Instrument Training in an R22!!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Instrument Training in an R22!!
Just about to try and get the "no instrument flying instruction" restriction removed from my licence (using R22) because students need to do 5 hours instrument appreciation for JAR PPL syllabus now. Seems a bit stupid to me to give student pilots this info, as we all know, a little knowledge is dangerous.
No doubt it'll be fun but is it a good thing or a bad thing. Encouraging flight if the weather / viz is not suitable? R22's not certified for anything other than VFR flight in UK anyway!
Shouldn't be up there in the first place etc etc. Your views?
No doubt it'll be fun but is it a good thing or a bad thing. Encouraging flight if the weather / viz is not suitable? R22's not certified for anything other than VFR flight in UK anyway!
Shouldn't be up there in the first place etc etc. Your views?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Helimutt
Good point, from a ppls prospective I have just done 10 hours of instrument training(none was required when i did my ppl h)to obtain my night rating,I couldnt understand why they never had it in the ppl H syllabus before.
As to the fors and against, well if people have absoluptely no idea of instruments and live in fear of flying into cloud and then one day accidentaly do,there are very serious consequences. I feel if everyone was trained to a standard wereby they have a knowledge of how difficult it is to fly on instruments it will do 2 things a) make them think even more about marginal conditions and b)If something does happen to require instrument flight at least they have a fighting chance of staying the right way up rather than none at all!
The really big problem is keeping in practice on instruments, it really is amazing how fastyou can get out of practice/or how much practice it requires. and I think this is the big point that needs to be made.
I think once the average ppl sees how difficult it is to fly on instruments it will serve as a great deterent!
Having said that I enjoyed it so much I would now like to do an IR rating!!
regards
hoverbover
PS
A very wise man once told me, the quickest way to die is fly an unaugmented/stabilized helicopter in cloud.
Good point, from a ppls prospective I have just done 10 hours of instrument training(none was required when i did my ppl h)to obtain my night rating,I couldnt understand why they never had it in the ppl H syllabus before.
As to the fors and against, well if people have absoluptely no idea of instruments and live in fear of flying into cloud and then one day accidentaly do,there are very serious consequences. I feel if everyone was trained to a standard wereby they have a knowledge of how difficult it is to fly on instruments it will do 2 things a) make them think even more about marginal conditions and b)If something does happen to require instrument flight at least they have a fighting chance of staying the right way up rather than none at all!
The really big problem is keeping in practice on instruments, it really is amazing how fastyou can get out of practice/or how much practice it requires. and I think this is the big point that needs to be made.
I think once the average ppl sees how difficult it is to fly on instruments it will serve as a great deterent!
Having said that I enjoyed it so much I would now like to do an IR rating!!
regards
hoverbover
PS
A very wise man once told me, the quickest way to die is fly an unaugmented/stabilized helicopter in cloud.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I think that the instrument appreciation part of the new course is VERY important, and should have been included in the old system.
I think it has been included purely as an 'APPRECIATION' and I feel it is just being realistic.
The CAA are most certainly aware that people do 'wander' (Terrible way to put it, but all I could think of!!!) into circumstances beyond their knowledge, capabilities and aircraft restrictions.
Surely including this is the syllabus can only broaden the pilots knowledge.
I think there are two main fall backs:-
1. The flying school need to emphasise that it is ONLY an appreciation and gives absolutly no Instrument capability at all
2. Bolshy pilots. I know aircraft Owners who have relativly limited experience, and fly in illegal conditions. This appreciation could increase these happenings because they think that after 5 hours they know it all! (I am not saying all Owner/pilots are like that, it is just my experience)
Taking all of this into consideration, I think that the only way it can work is if it is taught in the right context, and pilots understand that this is not an entitlement to Instrument flying.
"Some days you are the statue and some days you are the pigeon!"
I think it has been included purely as an 'APPRECIATION' and I feel it is just being realistic.
