Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
artsyman
Topic Author
Posts: 4516
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2001 12:35 pm

Instrument Flying

Fri Sep 22, 2006 5:51 pm

While I am aware there are endless threads on this topic, most of these do not focus on my question. This question is targeted only at Commercial pilots for major carriers.

By the time you have worked your way through the ranks to finally work at a major carrier, is flying by instruments completely second nature ?. I have seen talk on here of GA Pilots saying it took them a few years to get comfortable, and some said they still were not comfortable with instrument only flying, but I was wondering at what point it becomes second nature.

Tonight I did a quick Westjet flight from Calgary to Regina, and it was pitch black, raining from more or less take off to touchdown. No city lights, no stars above. The FO who was flying us was a young guy of probably 25 or so, and It just made me think about it. When getting bumped around, and more or less zero visability, is a commercial pilot completely at ease with flying by instruments.
 
113312
Posts: 683
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 9:09 am

RE: Instrument Flying

Sat Sep 23, 2006 1:18 am

I began my flight training in Southern California well known for it's SMOG. From my very first flight, I learned to incorporate flight instrument scan with visual clues out the window. Using that method of primary instruction, instrument flight was integral with all flying. As a result, I was always comfortable maintaining attitude by instruments even though I might be flying Day or Night VFR.

When I began serious all weather flying, flying by reference to instruments only was already second nature and integral to basic flying. As a professional commercial pilot, flight by instruments can begin early in the takeoff run as visibility down the runway can be limited by fog, rain or snowfall. You need to get focused on the business of instrument scan right from the start.

Hope this answers your question.
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6488
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: Instrument Flying

Sat Sep 23, 2006 1:28 am

Yes, with over 20,000 hours of IFR time now, I find it second nature.

But the comfort level is not a relationship with your IFR time, but more your time on a particular aircraft type. While I find the A320 series to be an incredibly well designed cockpit, with a lot of information within a quick scan, my favourite is still the B737 as an IFR stable platform.

I have only about 2500 hours on the A320, and over 10,000 hours on the B737. For me, the B737 is like a comfortable old shoe, slip it on and get the job done!
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
LJDRVR
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 3:08 am

RE: Instrument Flying

Sat Sep 23, 2006 4:36 am

Instrument flying became second nature as a freight dog, hauling around boxes for UPS in a Cessna Caravan. If for some reason I don't fly for a month or so, the first flight back always is noticeable in a sense of having to work a bit harder in the scan for the first few minutes, then several legs to get the "old glove" feeling back. Nothing the other pilot would even notice though.

Longhauler: I find myself compelled to question your purported credentials. Nobody I've met has ever referred to IFR flying as anything other than that time during which the aircraft was controlled solely by instruments. Therefore, even those amongst us who log liberally tend to never have more than 10% of their total time as instrument. (For instance, my total over 23 years of flying, eleven professionally, includes only 4% IFR time.)

For years, I've browsed the forums on here and laughed as people attempted to pass themselves off as somebody they aren't. Now that I'm a member, I'm going to speak up whenever I witness such prevarication. You sir, are likely not a pilot, if you are I'll apologize, but my guess is you won't be able to prove it.
 
artsyman
Topic Author
Posts: 4516
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2001 12:35 pm

RE: Instrument Flying

Sat Sep 23, 2006 8:44 am

thanks thus far for the replies. To be more specific, does an entry level commercial pilot feel completely at ease with flying by instruments for long periods of time, perhaps in turbulence etc. I am sure that pilots flying for 20 years do, but new hires at major carriers, do they ?. I'd like to assume they do, but was curious
 
pilotpip
Posts: 2844
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 3:26 pm

RE: Instrument Flying

Sat Sep 23, 2006 9:49 am

Yes. I have only about 20 hours in actual but am completely comfortable doing it. This is only because I've logged about 5 of those hours in the last couple weeks. The first time I went up with a friend so there were two sets of eyes in the cockpit. The other 5 hours have been with instrument students.
DMI
 
LJDRVR
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 3:08 am

RE: Instrument Flying

Sat Sep 23, 2006 10:12 am

Artsyman,

Yes, you'll feel comfortable right away. A couple of approaches to minimums under your belt and you'll feel right at home.
 
