Use Of AutoPilot in IMC
Fly Conventional Gear
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Winchester
Posts: 1,600
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But of course Bose, I wasn't trying to say that landing at Gatwick from the airways was easy...you're completely right...the controllers did make it easy for me; I just turned up at the Midhurst VOR, was told to route to MAY and it was vectors from there.
It wasn't something I did lightly...I'd done ILS approaches (under the hood) into big airports in the US and was aware that the most important thing was to do as I was told and be professional on the radio. Which is more than can be said for some dodgy Russian sounding crew who were in front of me in the sequence
.
It wasn't something I did lightly...I'd done ILS approaches (under the hood) into big airports in the US and was aware that the most important thing was to do as I was told and be professional on the radio. Which is more than can be said for some dodgy Russian sounding crew who were in front of me in the sequence
.
Fly Conventional Gear
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Winchester
Posts: 1,600
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But still my point, the controllers were doing the work for you quite probably because you were a novelty and they were paying extra attention to making sure you did not knock an airbus out of the sky.
How so? I was in Class G, with a RIS, doing my own thing. I didn't even ask for a Luton Zone transit; they offered me a quick shortcut through, which I accepted.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Maders UK
Age: 57
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
let the A/P take the strain
"whether folks are happy to undertake prolonged single pilot IMC flying without an autopilot or would never consider it?"
Never. That would just be soooooo unpleasant!
I wouldn't even consider it.
What's more I might spill the G+T!
Non-functional A/P means I do not go IMC.
For me in the rough stuff the A/P does a far better job than I.
IFR - I hand fly 5 mins on departure and 5 mins on approach/landing.
Safer for me to monitor what is happening.
If I want to hand fly I take my R44 instead - and I never take that into IMC.
SB
Never. That would just be soooooo unpleasant!
I wouldn't even consider it.
What's more I might spill the G+T!
Non-functional A/P means I do not go IMC.
For me in the rough stuff the A/P does a far better job than I.
IFR - I hand fly 5 mins on departure and 5 mins on approach/landing.
Safer for me to monitor what is happening.
If I want to hand fly I take my R44 instead - and I never take that into IMC.
SB
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is nothing wrong with single engine IFR, just the same as there is nothing wrong with single engine over water or at night. It is a personal risk assessment choice. Some are prepared to do it others are not, the aircraft does not know it is in cloud or night etc.
Single engine night work and over water is equally foolish. However, single engine IMC is another matter entirely. Particularly in light piston engine airplanes. Setting aside the obvious issues of engine failure, most light singles have one electrical source, limited instrumentation, a single vacum source, no backup instruments, etc. Many of the vacum powered instruments in use tend to precess, some badly, and are often cheap in nature. Fine for training basic procedures on a good day with a hood; poor choices in the weather. Add to that a lack of radar and weather capability, lack of deice, and yes, one single engine. An exposed alternator or generator, exposed to the elements. Unprotected flying surfaces. Very limited performance.
If you've never hit embedded convective weather, you may be in for a surprise. If you've never suddenly encountered a rapid, severe ice buildup, you may be in for a suprise. If you've never suddenly found yourself on a partial panel, experienced an electrical failure on instruments, had a gyro slowly die on you (insidious, and can lead you into the ground because it looks quite normal), fixated, been distracted, been rolled in wake, or any of the other things that can happen, especially more so in a light single airplane...then you may certainly be in for a surprise. In fact, as a willing self-proclaimed risk-taker, you may be found with that surprised look still on your face.
Don't be that guy.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some are prepared to do it others are not, the aircraft does not know it is in cloud or night etc.
I agree completely, the airplane does not know but having an IQ above an inanimate machine I know where I am and not wanting to play Russian Roulette with an airplane I don't fly single engine at night, in IMC or over water.
Met another ferry pilot a few years ago in the parking area of the airport in Luxor who was delivering a Cessna 172 from the USA to somewhere in the sand box. We got talking and I asked him how he felt in that thing during the North Atlantic crossing and he said the same thing, he felt no fear because the airplane did not know it was over water.
That mindset is something I can't understand.
I agree completely, the airplane does not know but having an IQ above an inanimate machine I know where I am and not wanting to play Russian Roulette with an airplane I don't fly single engine at night, in IMC or over water.
