locally. Glass does nothing I can't do with other equipment, including cheaper glass panels. But you must be able to function without that glass panel. A blown circuit breaker should never be a life-threatening event. Once again, things are different in IMC, but that's not where you nor I are at the moment.

Honestly, after transitioning to the Garmin 430 and then the Aspens, there isn't all that much to these systems for VFR, even using all the VFR facilities (OBS mode, flight plans, frequency lookups, NRST, etc.). But there is a LOT of potential for distraction. VFR, it just doesn't buy you anything significant.

 

[Shawn]

but turning the autopilot on is very unlikely. If YOU turn it on, it's quite likely to "fail" right away.

That is not at all an actuate statement. I trained and tested in a G1000. My instructor and I took the approach that I was flying a steam gauges plane for my check ride and that my DPE may not allow any of the technology to be used but I was going to use "all available resources" that were at my disposal until told otherwise, so I was ready for it either way.

First thing DPE says getting in the plane...I can use all the technology available to me once I demonstrate I can fly without it. He wanted to see my cockpit resource management, that it wasn't a distraction and I could manage the glass cockpit while still flying the plane safely.

Now if you turn it on and you don't know EXACTLY what to expect and it does not respond properly...you freak out and don't know immediately what to do and can't disengage it instantaneously...THAT might be an instant fail!

 

[Henning]

Thanks for your comments ferrari-tech.

It's funny you mention that. This plane has a Garmin 430 GPS unit. I know how to use some of its functions, but I have ignored it so much throughout my training that I didn't even think to turn to it when I was scanning about for the airport. My goal to date has been to force myself to keep a mental correlation between the chart and the ground, learn to use my arrival times, etc., but given that it's just one more tool, it's odd that I didn't even consider using it. Have to think about that...

If you don't know how to use the 430, learn it. In the mean time you did the better thing; if you need a steer, ask ATC, don't go head down in the panel and try to figure out a complex radio while flying solo in crowded and complex airspace that contains large rocks, it's a recipe for a crash. Your eyes belong outside. When in doubt, give a shout.

Go to Garmin.com and download the 430/530 simulator and instructions, then get the spinning and pushing stuff down in the plane on the ground plugged into a GPU of some sort.

 

[MAKG1]

That is not at all an actuate statement. I trained and tested in a G1000. My instructor and I took the approach that I was flying a steam gauges plane for my check ride and that my DPE may not allow any of the technology to be used but I was going to use "all available resources" that were at my disposal until told otherwise, so I was ready for it either way.

First thing DPE says getting in the plane...I can use all the technology available to me once I demonstrate I can fly without it. He wanted to see my cockpit resource management, that it wasn't a distraction and I could manage the glass cockpit while still flying the plane safely.

Now if you turn it on and you don't know EXACTLY what to expect and it does not respond properly...you freak out and don't know immediately what to do and can't disengage it instantaneously...THAT might be an instant fail!

I think you misunderstood. The applicant will not fail for using an autopilot correctly. The only way would be if he did something unsafe (and there are a couple of those -- it's seldom a good idea to combine alt hold with a large throttle reduction, for instance). The instrument will likely "fail" (i.e., the examiner will say "Your autopilot failed," or something similar) so the examiner can determine if you can fly without it.

Most of the checkride isn't really possible with an autopilot anyway. Stalls, steep turns, landings, etc. don't do very well.

 

[Shawn]

Agreed..there is more of a risk of something going wrong with the technology or operator error than not using it at all so it is always safer to just fly the basics on the check ride rather than introducing added variables.

 

[jspilot]

Couple things about this first leg of the xc were a bit confusing to me. It seems like you were not very confident over the radios- you don't need to apologize for every little thing. The ATC has no idea you are a student pilot and my experience is when you give them the indication you are timid they get nervous too and then become quicker to issues demands and instructions. So what you could not find the airport???? Just fess up and say, "requesting vectors to the airport" and they will give it to you. Also, why did you decide to orbit the airport??? It looked like a very simple airport and if you just entered the downwind and landed you would have made things so much easier on yourself. Lastly, you were crazy high on that first approach and probably should have gone around. Floating almost halfway down the runway and being at almost 80 knots on short final( I think that's what the airspeed was) is not a safe practice. I hate to be so hard on you and I give you major credit for posting your first xc solo for us to look at but I imagine you did this for feedback.