canyonblue737
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 1:32 pm

RE: Instrument Flying

Sat Sep 23, 2006 12:25 pm

Totally at ease. Even as a new hire at a small regional airline and now certainly at a major I feel 100% at ease on instruments. It is a total and non-event.
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6488
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: Instrument Flying

Sat Sep 23, 2006 12:59 pm

Quoting LJDRVR (Reply 3):
Longhauler: I find myself compelled to question your purported credentials. Nobody I've met has ever referred to IFR flying as anything other than that time during which the aircraft was controlled solely by instruments. Therefore, even those amongst us who log liberally tend to never have more than 10% of their total time as instrument. (For instance, my total over 23 years of flying, eleven professionally, includes only 4% IFR time.)

For years, I've browsed the forums on here and laughed as people attempted to pass themselves off as somebody they aren't. Now that I'm a member, I'm going to speak up whenever I witness such prevarication. You sir, are likely not a pilot, if you are I'll apologize, but my guess is you won't be able to prove it.

I had to chuckle about this. In Canada, we have a term called "cloud time", that is the time you spend without any reference to outside indications. Transport Canada allows 0:36 per flight, assuming :18 for the climb and :18 for the descent. When you start, it is logged the same as "hood" time. After 1000 hours of "cloud time", I stopped counting. For obvious reasons ... why?

But I referred to IFR time. That is the time I have spent flying an aircraft on an IFR flight plan. ALL of the time I have spent with Air Canada/Canadi>n, has been spent on an IFR flight plan ... for the obvious reason ... Air Canada does not allow its aircraft to carry passengers without the safety of an IFR flight plan ... period. That means, not matter how tempted, even when ATC says, "we can get you out quicker if you take off VFR and file in the air" I have never done it ... not allowed.

1000+ hours of cloud time??? How on earth? Well, look above, I have over 10,000 hours on the B737, from 1989 to 2003. About 6000 hours in the right seat, about 4000 hours in the left seat. The last three years in the left seat of the A320 series. It is not hard to fly 1000 hours of cloud time at :36 a flight in an aircraft that averages 1:20 a flight. As I said, once i hit 1000 hours I stopped counting.

Am I really a pilot? Thats funny! I honestly don't care whether you believe me or not. Why should I???

But back to the question of the original poster. Even though I am a Line Indoctrination Training Captain on the A320, I don't get a chance to fly with pilots with little IFR (or cloud!) time. So I refer to my days before airline flying when I taught IFR to ab initio students.

The original poster's concerns are quite common and quite valid. It is an environment that is uncomfortable. My point of my original post .... yes, you will get to a point where you are very comfortable. (The comfortable old shoe above.) My point though, was it is more aircraft type specific.

For example .... I fly the A319, A320 and A321. Between the three of them, Airbus has done a phenomenal job in making an A319 (70,000 kgs) fly like the A321 (93,000 kgs). However, they are not the same! The A319, and A320 are the closest, but that is more a software thing, as they were developed closer together.

When I fly an A321, it takes a few minutes to get comfortable, as it is a whole different beast. Takes off like a bat out of hell, then around 8000 feet, becomes an old boat. And, as we only have 10 of them, vice around 100 of the A320/319, i dont get much of a chance to fly them.

So relax, you WILL get to a point where you are far more comfortable under IFR conditions, than VFR!

Oh ... how would you suggest I prove whether I am a pilot. If you want, i can send you a pic of myself flying an A320. But then you'd think I photoshopped it, or wore a fake uniform ... so why bother!  Smile

BTW, as a new member, you may not have discovered that you can review all of the postings of any member ... check mine, see if I am talking out of my a$$.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16136
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Instrument Flying

Sat Sep 23, 2006 8:27 pm

Quoting Artsyman (Thread starter):
By the time you have worked your way through the ranks to finally work at a major carrier, is flying by instruments completely second nature ?. I have seen talk on here of GA Pilots saying it took them a few years to get comfortable, and some said they still were not comfortable with instrument only flying, but I was wondering at what point it becomes second nature.

Under instruments everything is the same, all the same principles you used when flying visually, now you have to look at the horizon inside to get your attitude information.