Met another ferry pilot a few years ago in the parking area of the airport in Luxor who was delivering a Cessna 172 from the USA to somewhere in the sand box. We got talking and I asked him how he felt in that thing during the North Atlantic crossing and he said the same thing, he felt no fear because the airplane did not know it was over water.
That mindset is something I can't understand.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why are you in IMC?
There might be a good 2,000 feet between the base and the ground. You might be a few hundred feet above the base. You might be there because you want some experience of flying in IMC in relatively carefully chosen conditions - no convective activity what so ever and no risk of icing. If things go wrong there is a readily available out. For a pilot qualified to do so I don’t see that as unreasonable. Moreover I don’t see it matters whether or not there is water below - if the same pilot was also happy to fly over water in VMC.
A wholly different scenario is flying IMC with low bases, embedded activity or icing. I think these are a no go events in the average SEP which is not equipped to deal with these conditions. The minimum equipment in those circumstances is a decent nav fit, storm scope, de-icing and, for low bases, an extra engine.
With any system surely a reasonable starting point is redundancy. We have two VORs so that when the first fails there is a second. We have two fuel pumps or a vac and an electrically driven AI for the same reason.
Having one engine does not seem to fulfill this criteria. However, in fact it does. If it fails we have our eyes and an aircraft that performance in a way that the chances of a successful FL are pretty good. If the engine fails in IMC, with a low base, you are down to one system. Your eyes are useless when you break out at 500 feet - all that remains is luck. With a base of 2,000 feet the second system with a lot less luck has got a reasonable chance of doing a good job.
There might be a good 2,000 feet between the base and the ground. You might be a few hundred feet above the base. You might be there because you want some experience of flying in IMC in relatively carefully chosen conditions - no convective activity what so ever and no risk of icing. If things go wrong there is a readily available out. For a pilot qualified to do so I don’t see that as unreasonable. Moreover I don’t see it matters whether or not there is water below - if the same pilot was also happy to fly over water in VMC.
A wholly different scenario is flying IMC with low bases, embedded activity or icing. I think these are a no go events in the average SEP which is not equipped to deal with these conditions. The minimum equipment in those circumstances is a decent nav fit, storm scope, de-icing and, for low bases, an extra engine.
With any system surely a reasonable starting point is redundancy. We have two VORs so that when the first fails there is a second. We have two fuel pumps or a vac and an electrically driven AI for the same reason.
Having one engine does not seem to fulfill this criteria. However, in fact it does. If it fails we have our eyes and an aircraft that performance in a way that the chances of a successful FL are pretty good. If the engine fails in IMC, with a low base, you are down to one system. Your eyes are useless when you break out at 500 feet - all that remains is luck. With a base of 2,000 feet the second system with a lot less luck has got a reasonable chance of doing a good job.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chuck, SN3 - Guys you are entitled to your own opinion about flying night, IMC etc in single engine aircraft, that is your call. But we don't need the judgmental postings to go with it.
All flying is about personal risk assessment and risk mitigation. Every flight has an amount of risk and we do our best to offset those risks through training and preparation.
I am perfectly happy to fly SEP as described, but I am careful to apply my own mitigating factors before I conduct the flight just as many others are.
All flying is about personal risk assessment and risk mitigation. Every flight has an amount of risk and we do our best to offset those risks through training and preparation.
I am perfectly happy to fly SEP as described, but I am careful to apply my own mitigating factors before I conduct the flight just as many others are.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London, UK
Posts: 778
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hobbit1983,
Your posts would suggest that you are trying to take a considered and diligent approach to flying in IMC. On that basis, why not buy yourself a handheld GPS? It's nothing to do with rules, just common sense. Even a crappy old Garmin Pilot III would make a HUGE difference to that kind of flying and is cheap as chips. If you can afford a colour moving map so much the better.
Your posts would suggest that you are trying to take a considered and diligent approach to flying in IMC. On that basis, why not buy yourself a handheld GPS? It's nothing to do with rules, just common sense. Even a crappy old Garmin Pilot III would make a HUGE difference to that kind of flying and is cheap as chips. If you can afford a colour moving map so much the better.