Couple things I've learned since my solo xc some 100 hours ago. First, be in command of the situation. Tell ATC what you want and they will give it to you. The more confident you sound the easier it is for them to help, and that's what they want to do. Second, make things easier on yourself. Stay ahead of the plane and things will slow down. The last thing is, fly the plane first and everything else comes second. I got the sense that you let some jitters get in the way of your flying and that's normal at your experience level( heck my first xc was not a thing of beauty either) but I think the more confidence you get the better your overall experience will be.

But in all honestly, you made it safely back, the airplane will fly aain and you learned a great deal. That's all good stuff!

 

[MAKG1]

Some experience with the controllers and pro pilots will calm the radio jitters. They are all people trying to help.

I've had a few controllers inject a bit of humor (like Oakland Center asking for a traffic report on I-80 on Labor Day near Lake Tahoe -- they knew it was terrible; it always is). That helps humanize them.

If you need it, the "student pilot" thing in the AIM is available, but I never needed it in practice. I've found every controller I've interacted with to be helpful, even when the radio is noisy and I ask for multiple repeats. Some folks have reported occasional problems with specific controllers, but this is not ordinary.

 

[Henning]

Agreed..there is more of a risk of something going wrong with the technology or operator error than not using it at all so it is always safer to just fly the basics on the check ride rather than introducing added variables.

That may not be an option though. If there is equipment in the plane, it is fair game to be tested on during the check ride. The 430 isn't that difficult to learn to use and if one is flying with one, one should know how to use at least the VFR functionality like dialing in a 'Direct To' location.

 

[MAKG1]

That may not be an option though. If there is equipment in the plane, it is fair game to be tested on during the check ride. The 430 isn't that difficult to learn to use and if one is flying with one, one should know how to use at least the VFR functionality like dialing in a 'Direct To' location.

But, if the equipment is not in the plane, it cannot be tested.

IMO, a 430 isn't that complex, but it's an hour that can easily be done after the license is in hand. There is enough of an issue with nerves during a practical test that I'll suggest the extra variables are best left for a later (or separate) date. The extra equipment is also extra opportunity for distraction, a "special emphasis area" during the practical test.

A local DPE here had a story he liked to tell about failing a candidate who insisted on programming a diversion into a G1000 when the airport was in sight and only a few miles away. And this was inside Class C near the primary airport....

 

[Henning]

But, if the equipment is not in the plane, it cannot be tested.

IMO, a 430 isn't that complex, but it's an hour that can easily be done after the license is in hand. There is enough of an issue with nerves during a practical test that I'll suggest the extra variables are best left for a later (or separate) date. The extra equipment is also extra opportunity for distraction, a "special emphasis area" during the practical test.

A local DPE here had a story he liked to tell about failing a candidate who insisted on programming a diversion into a G1000 when the airport was in sight and only a few miles away. And this was inside Class C near the primary airport....

Are you suggesting pulling the 430 for the check ride?

 

[MAKG1]

Are you suggesting pulling the 430 for the check ride?

Certainly not. I'm suggesting preparing for and taking the practical test in a simpler aircraft, that just doesn't have one.

"Fixing" stuff that isn't broken is an opportunity to make it broken.

 

[ferrari-tech]

Certainly not. I'm suggesting preparing for and taking the practical test in a simpler aircraft, that just doesn't have one.

"Fixing" stuff that isn't broken is an opportunity to make it broken.

I've always been able to walk and chew gum at the same time.
The G1000 is not that complicated and in no way is it a distraction from looking out the window and flying the plane. If it distracts you that's your fault not the system
I cant imagine how negative you would be if I had taken all my training at the local Cirrus school. ( which all my friends that own a cirrus talked me out of)
I've said time and time again, its not for everyone but it works for me, I have no idea what car you drive but I feel certain you would tell me it gets you from A to B as well as a new Ferrari 458 or a McLaren MP4 -12C, but its not just not quite the same is it...
Everyone has got the point you don't like the G1000, so don't fly one, but don't keep offering opinions on something you have never even tried.
If you need the extra $50 ( as that seems to be important to you) PM me and I will happily send it to you so you can give it a try.