I do increase my situational awareness when flying IFR, terrain considerations always are in the back of my mind. You need to be careful overseas, somtimes controllers will try to vector you into a hill, a simple slip up with a incorrect call on left or right turn onto a heading can be trouble.

The larger the aircraft, the more you will need to fly on instruments even to fly a visual approach, larger aircraft give very few cues for pilots to fly by feel.

Quoting LongHauler (Reply 8):
I had to chuckle about this. In Canada, we have a term called "cloud time", that is the time you spend without any reference to outside indications. Transport Canada allows 0:36 per flight, assuming :18 for the climb and :18 for the descent. When you start, it is logged the same as "hood" time. After 1000 hours of "cloud time", I stopped counting. For obvious reasons ... why?

But I referred to IFR time. That is the time I have spent flying an aircraft on an IFR flight plan. ALL of the time I have spent with Air Canada/Canadi>n, has been spent on an IFR flight plan ... for the obvious reason ... Air Canada does not allow its aircraft to carry passengers without the safety of an IFR flight plan ... period. That means, not matter how tempted, even when ATC says, "we can get you out quicker if you take off VFR and file in the air" I have never done it ... not allowed.

I think the comments made by LJDRVR are fair enough, it totally B/S to say you have "over 20,000 hours of IFR time now". I have a number of friends with total times over 20k hours, none of them are so pompous to claim they have "20,000 hours of IFR time", they normally are very careful in the words they choose, 20+ years in the industry does that.

I cannot recall the TC regs word for word, some of your other points regarding logging of flight time seem unprofessional in the best case.
“Don't be a show-off. Never be too proud to turn back. There are old pilots and bold pilots, but no old, bold pilots.” E. Hamilton Lee, 1949
 
User avatar
Jetlagged
Posts: 2564
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 3:00 pm

RE: Instrument Flying

Sat Sep 23, 2006 11:56 pm

Quoting LongHauler (Reply 2):
Yes, with over 20,000 hours of IFR time now, I find it second nature.



Quoting LongHauler (Reply 8):
But I referred to IFR time. That is the time I have spent flying an aircraft on an IFR flight plan.



Quoting Zeke (Reply 9):
I think the comments made by LJDRVR are fair enough, it totally B/S to say you have "over 20,000 hours of IFR time now".

It has to be said that some of the pilots I have met have been full of B/S, and not that familiar with how the aircraft the fly actually works. So maybe Longhauler really is a commercial pilot. Big grin

Odd username for an A320/B737 driver though.
The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6488
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: Instrument Flying

Sat Sep 23, 2006 11:57 pm

Actually, the term "cloud time" was coined to me by a Transport Canada Inspector on my first IFR ride, too long ago to mention, as were the parameters under which one logs "actual IFR" time. I didn't hear the term again until my B737 command course in the mid 1990's, as one of the Check Pilots asked. At the time, I thought it was a cool term for "actual IFR" time.

As for being pompous ... well, I think it is very hard to gauge one's tone here when only using words. Instead of being pompous, the tone I was aiming for was compassion .... it is all too easy to forget what it was like on our first IFR flights, and the anxiety we felt. We were all there.

Unprofessional is again, an odd judgement ... when you don't know me, nor my capabilities. The logging parameters were found in the TC Instruments Procedures Manual of the Day. I have no idea what they use now ..as I stated before, once I hit 1000 hours of Actual IFR time, I stopped counting.

I was however, a little surprised at being accused of not being an airline pilot. Not that I care what one individual I'll never meet, thinks of me, but more .... how would one prove it? You can state facts about the aircraft on which you fly, but that is readily available to non-pilots. Same goes for a lot of procedures .... we are bound by security restraints.

What can I tell LJDRVR .... our crew meal selection of last month? ... the Date of Hire of our most junior A320 Captain? ... the crew expenses allowed at St. John's Newfoundland, vs Barbados? All of those would be non-security related, as well as not all that easy found by a non-pilot.

Actually Zeke, you of all people know that I do fly the A320. As you accused me recently of non-standard practices with regard to the pack flow handling on the ground and in the air, upon departure from BGI. In fact you are right, it was non-standard ... but in all fairness the whole operation was non-standard, as we left YYZ without an operational APU. And ... (sigh) ... it was difficult to get ground support there.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
Yikes!
Posts: 360
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2001 4:51 pm

RE: Instrument Flying

Sun Sep 24, 2006 12:38 am

LongHauler:

Very well handled!