The CAA are most certainly aware that people do 'wander' (Terrible way to put it, but all I could think of!!!) into circumstances beyond their knowledge, capabilities and aircraft restrictions.
Surely including this is the syllabus can only broaden the pilots knowledge.
I think there are two main fall backs:-
1. The flying school need to emphasise that it is ONLY an appreciation and gives absolutly no Instrument capability at all
2. Bolshy pilots. I know aircraft Owners who have relativly limited experience, and fly in illegal conditions. This appreciation could increase these happenings because they think that after 5 hours they know it all! (I am not saying all Owner/pilots are like that, it is just my experience)
Taking all of this into consideration, I think that the only way it can work is if it is taught in the right context, and pilots understand that this is not an entitlement to Instrument flying.
"Some days you are the statue and some days you are the pigeon!"
Guest
Posts: n/a
helieng:
I agree with you completely and hope any PPL(H) holders I come across or eventually teach, will have enough common sense to realise it is only an appreciation and nothing else. Only meant to teach a 180 backtrack and out of possible cloud with reference to instruments.
If I admit now that whilst hour building in Florida a few years ago, myself and another pilot got caught out by low level fog which really did seem to appear from nowhere, at night, over swamp land. We had a combined total time of approx. 200 hours and in an R22, were lucky to not end up very dead. It certainly brought home to me the things that can go wrong.
The point I'm trying to make here is that even if we were fairly good with instrument flying, the speed with which everything seemed to go wrong in the R22 wouldn't have given us time to revert to instruments and put our "training" to good use. We survived by doing a very hasty 180 but I wouldn't recommend trying it out to anyone.
I agree with you completely and hope any PPL(H) holders I come across or eventually teach, will have enough common sense to realise it is only an appreciation and nothing else. Only meant to teach a 180 backtrack and out of possible cloud with reference to instruments.
If I admit now that whilst hour building in Florida a few years ago, myself and another pilot got caught out by low level fog which really did seem to appear from nowhere, at night, over swamp land. We had a combined total time of approx. 200 hours and in an R22, were lucky to not end up very dead. It certainly brought home to me the things that can go wrong.
The point I'm trying to make here is that even if we were fairly good with instrument flying, the speed with which everything seemed to go wrong in the R22 wouldn't have given us time to revert to instruments and put our "training" to good use. We survived by doing a very hasty 180 but I wouldn't recommend trying it out to anyone.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Here's the exact wording I decided upon when dealing with Ex. 27 (book again, sorry!). It is in red text and in the centre of the graphic arrangement. -
'Although Europe (under JAR) has added Basic
Instrument Awareness to its PPL H syllabus it must be clear that this exercise does not turn the PPL H pilot into an instrument rated pilot.
The exercise was included only to give some
basic knowledge in reaction to problems
experienced by pilots inadvertantely entering conditions of poor visibility. It is only intended for support of VFR flight.
Cloud and poor visibility conditions must still be avoided at all costs. KEEP OUT of cloud and poor visual conditions, they have killed many people.
Land if you have to, and live to apologise to a landowner or those awaiting your arrival.'
Out of interest, I've only flown one full instrument trainer R22 (G DMCD), based at Fast, Thruxton. Are there any more in UK?
'Although Europe (under JAR) has added Basic
Instrument Awareness to its PPL H syllabus it must be clear that this exercise does not turn the PPL H pilot into an instrument rated pilot.
The exercise was included only to give some
basic knowledge in reaction to problems
experienced by pilots inadvertantely entering conditions of poor visibility. It is only intended for support of VFR flight.
Cloud and poor visibility conditions must still be avoided at all costs. KEEP OUT of cloud and poor visual conditions, they have killed many people.
Land if you have to, and live to apologise to a landowner or those awaiting your arrival.'
Out of interest, I've only flown one full instrument trainer R22 (G DMCD), based at Fast, Thruxton. Are there any more in UK?