 

[eetrojan]

Couple things about this first leg of the xc were a bit confusing to me. It seems like you were not very confident over the radios- you don't need to apologize for every little thing. The ATC has no idea you are a student pilot and my experience is when you give them the indication you are timid they get nervous too and then become quicker to issues demands and instructions. So what you could not find the airport???? Just fess up and say, "requesting vectors to the airport" and they will give it to you. Also, why did you decide to orbit the airport??? It looked like a very simple airport and if you just entered the downwind and landed you would have made things so much easier on yourself. Lastly, you were crazy high on that first approach and probably should have gone around. Floating almost halfway down the runway and being at almost 80 knots on short final( I think that's what the airspeed was) is not a safe practice. I hate to be so hard on you and I give you major credit for posting your first xc solo for us to look at but I imagine you did this for feedback.

Couple things I've learned since my solo xc some 100 hours ago. First, be in command of the situation. Tell ATC what you want and they will give it to you. The more confident you sound the easier it is for them to help, and that's what they want to do. Second, make things easier on yourself. Stay ahead of the plane and things will slow down. The last thing is, fly the plane first and everything else comes second. I got the sense that you let some jitters get in the way of your flying and that's normal at your experience level( heck my first xc was not a thing of beauty either) but I think the more confidence you get the better your overall experience will be.

But in all honestly, you made it safely back, the airplane will fly aain and you learned a great deal. That's all good stuff!

Just got back from dumping my first born son in college... Think of the airplane I could buy with all that flipping tuition.

Thanks for the feedback. No worries about being hard on me. I’ve got a thick skin. My goal is simply to get better and better.

On orbiting, that’s what my school wants me to do when arriving at an airport that I have not previously visited. Of course, I have the option of NOT orbiting and just entering the pattern if it seems appropriate to do so. I definitely considered just flying the pattern as I was essentially on the 45 when I initially arrived, but I felt high and wanted a few more minutes to get myself oriented. It was just a call that I made.

As you noticed, I ended up high anyway, picked up some speed and floated for "a bit." In hindsight, I blame myself for crossing over, but not flying far enough away from the runway before turning right, and then right again, to enter left traffic on the 45. My turn essentially became a 270-degree turn to the downwind. I carried the extra altitude through the rest of the approach.

I’ve got some night flying tomorrow, and will probably fly my 150 NM + XC in the next week or two. Destination is Santa Barbara, KSBA!

 

[MAKG1]

Wow, a long cross country right through LA airspace!

Certainly possible, probably a lot of radio work, maybe some weather dodging....but it beats eastbound heat. I'm at KPMD right now, and the thunderstorms finally ended yesterday.

 

[LDJones]

Nicely done videos and good job on the radios. Having a couple of students struggling with radio comm lately, color me impressed!

 

[yakdriver]

Wow, a long cross country right through LA airspace!

Certainly possible, probably a lot of radio work, maybe some weather dodging....but it beats eastbound heat. I'm at KPMD right now, and the thunderstorms finally ended yesterday.

That was my second cross country and I lost my comm radio on the way back. No problem flying through the corridor. Joined in with the rest of the 150s on 19L rocked my wings and got the green light. My first CC was SNA to San Diego Lindbergh Field. But that was in 1976. I know the school the OP is using and I'm sure he is being taught right. Up until a couple of years ago they would not allow you to use anything other than pilotage and VORs until after the checkride and I agree with that policy. He's also way ahead of the curve already having done spin training. As for cameras during primary training I'm not sure that it is a distraction or not. Seems like the world loves videos for everything.
Off the subject I built the Pitts model hanging in the school. Also look for pictures of Michael in my SNJ. Keep up the good work you'll be taking your checkride in no time. Don

 

[jspilot]

On orbiting, that’s what my school wants me to do when arriving at an airport that I have not previously visited. Of course, I have the option of NOT orbiting and just entering the pattern if it seems appropriate to do so. I definitely considered just flying the pattern as I was essentially on the 45 when I initially arrived, but I felt high and wanted a few more minutes to get myself oriented. It was just a call that I made.

I am very curious why your school is teaching you to orbit an unfamiliar airport. Do you know why they are suggesting that? I could see if the airport in a non towered airport and you choose to orbit to check runway conditions/ wind sock.... Things like that. It just seems very not needed. I could definately imagine this practice getting you in a tough spot flying into Santa Barbra or any busier airport as it siginificantly increases the demands placed on ATC because they pretty much want you to land just by entering the pattern. Just seems like your school is putting you in a tough spot by suggesting you do something that is not the norm, at least as far as my experience is concerned.