Nordair, PWA or EPA??
 
LJDRVR
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 3:08 am

RE: Instrument Flying

Sun Sep 24, 2006 12:59 am

Quoting LongHauler (Reply 8):
BTW, as a new member, you may not have discovered that you can review all of the postings of any member ... check mine, see if I am talking out of my a$$.

OK, sounds like a good idea to me, here we go!

Quoting LongHauler (Reply 8):
"…any jet transport aircraft I have flown. (A320, A330/340, B727, B737, DC-9, DC-8")

"By the time I was hired at AC, the DC-8-40s were retired."

"I have flown the A300B4-203, the A310-300, the A320, A330 and A340."

"And, that is with 10 years on the A320, A330 and A340, left and right seat."

"My first solo was about 20 years and 15,000 hours ago" (2004 post)

"I have over 20,000 hours, of which over 15,000 is in command of transport aircraft."

"I have over 10,000 hours on the B737, from 1989 to 2003. About 6000 hours in the right seat, about 4000 hours in the left seat. The last three years in the left seat of the A320 series."

"The feel is identical to the Boeing 767 that I flew immediately before being trained on the A320"

"Yes, with over 20,000 hours of IFR time now, I find it second nature."

Now, we could simply leave the above assortment of random contradictions above stand on their own, but, for the benefit of the laymen reading, let's examine them from the standpoint of a professional pilot.

You are what, 46 years old? I make this assumption based on a 2005 post where you identify your age as 45 13/12 to a member, shortly thereafter the demographic on your profile was changed. To have the time you claim, you would have had to have flown 61 hours a month from the age of 19. While that number is within the range of possibility, it's highly unlikely.

You say you flew DC-8's. But you also say they were gone by the time you arrived at AC. You also claim time in the A300 and A310. I'm pretty sure AC never operated those airplanes. you claim to have flown the A340, AC started operating those in 95', the same time you claim to have been flying 737's in other posts. apparently there was also time for you to squeeze DC-9's and 727's in there too.

So here's your time-line:
1989-2003, B-737. 2003-present, the A320 family. That gives you 17 of your 20 years flying at Air Canada. So, in the years between 1984 when you soloed, and 1989 when you started your job at AC, you managed to squeeze in the following airframes: Cheyyene IV, Lear25, DC-9, B727, A310, A300, A340, A330 & B767? Very impressive.

You say 15,000 hours in command of transport category aircraft. With a self-admitted 4000 in the left seat of the 737 and 2500 in the left of the A320, where does the other 8500 hours come from? Pre 1989? You logged 8500 hours of transport P1 time by the age of 29?

I'm calling complete and total BS!!

O.K., we've established that you proud assertion of various experience are, at least in large part, lies. (Your willingness to proudly thump your chest about your 20,000 hours is what caught my attention, BTW.) This brings us to the big question: Why? I've read your posts. Your either a pilot or a sim instructor, my guess being the latter. Why the need to invent experiences and qualifications? You level of knowledge is quite impressive enough on it's own, without you embellishing your qualification.

So, are you going to fess' up? I think you owe the people here an explanation for your pathological lying. Good luck getting whatever new version of your story you give to jibe with the crap you've already posted.

[Edited 2006-09-23 18:05:15]

[Edited 2006-09-23 18:15:46]

[Edited 2006-09-23 18:16:36]

[Edited 2006-09-23 18:27:53]
 
cptspeaking
Posts: 567
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2006 2:49 pm

RE: Instrument Flying

Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:02 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 9):
it totally B/S to say you have "over 20,000 hours of IFR time now".

IFR time could be believable...IMC? not a chance...

Lots of valid points in LJDRVR's last post though...can't argue with his reasoning

Your CptSpeaking
...and don't call me Shirley!!
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6488
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: Instrument Flying

Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:37 am

OK, where do I start ... this is fun!