Professional Student
I've on occasion borrowed/used a handheld GPS from friends at the flying club, for backup use, and it's certainly very useful - I have therefore added a small handheld GPS to my Xmas list 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chuck, SN3 - Guys you are entitled to your own opinion about flying night, IMC etc in single engine aircraft, that is your call. But we don't need the judgmental postings to go with it.
And I don't need your snotty judgmental opinion about how I make decisions.
All flying is about personal risk assessment and risk mitigation. Every flight has an amount of risk and we do our best to offset those risks through training and preparation.
Exactly, and all the training in the world won't help you if you have an engine failure over very cold water beyond gliding distance from land, or in IMC with a low ceiling.....or at night with no ground reference therefore not exposing ones self to these conditions is in my opinion good airmanship.
I am perfectly happy to fly SEP as described, but I am careful to apply my own mitigating factors before I conduct the flight just as many others are.
Think about this for a while::
I was talking to another ferry pilot in Wick while holding for weather on my last Atlantic ferry flight he was delivering a single engine airplane to North America.
I asked him if he was concerned about only having one engine and he said not at all.
I received an e-mail a few months later telling me that he had just disappeared on his last ferry flight over the North Atlantic' I often think about how indifferent he was to the risk factor when we were talking.
And I don't need your snotty judgmental opinion about how I make decisions.
All flying is about personal risk assessment and risk mitigation. Every flight has an amount of risk and we do our best to offset those risks through training and preparation.
Exactly, and all the training in the world won't help you if you have an engine failure over very cold water beyond gliding distance from land, or in IMC with a low ceiling.....or at night with no ground reference therefore not exposing ones self to these conditions is in my opinion good airmanship.
I am perfectly happy to fly SEP as described, but I am careful to apply my own mitigating factors before I conduct the flight just as many others are.
Think about this for a while::
I was talking to another ferry pilot in Wick while holding for weather on my last Atlantic ferry flight he was delivering a single engine airplane to North America.
I asked him if he was concerned about only having one engine and he said not at all.
I received an e-mail a few months later telling me that he had just disappeared on his last ferry flight over the North Atlantic' I often think about how indifferent he was to the risk factor when we were talking.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The thing is Chuck you are talking of a whole different kind of risk.
One may as well be flying an SEP over the N. Pole wearing just one's underpants. Perfectly OK if you have a good heater.
Flying over land, even if it is OVC005 down below, is nothing like as bad. Probably about 99% of Europe, especially the UK, has nothing down there at any given moment. Towns can be avoided with a GPS. Etc.
Ferrying is a dangerous game, especially if ferrying some of the old junk which people buy and want to ship over.
I am sorry to hear of your friend. What was he flying?
Pilots tend to regard what they currently fly as the baseline. I know twin TP pilots who think the minimum for IFR is a twin TP with full KI de-ice.
One may as well be flying an SEP over the N. Pole wearing just one's underpants. Perfectly OK if you have a good heater.
Flying over land, even if it is OVC005 down below, is nothing like as bad. Probably about 99% of Europe, especially the UK, has nothing down there at any given moment. Towns can be avoided with a GPS. Etc.
Ferrying is a dangerous game, especially if ferrying some of the old junk which people buy and want to ship over.
I am sorry to hear of your friend. What was he flying?
Pilots tend to regard what they currently fly as the baseline. I know twin TP pilots who think the minimum for IFR is a twin TP with full KI de-ice.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am sorry chuck but I don't see your point. If I applied your risk assessment to every flight then I would not leave the ground without at least four of everything including engines.
There was nothing snotty about my post to you, it was in fact one of my more polite responses.
Like I said you have your own limits that you are prepared to operate to and I realise in your eyes my mere few thousand hours count for nothing buy I don't need you to be so judgmental.
I make my choices and mitigate accordingly. I am not sure I would cross the atlantic in a single either, but I am quite happy to cross the English Channel and the Med with appropriate safety precautions in place. The same as I am not prepared to fly in IMC that does not give me a suitable margin of ground vision in the even of an engine failure in a single or a twin for that matter.
I have always valued the experience you offer these forums, but I am not prepared to be bludgeoned or insulted into agreeing with you regardless of the horror stories you want to try and frighten me with. I can add my own equally impressive stories of death and disaster to the mix thanks!
There was nothing snotty about my post to you, it was in fact one of my more polite responses.