Guest
Posts: n/a
I forgot to include a couple of things I believe to be important-
1. That hopefully all PPL H's will 'get into the habit'and always take off with the AH set as a result of this training. An important safeguard if caught out by unexpected conditions of poor viz. The pilot will then have something worth looking at....
2. That AH's suffer uneven wear on only one gimbal bearing if left 'stalled'or 'toppled' to one side during flight. They should last longer if always set beforehand and be more accurate during their life.
1. That hopefully all PPL H's will 'get into the habit'and always take off with the AH set as a result of this training. An important safeguard if caught out by unexpected conditions of poor viz. The pilot will then have something worth looking at....
2. That AH's suffer uneven wear on only one gimbal bearing if left 'stalled'or 'toppled' to one side during flight. They should last longer if always set beforehand and be more accurate during their life.
Guest
Posts: n/a
The only thing instrument appreciation will bring under the new JAR nonesense is more fatalities. The difference bewteen wearing a silly IFR hood and flying in cloud is a million miles apart.
The Robinson R22 is not suitable for instrument flying whoever is at the controls, never mind a newly qualified PPLH.
I have flown in an r22 in cloud with an instrument rated instructor for approximately five minutes. During this time i found it extremely difficult to maintain wings level and the airspeed was racing from 0kt to 100kt this is with the comfort that i can i can give up at any time and hand over the controls. Given the real situation and this is what instrument appreciation is encouraging your stress levels would explode and you would find it extremely difficult to carry out the simplest of tasks.
My advise to anybody who inadvertanly entered cloud is to lower the lever and slow down. The dynamicly unstable helicopter is most stable in a state of autorotation and i believe the 180 degree turn would be very foolish
Maybe an instrument rated pilot could put me right.
The Robinson R22 is not suitable for instrument flying whoever is at the controls, never mind a newly qualified PPLH.
I have flown in an r22 in cloud with an instrument rated instructor for approximately five minutes. During this time i found it extremely difficult to maintain wings level and the airspeed was racing from 0kt to 100kt this is with the comfort that i can i can give up at any time and hand over the controls. Given the real situation and this is what instrument appreciation is encouraging your stress levels would explode and you would find it extremely difficult to carry out the simplest of tasks.
My advise to anybody who inadvertanly entered cloud is to lower the lever and slow down. The dynamicly unstable helicopter is most stable in a state of autorotation and i believe the 180 degree turn would be very foolish
Maybe an instrument rated pilot could put me right.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Still seems to me too many VFR pilots are not sufficiently paranoid about never entering IMC. I'm a firm believer that a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing and that perhaps rather than try and promote more basic instrument training for inadvertent entry into IMC, more training should be provided to low time PPLs on recognising the signs earlier, and slowing, going lower or turning - what ever it takes - NOT to inadvertently go into IMC in the first place. As the accident stats show all to well, too many do end up losing visual reference and in a heli, there really is no excuse. What chance has a VFR pilot really got, in a VFR machine, of handling going IMC for the first time in his life and surviving long enough to find somewhere with a decent cloud base and friendly radar controller to help him down?
Guest
Posts: n/a
SPS
There's one other R22 instrument trainer I know of which is on Burman Aviation's fleet G-BOAM. It's a bit of an old bucket, but it has all the toys you could ever want on board. I don't think it gets used as such, though. (Instrument trainer, not bucket!)
I'd second all the comments made about avoiding being in IMC in a robbo. 10 hours instrument appreciation does give you a feeling that you could handle an inavertent entry into IMC, but the reality is somewhat different. Having an instructor alongside, and a hood that you could remove at a moments notice is no match for the moments panic realisation that you really really can't see where you're going, and you're on your own.
I've been 'under the hood' quite a bit, and it certainly trains you to concentrate on the instruments, conduct your scan, and fly your way out of trouble. But only for a short space of time, and only if you have your wits about you and are kind of expecting it. The first time you fly into REAL cloud, the sudden-ness of being enveloped by 'fluff' is breathtaking and will remove your concentration, replacing it with panic.