First of all, it is obvious that as I have stated many times, I fly for Air Canada, in fact I did not start at Air Canada, as did over a third of our pilots. Look at my aircraft types and it should be obvious where I started. And that is Wardair. (Airbus A300 and A310) From there, the progression is obvious after the merger of 1989.

Quoting LJDRVR (Reply 13):
"By the time I was hired at AC, the DC-8-40s were retired."

Notice I state the DC-8-40, not the DC-8. As that was the gist of the thread where you got the quote.

Quoting LJDRVR (Reply 13):
I have flown the A300B4-203, the A310-300, the A320, A330 and A340."

Make sense now? Flying Mr. Ward's fine machines. However the A330/340 came as a gift during the slowdown and merger, where I was force bid out of my left seat onto the A330/340 in the early 2000s, then was able to regain the seat without penalty by reinstatement rights. Same thing with the DC-9, I was able to bid it, (for fun) with the protections of the Mitchnick award. Then was reduction bid off the aircraft when the aircraft was retired, and ended up on the only thing my seniority could hold with the protection i was given ... namely the A320.

The B767 was during my time at CAIL, when after right seat B737 I bid right seat B767, shoot who wouldn't, its natural progression? I was force bid off the B767, when during a reduction bid mid 1990s the YYZ DC-10 base was closed, and things slid down the list in YYZ. From there, right seat B737 again, then left seat.

The Cheyenne IV, the Lear25 and the B727 were all at the position I was holding when hired by Wardair. Doesn't take a detective to tell what company THAT was!!!

I suppose semantics are what is bothering you ... IFR vice actual IFR time. Perhaps taking poetic licence, I considered the CheyenneIV and the Lear to be transport aircraft. Maybe not, they sure felt like it at the time. Same thing with the B737 and A320 yes those were the years flown. However, you seem bothered by the fact that there were other aircraft types during that time. As none of those types were in the left seat, and to keep things simple, they were omitted. For the record, the B767, the DC-9 and the A330/340 were all less than 12 months.

I have found on this forum, keeping things simple make easier reading. That is why the omissions. Same thing with rounding up/down hours and age. It is not as much for embellishment as for laziness is checking up actual times, actual years and actual age. And yeah, you caught me on that one, it was pure laziness that kept my earlier age band. When called on it, I changed it.

Quoting LJDRVR (Reply 13):
You level of knowledge is quite impressive enough on it's own, without you embellishing your qualification.

I'll take that as a compliment.

But no, I am not a sim instructor, as I said, I am a plain old Line Indoc Training Captain on the A320. Not a Check Captain as that is a different department. I just bid a block using my own seniority, then when new Captains and F/O's come from training, I introduce them to the aircraft. For that reason, yes I am trained in both the left and right seat. That is why i participated in the discussion about left and right sidestick, vs a control column.

Make sense?

I am a bit confused why this bothers you so?
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
LJDRVR
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 3:08 am

RE: Instrument Flying

Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:58 am

Well,

It would seem I owe you an apology.

I'm sorry for questioning your integrity, I was wrong.

Normally my BS detector is pretty good when it comes to Internet frauds, you're the first one I was incorrect about.

What "bothers me so" was the apparent contradictions of your various assertions. What was lacking was context. You've supplied that. (Thanks) I still find you purported claim of PIC and totals to be a bit on the high side for your age, but I'll stipulate your claims as fact, based on your level of knowledge and the context you provided. It's rare to find somebody that's flown full time since the inception of their professional careers, it would appear you've done so.

By the way, we agree with each other that the Learjet series is most certainly transport category. I sure do miss flying those little rockets.
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6488
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: Instrument Flying

Sun Sep 24, 2006 3:05 am

Also LJDRVR, I made an assumption here that may not be true. I see you are American and assumed you were familiar with the landscape of airlines in Canada in the past. Wardair was purchased and merged into Canadi>n Airlines in 1989, then Canadi>n, or CAIL as it was called was purchased/merged into Air Canada in 1999.