Like I said you have your own limits that you are prepared to operate to and I realise in your eyes my mere few thousand hours count for nothing buy I don't need you to be so judgmental.
I make my choices and mitigate accordingly. I am not sure I would cross the atlantic in a single either, but I am quite happy to cross the English Channel and the Med with appropriate safety precautions in place. The same as I am not prepared to fly in IMC that does not give me a suitable margin of ground vision in the even of an engine failure in a single or a twin for that matter.
I have always valued the experience you offer these forums, but I am not prepared to be bludgeoned or insulted into agreeing with you regardless of the horror stories you want to try and frighten me with. I can add my own equally impressive stories of death and disaster to the mix thanks!
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am sorry chuck but I don't see your point. If I applied your risk assessment to every flight then I would not leave the ground without at least four of everything including engines.
There you go again....making off the wall statements, no where have I indicated you need four of everything to fly safely what I am saying is single engine in the wrong place is a risk factor I won't accept.
Like I said you have your own limits that you are prepared to operate to and I realise in your eyes my mere few thousand hours count for nothing
Are you saying that I look down on low time pilots???
As to my attitude....suck it up Princess you will get over the hurt.
There you go again....making off the wall statements, no where have I indicated you need four of everything to fly safely what I am saying is single engine in the wrong place is a risk factor I won't accept.
Like I said you have your own limits that you are prepared to operate to and I realise in your eyes my mere few thousand hours count for nothing
Are you saying that I look down on low time pilots???
As to my attitude....suck it up Princess you will get over the hurt.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I have tried to be polite and reasonable to you Chuck. I have tried to debate.
It obviously does not work with you so as you north americans say, you can kiss my ass.
Or if I am to be your princess, you can be my bitch.......
It obviously does not work with you so as you north americans say, you can kiss my ass.
Or if I am to be your princess, you can be my bitch.......
Last edited by S-Works; 28th Nov 2007 at 16:45.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
During the summer life jackets, life raft and PLB. During the winter exposure suits as well. I generally always cross in the airways and for the UK to Europe crossing this actually always leaves me in glide distance. For the UK to the CI which I do weekly my out of glide distance is around 10 mins. Regardless I take appropriate equipment for sea survival. As an offshore boat skipper I attend a sea survival course every year which includes deployment and getting into a life raft.
Crossing the Channel in the UK with an EPIRB leaves me no more than 30 minutes according to the coast guard from a helicopter.
I also carry flares and water dye marker. In addition to my McMurdo Fast find GPS PLB my aircrew life jacket also has a 121.5 locator built into it. The ditch bag carries a mobile phone in an aqua-pac, an aviation Icom in an aqua-pac and an Icom marine radio in an aqua-pac.
I won't fly over 'hostile' territory single engine. By hostile I mean something like the Canadian 'outback' where it is difficult to locate a downed aircraft and the emergency response is minimal.
I will fly over European mountains at airways heights as the exposure time again is limited and surprisingly there are a very healthy number of glide clear options. I would not want to cross some of the big US ranges single engine.
The problem with you North Americans is you apply North American geography to our terrain which is pussy cat stuff to what you have. We have little in the way of things that stick up to run into. Our ground is generally flat and open and we are minutes away from rescue over 98% of our terrain.
Even crossing the med which is warm water the longest crossings to anywhere are the Islands and they are around 120nm around 50mins in my aircraft and at airways heights around half that time is away from glide clear.
I am happy with the risk mitigation that I take . It is not perfect but then nothing in aviation is. Of course I would prefer taking a twin but at our operating costs a 2 week holiday touring around Europe would settle the 3rd world debt, reduce the places that I can visit etc.
Crossing the Channel in the UK with an EPIRB leaves me no more than 30 minutes according to the coast guard from a helicopter.
I also carry flares and water dye marker. In addition to my McMurdo Fast find GPS PLB my aircrew life jacket also has a 121.5 locator built into it. The ditch bag carries a mobile phone in an aqua-pac, an aviation Icom in an aqua-pac and an Icom marine radio in an aqua-pac.
I won't fly over 'hostile' territory single engine. By hostile I mean something like the Canadian 'outback' where it is difficult to locate a downed aircraft and the emergency response is minimal.