I remember the first time I took a twin Squirrel up through the cloud layer for about a minute before I broke through the top. After all the training, I still didn't breathe the whole time. And I had a 10k+ hours IR pilot sitting next to me!
I remember having about 200 hours up, and 'experimenting' by flying straight through very small fluffy clouds in an R44. The kind of couds small enough that you'd be through and out the other side in about two seconds. That was OK. Concentrate on the instruments, set up for straight & level and focus on maintaining the attitude all the way through. Nevertheless, the cloud rushes at you at the last second and makes you jump the first few times. Then, I hit a cloud that was thicker than I thought. It took me all of about five seconds to go through. No real big risk, but enough to make me certain that flying into the real thing one day was going to be a BAD experience, to be avoided at all costs!
Treat with caution! If you MUST fly a robbo in cloud, just do it on a PC!
Holly
There's one other R22 instrument trainer I know of which is on Burman Aviation's fleet G-BOAM. It's a bit of an old bucket, but it has all the toys you could ever want on board. I don't think it gets used as such, though. (Instrument trainer, not bucket!)
I'd second all the comments made about avoiding being in IMC in a robbo. 10 hours instrument appreciation does give you a feeling that you could handle an inavertent entry into IMC, but the reality is somewhat different. Having an instructor alongside, and a hood that you could remove at a moments notice is no match for the moments panic realisation that you really really can't see where you're going, and you're on your own.
I've been 'under the hood' quite a bit, and it certainly trains you to concentrate on the instruments, conduct your scan, and fly your way out of trouble. But only for a short space of time, and only if you have your wits about you and are kind of expecting it. The first time you fly into REAL cloud, the sudden-ness of being enveloped by 'fluff' is breathtaking and will remove your concentration, replacing it with panic.
I remember the first time I took a twin Squirrel up through the cloud layer for about a minute before I broke through the top. After all the training, I still didn't breathe the whole time. And I had a 10k+ hours IR pilot sitting next to me!
I remember having about 200 hours up, and 'experimenting' by flying straight through very small fluffy clouds in an R44. The kind of couds small enough that you'd be through and out the other side in about two seconds. That was OK. Concentrate on the instruments, set up for straight & level and focus on maintaining the attitude all the way through. Nevertheless, the cloud rushes at you at the last second and makes you jump the first few times. Then, I hit a cloud that was thicker than I thought. It took me all of about five seconds to go through. No real big risk, but enough to make me certain that flying into the real thing one day was going to be a BAD experience, to be avoided at all costs!
Treat with caution! If you MUST fly a robbo in cloud, just do it on a PC!
Holly
Guest
Posts: n/a
I'm a bit stumped as to whether or not get the instrument instructor rating here in the states. I like the idea of it being a way to keep in practice, but it doesn't seem real practical.
one way you can make hooded time seem like real IMC is to fly over long expanses of water (not too far offshore though) as this erases any chance of peeking under the visor at the which way the houses are passing you by.
as far as I know, an r22 can never be legal in clouds (or safe), so I wonder why the few of you above ever risked it?
one way you can make hooded time seem like real IMC is to fly over long expanses of water (not too far offshore though) as this erases any chance of peeking under the visor at the which way the houses are passing you by.
as far as I know, an r22 can never be legal in clouds (or safe), so I wonder why the few of you above ever risked it?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Felt the urge to reply to your post, mainly because of the 'shouldn't be up there in the first place' comment.
We know we shouldn't press on in conditions that are unsuitable for visual flying if we're not instrument rated or the aircraft isn't fitted for it.
However, in Aust at least, the helicopter VMC criteria allow you to fly visually but close to cloud and in quite low vis.
Add in some heavy rain showers that reduce the visibility quickly, or perhaps find yourself having flown up a valley and, having to turn back, find the Wx behind you has deteriorated, and the scene is set for inadvertent IMC.