Air Canada has tried a great deal over the last 6 years to hide one's original airline affiliation, as you may have heard, it was not a pleasant merger, and oddly enough to date ... still continues. But, at my last Recurrent Simulator a Transport Canada inspector was present. That is common when dual left seat/right seat qualified. But the inspector laughed when he looked at my licence .... "wow" he said, "try as Air Canada might, I KNOW the progression you took in getting here!" Makes sense Wardair, A300/A310, CAIL, B737/B767, then Air Canada, DC-9, A330/340, A320.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6488
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: Instrument Flying

Sun Sep 24, 2006 3:12 am

Hey LJDRVR, its cool.

When looking at your comments, heck, I would have thought the same thing. I just wouldn't have commented on it, I just would have thought the guy was a liar! I appreciate the opportunity to clarify things.

But .... you were dead nuts right about my age. When I looked at your comments, I see:

Quoting LJDRVR (Reply 13):
"My first solo was about 20 years and 15,000 hours ago" (2004 post)

Yeah, that is cause for confusion. In 2004, in fact it was 25 years from by first solo, or (God help me) 27 years ago!!! Shoot, my wife is right ... I AM getting old!  Smile
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16136
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Instrument Flying

Sun Sep 24, 2006 7:24 am

Quoting LongHauler (Reply 11):
I have no idea what they use now ..as I stated before, once I hit 1000 hours of Actual IFR time, I stopped counting.

as I said

Quoting Zeke (Reply 9):
some of your other points regarding logging of flight time seem unprofessional in the best case

Keeping a professional library current and keeping abreast of changes is the job of any professional pilot, be those changes TC, OEBs, QRH, FCOM, MEL.

Do you claim ignorance to your other responsibility's as well ? e.g. sort of attitude I would expect to hear, "I have over 15,000 is in command of transport aircraft including 2500 hours command on a A320 I dont need to look at the books"
“Don't be a show-off. Never be too proud to turn back. There are old pilots and bold pilots, but no old, bold pilots.” E. Hamilton Lee, 1949
 
Pihero
Posts: 4318
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

RE: Instrument Flying

Sun Sep 24, 2006 8:25 am

Back to the original subject :

Quoting Artsyman (Thread starter):
When getting bumped around, and more or less zero visibility, is a commercial pilot completely at ease with flying by instruments



Quoting Artsyman (Reply 4):
does an entry level commercial pilot feel completely at ease with flying by instruments for long periods of time, perhaps in turbulence etc. I am sure that pilots flying for 20 years do, but new hires at major carriers, do they ?.

I think it's more a matter of competence than mere comfort. And competence comes from a lot of disciplined training and practice.
That's why, statements like :

Quoting Canyonblue737 (Reply 7):
It is a total and non-event



Quoting Pilotpip (Reply 5):
Yes. I have only about 20 hours in actual but am completely comfortable doing it. This is only because I've logged about 5 of those hours in the last couple weeks. The first time I went up with a friend so there were two sets of eyes in the cockpit. The other 5 hours have been with instrument students

make me feel a bit uncomfortable :have they experienced vertigo once ? Can they perform a raw data approach ? or can they just know enough in order to survive an inadvertent cloud penetration on a night VFR flight ?
Actually, the most misleading statement comes from

Quoting LJDRVR (Reply 6):
Yes, you'll feel comfortable right away. A couple of approaches to minimums under your belt and you'll feel right at home.

What he omits to tell you is that before you're allowed these approaches to minima, you'd have spent a few dozens of hours in a link trainer, a simulator and a real aircraft.
For me, instrument flying is altogether a totally different ball game : on a visual flight, you can see your track (that tree on top of that hill, this bridge east of that cute little town), your glide path (the apparent immobile object through your windscreen), your position (the cardinal points are there...your seat relative to the landscape...etc..).
On instruments you will have to intellectually reconstruct the real world on your attitude and Nav displays.It is easier in a glass cockpit...with just a T- arranged set of flight instruments...sweat, baby, sweat !
And when you are proficient on instrument flying, you'll discover the last BIIIG problem : reverting to visual flying, generally close to the ground with very scarce visual clues...but I'm out of the subject.

Cheers !
Contrail designer
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6488
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: Instrument Flying

Sun Sep 24, 2006 8:38 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 19):
Do you claim ignorance to your other responsibility's as well ?

There is no responsibility to maintain a log of "actual IFR" flight time. That is why after 1000 hours, I stopped counting. It was merely for interest sake.