I will fly over European mountains at airways heights as the exposure time again is limited and surprisingly there are a very healthy number of glide clear options. I would not want to cross some of the big US ranges single engine.
The problem with you North Americans is you apply North American geography to our terrain which is pussy cat stuff to what you have. We have little in the way of things that stick up to run into. Our ground is generally flat and open and we are minutes away from rescue over 98% of our terrain.
Even crossing the med which is warm water the longest crossings to anywhere are the Islands and they are around 120nm around 50mins in my aircraft and at airways heights around half that time is away from glide clear.
I am happy with the risk mitigation that I take . It is not perfect but then nothing in aviation is. Of course I would prefer taking a twin but at our operating costs a 2 week holiday touring around Europe would settle the 3rd world debt, reduce the places that I can visit etc.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Age: 59
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Immersion Suits & EPIRB
As usual Bose X makes excellent comments.
The general conclusion of this thread is that most pilots feel that flying extensieve IMC without an autopilot is a risk too far in their personal flying assessments.
Can anyone reccomend a centre to practice ditching and liferaft recovery, I seem to recall that there are some centres on the South Coast. (PM if necessary)
I'd be interested in some feedback about immersion suits. I always have a life raft when going to the CI but I've seen pilots struggling to get into these suits on the apron. Are they very bulky in the cabin, do you sweat like dogs ?
Finally I'm off to the boat show on Saturday and want to buy an EPIRB. For those people in the know are any types better than others, and can marine EPIRB's be used for aviation ?
Best Wishes,
LateFinals
The general conclusion of this thread is that most pilots feel that flying extensieve IMC without an autopilot is a risk too far in their personal flying assessments.
Can anyone reccomend a centre to practice ditching and liferaft recovery, I seem to recall that there are some centres on the South Coast. (PM if necessary)
I'd be interested in some feedback about immersion suits. I always have a life raft when going to the CI but I've seen pilots struggling to get into these suits on the apron. Are they very bulky in the cabin, do you sweat like dogs ?
Finally I'm off to the boat show on Saturday and want to buy an EPIRB. For those people in the know are any types better than others, and can marine EPIRB's be used for aviation ?
Best Wishes,
LateFinals
Last edited by LateFinals; 29th Nov 2007 at 07:33. Reason: correct spelling
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't help thinking that people who wear immersion suits are either hardened anoraks who fly alone (or in the company of other hardened anoraks), or they will very soon chuck the whole thing in.
It can't be much fun getting in and out of those things.
Flying should be enjoyable.
I am as flexible as any 50 year old can be but getting in and out of say a PA28 or any other single-door spamcan is a right b*astard of a job, that is if you are trying to do it without wrecking the seats you have to climb over. Doing it with a drysuit is going to be a lot of fun, especially if you have to get out in a hurry. I've got ~ 70hrs in PA28s so I know them well; they were designed for starved ex-WW2 pilots.
Much better to get a decent life raft, carefully brief passengers on what to do in the event of a ditching, and get it serviced regularly.
Plus carry a 406Mhz EPRIB of course, with a built-in GPS. They are quite cheap now.
BTW, in much of the Med there is very little S&R. Sure enough you will get picked up eventually (through the 406MHz-satellite activated commercial shipping network) but it could be days.
Whereas near the UK there is a chance of the S&R heli getting to you even before you hit the water; this actually happened to a Mooney (?) recently.
It can't be much fun getting in and out of those things.
Flying should be enjoyable.
I am as flexible as any 50 year old can be but getting in and out of say a PA28 or any other single-door spamcan is a right b*astard of a job, that is if you are trying to do it without wrecking the seats you have to climb over. Doing it with a drysuit is going to be a lot of fun, especially if you have to get out in a hurry. I've got ~ 70hrs in PA28s so I know them well; they were designed for starved ex-WW2 pilots.
Much better to get a decent life raft, carefully brief passengers on what to do in the event of a ditching, and get it serviced regularly.
Plus carry a 406Mhz EPRIB of course, with a built-in GPS. They are quite cheap now.
BTW, in much of the Med there is very little S&R. Sure enough you will get picked up eventually (through the 406MHz-satellite activated commercial shipping network) but it could be days.
Whereas near the UK there is a chance of the S&R heli getting to you even before you hit the water; this actually happened to a Mooney (?) recently.