Many have come to grief in such situations, and a bit of instrument training may make all the difference in avoiding spiralling in.
I would say that the requirement for compulsory instrument famil training is well founded, and that the drummed-in response of 'getting on the AI' when you have lost visual reference and don't look like regaining it is a life-saver of the first magnitude.
Of course, you've got to have somewhere to go after that, but in the first instance the 'quick 180' should be a pretty good start.
We know we shouldn't press on in conditions that are unsuitable for visual flying if we're not instrument rated or the aircraft isn't fitted for it.
However, in Aust at least, the helicopter VMC criteria allow you to fly visually but close to cloud and in quite low vis.
Add in some heavy rain showers that reduce the visibility quickly, or perhaps find yourself having flown up a valley and, having to turn back, find the Wx behind you has deteriorated, and the scene is set for inadvertent IMC.
Many have come to grief in such situations, and a bit of instrument training may make all the difference in avoiding spiralling in.
I would say that the requirement for compulsory instrument famil training is well founded, and that the drummed-in response of 'getting on the AI' when you have lost visual reference and don't look like regaining it is a life-saver of the first magnitude.
Of course, you've got to have somewhere to go after that, but in the first instance the 'quick 180' should be a pretty good start.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I've been instrument rated on plankers for nearly 2 decades.
Pre-rating the life saving 180 manoeuvre did the job for me at least once.
Post-rating I have more than once launched with cast-iron advertised VMC and found myself seeking a popup IFR clearance as a way out. Nothing stupid or negligent, just unforecast weather developing in front AND behind very fast while a considerable distance from a landing spot.
I'd say a level of training that gets the aircraft reversed is precious. Sometimes IMC in front is clearly defined and sometimes it isn't. It can even drop suddenly from above (e.g. RA/SN/TS). If training can also get you down under control and safely in someone's field then the value is huge.
Even if you are only good for a minute or two of instrument flying (= enough to get out) this has GOT to be better than loss of control.
Most FW pilots untrained on instruments also lose control shortly after entering IMC. Agree R22 is utterly unsuitable for IFR. Bet you can keep one upright with proper instrumentation and training though, after all the aircraft does not know it is in the murk.
Given a choice between a fix for mast bumping and an attidude indicator I'd take the latter. Hope you aren't reading this Lu.
Chips
ps I know you can lose forward speed in a helicopter in a way you can't in a FW, so don't remind me.
------------------
More volts, Igor
Pre-rating the life saving 180 manoeuvre did the job for me at least once.
Post-rating I have more than once launched with cast-iron advertised VMC and found myself seeking a popup IFR clearance as a way out. Nothing stupid or negligent, just unforecast weather developing in front AND behind very fast while a considerable distance from a landing spot.
I'd say a level of training that gets the aircraft reversed is precious. Sometimes IMC in front is clearly defined and sometimes it isn't. It can even drop suddenly from above (e.g. RA/SN/TS). If training can also get you down under control and safely in someone's field then the value is huge.
Even if you are only good for a minute or two of instrument flying (= enough to get out) this has GOT to be better than loss of control.
Most FW pilots untrained on instruments also lose control shortly after entering IMC. Agree R22 is utterly unsuitable for IFR. Bet you can keep one upright with proper instrumentation and training though, after all the aircraft does not know it is in the murk.
Given a choice between a fix for mast bumping and an attidude indicator I'd take the latter. Hope you aren't reading this Lu.
Chips
ps I know you can lose forward speed in a helicopter in a way you can't in a FW, so don't remind me.
------------------
More volts, Igor
Guest
Posts: n/a
Interesting to read about the 5 hours required by JAR. In the US, the typical student earns a private pilot certificate with an "airplane single engine land" rating, which requires 3 hours of inst. training. A PPC with a "rotorcraft helicopter" rating doesn't need any inst. time. Both do require 3 hours of night, which includes cross-country flight. After they are rated, they can fly at night w/o an inst. rating.
5 hours of inst. training in a FW seems like it might generate enough confidence to encourage some illegal cloud-busting. I'm not sure about that in the R22, though. I still find it a challenge to hold the airspeed at a tight tolerance for an extended time in visual conditions. Of course, I'm not paying much attention to the panel, instead looking out for other traffic. The point is that I think the Robby would be hard to fly well on the guages. Probably why it's not certificated for flying in actual IMC. Anyway, how do you fly in IMC and refold a chart without 3 or 4 hands? That takes more talent then I was given.
I've flown four R22s and only one had an attitude indicator. I think without an AI, even just trying to do a 180 in cloud might get the ship inverted in a hurry. Are the R22s in UK/Aust./NZ usually equipped with an AI?
I did a half-day of flying at a California school recently that had an R22 with a jam-packed panel. Rather than using the common hoods, this ship had a curtain that pulled around half of the inside of the bubble, and it was held with suction cups. Is this unique, or is that the usual way to set up R22 inst. trainers?
5 hours of inst. training in a FW seems like it might generate enough confidence to encourage some illegal cloud-busting. I'm not sure about that in the R22, though. I still find it a challenge to hold the airspeed at a tight tolerance for an extended time in visual conditions. Of course, I'm not paying much attention to the panel, instead looking out for other traffic. The point is that I think the Robby would be hard to fly well on the guages. Probably why it's not certificated for flying in actual IMC. Anyway, how do you fly in IMC and refold a chart without 3 or 4 hands? That takes more talent then I was given.
I've flown four R22s and only one had an attitude indicator. I think without an AI, even just trying to do a 180 in cloud might get the ship inverted in a hurry. Are the R22s in UK/Aust./NZ usually equipped with an AI?
I did a half-day of flying at a California school recently that had an R22 with a jam-packed panel. Rather than using the common hoods, this ship had a curtain that pulled around half of the inside of the bubble, and it was held with suction cups. Is this unique, or is that the usual way to set up R22 inst. trainers?
Guest
Posts: n/a
For once I agree with CAA, in that I think this was/is a good move. It is a difficult choice - Leave any PPL with no appreciation at all (basic level licence)or give them at least SOME experience that may help. They will have been well aware of the effect this might have on some, ie. that they will take more risk, but on balance it must be for the
greater good.
Let's face it, I didn't know how quick that hazy patch ahead slams into you as thick cloud when it looked like it was a good distance away (depending on many things)and if you have not experienced it before then panic could take any life. Some training has to be a good thing if it only prepares the pilot for that day.
I normally stick to the 'little knowledge is dangerous' principle but in this case I think that NO knowledge is worse.
Anyway, the main reason I write is that I hope when in cloud (for whatever reason)the second response should be to apply full carb heat(hot)in and R22.
The first HAS to be to go straight for the AH that you've already set before take-off.
Thanks for the info. on the trainers, DMCD moving to Denham makes sense knowing some of the connections and thanks for the bucket
Holly, made me grin!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Wow rotorfan, that reminded me of the curtain on the 130 used for the same thing, an ingenius solution solving the no peeking problem 
While it's true that a PPL in the states is rated for night and legal, you would be hard pressed to find an operator here that will allow the operation. most insurance's won't cover it, ot the operator has it's own rules for "Student night flight", Night flight here where weather can eat you up in a heartbeat while not even approaching VFR min's can make for an exciting flight.
All my night time is "Simulated", I am accompanied by a CFI, who rides along offering nothing more than conversation and monitoring. First attempt at my 50Nm X-C was with a lowering 600' overcast ( a cold front across the penny was moving our way) Bad enought getting used to seeing the deck just above me, but combine that with lights on one side and the black hole of the ocean on my right .... one could easily get nervous, and I was for the first 30 minutes. I made all the right decisions that night, including knowing my reaching the destination was not a "Must do" item, when we reached PBI we turned around knowing it just wasn't going to happen.
A pilot reacting like I did that night will never get into a position to find out (hopefully) what IMC is like in the robbie. With no AI, and no visual, to me, it's not doable in that bird.
Soon, I'll be doing my partial instrument in a 22 with the larger panel, I'm "comfortable" on instruments, but this will be new, and I expect to be all over the place, if I am lucky, I want to shoot approaches on a foggy morning. I have already flown twice myself on reduced visibility days with normal to heavy rain (but vis and ceiling above VFR basic min's)
that is bad enough ....
If you are not rated, and the aircraft properly equipped, just don't get into it!
------------------
Marc
[This message has been edited by RW-1 (edited 12 March 2001).]
While it's true that a PPL in the states is rated for night and legal, you would be hard pressed to find an operator here that will allow the operation. most insurance's won't cover it, ot the operator has it's own rules for "Student night flight", Night flight here where weather can eat you up in a heartbeat while not even approaching VFR min's can make for an exciting flight.
All my night time is "Simulated", I am accompanied by a CFI, who rides along offering nothing more than conversation and monitoring. First attempt at my 50Nm X-C was with a lowering 600' overcast ( a cold front across the penny was moving our way) Bad enought getting used to seeing the deck just above me, but combine that with lights on one side and the black hole of the ocean on my right .... one could easily get nervous, and I was for the first 30 minutes. I made all the right decisions that night, including knowing my reaching the destination was not a "Must do" item, when we reached PBI we turned around knowing it just wasn't going to happen.
A pilot reacting like I did that night will never get into a position to find out (hopefully) what IMC is like in the robbie. With no AI, and no visual, to me, it's not doable in that bird.
Soon, I'll be doing my partial instrument in a 22 with the larger panel, I'm "comfortable" on instruments, but this will be new, and I expect to be all over the place, if I am lucky, I want to shoot approaches on a foggy morning. I have already flown twice myself on reduced visibility days with normal to heavy rain (but vis and ceiling above VFR basic min's)
that is bad enough ....
If you are not rated, and the aircraft properly equipped, just don't get into it!
------------------
Marc
[This message has been edited by RW-1 (edited 12 March 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Going to the Nasa site given in another thread, there is a great article on this topic:
http://safecopter.arc.nasa.gov/Pages.../Hel_11_1.html
------------------
Marc
http://safecopter.arc.nasa.gov/Pages.../Hel_11_1.html
------------------
Marc
Guest
Posts: n/a
I got my PPL(H) just before the changeover to JAR, so never did the five hours on instruments. I recently decided to do it, so that if I inadvertently ended up in IMC I might at least stand a chance of survival. Well, it made me decide I'd never, under any circumstances, go anywhere near a cloud! It was more difficult than I would have believed without having tried it. And even when I could manage it, a 180 degree turn was about the limit of my concentration.
So it's probably made me more careful, not less. A little knowledge may be a dangerous thing, but no knowledge is even more dangerous.
------------------
Whirly
To fly is human, to hover, divine.
So it's probably made me more careful, not less. A little knowledge may be a dangerous thing, but no knowledge is even more dangerous.
------------------
Whirly
To fly is human, to hover, divine.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I did the night rating soon after completing my PPL and it sharpened me up no end. I would recommend any student to do as much instrument training as possible.
A very wise person pointed out to me to just check to see if the horizon is actually coming towards you and as long as you are only ever flying to the horizon with appropriate speed and height you will never go inadverdant IMC. (Not sure about night though)
DMCD is at Denham. Fast used to have one at Thruxton too. BRRY(I think)
------------------
Use it don't abuse it.
What day is it anyway?
A very wise person pointed out to me to just check to see if the horizon is actually coming towards you and as long as you are only ever flying to the horizon with appropriate speed and height you will never go inadverdant IMC. (Not sure about night though)
DMCD is at Denham. Fast used to have one at Thruxton too. BRRY(I think)
------------------
Use it don't abuse it.
What day is it anyway?