There is however a legal requirement to maintain a personal log book in Canada. And thus, I have. Date by date, flight by flight, registration, crew, routing, etc. Line by line.

It is a huge leap to assume, (and that is what you are doing), that because I no longer keep a not required log of "actual IFR" time, that i am not:

Quoting Zeke (Reply 19):
Keeping a professional library current and keeping abreast of changes is the job of any professional pilot, be those changes TC, OEBs, QRH, FCOM, MEL.

A HUGE leap.

One again, Zeke, you continue you attack me, and once again, you fail. Not maintaining a non required column in my log book is quite different than not:

Quoting Zeke (Reply 19):
Keeping a professional library current and keeping abreast of changes is the job of any professional pilot, be those changes TC, OEBs, QRH, FCOM, MEL.

I don't know how things are at your airline, but one would not get very far in Air Canada by not:

Quoting Zeke (Reply 19):
Keeping a professional library current and keeping abreast of changes is the job of any professional pilot, be those changes TC, OEBs, QRH, FCOM, MEL.

Care to explain the reason for your attack?
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
pilotpip
Posts: 2844
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 3:26 pm

RE: Instrument Flying

Sun Sep 24, 2006 12:12 pm

Quoting Pihero (Reply 20):
That's why, statements like :

Quoting Canyonblue737 (Reply 7):
It is a total and non-event



Quoting Pilotpip (Reply 5):
Yes. I have only about 20 hours in actual but am completely comfortable doing it. This is only because I've logged about 5 of those hours in the last couple weeks. The first time I went up with a friend so there were two sets of eyes in the cockpit. The other 5 hours have been with instrument students

make me feel a bit uncomfortable

I'm not talking about blasting off into the wild blue at anything near mins. Knowing the limits of yourself, and the aircraft you're flying are an important part. All an instrument rating does is make what was once a black and white question (go/no-go) much more grey. Our students spend a lot of time training in Frascas and under the hood before going into actual. I was taught in the same way. I know my limitations, and the limitations of the aircraft and take these into account.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 20):
have they experienced vertigo once ?

Anybody that says they haven't when in actual is a liar. I have, and usually do. That's where training comes into play. As you said, compentency. I have access to a Frasca for free, and usually use it at least once per week. I remember sitting in my instrument ground school listening to my instructor talk about what will happen, and thinking "no way". My first comment to my flight instructor after going into the clouds was "wow, he was right".

Quoting Pihero (Reply 20):
Can they perform a raw data approach ?

I'm flying light aircraft, most of the approaches are raw data. I'm lucky enough to be working in aircraft with flight directors and autopilots now, but the majority of my flying is in 172s, looking over from the right seat and making sure my students are doing as they have been trained to do (again, with ceilings and vis much above the mins).

Quoting Pihero (Reply 20):
or can they just know enough in order to survive an inadvertent cloud penetration on a night VFR flight ?

I guess I'm lucky in the sense that I was taught from the beginning (and teach my students) that your personal minimums should increase at night. I'm also lucky that I live in an area where at night the terrain isn't featureless.
DMI
 
onetogo
Posts: 286
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 1:40 pm

RE: Instrument Flying

Sun Sep 24, 2006 1:20 pm

Quoting LongHauler (Reply 8):
Transport Canada allows 0:36 per flight, assuming :18 for the climb and :18 for the descent

This is interesting. Does the FAA have any similar clause? If so, what if you are flying a short hop (more than :36 though) at relatively low altitude (BOS-LGA comes to mind as it is flown by A32X/MD80 a/c and is capped at 16,000) and end up being in actual instrument conditions the whole time?

For that matter, how do professional pilots (preferably pilots flying in the US) determine their actual instrument time per flight? Do they just "ballpark"?
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 16136
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Instrument Flying

Sun Sep 24, 2006 5:06 pm

This is what you said ...

Quoting LongHauler (Reply 11):
The logging parameters were found in the TC Instruments Procedures Manual of the Day. I have no idea what they use now ..as I stated before, once I hit 1000 hours of Actual IFR time, I stopped counting.

A professional exercising the privileges of a Canadian ATPL would be aware of what is used today in Canada, I am not so I looked it up.

Quoting LongHauler (Reply 21):
There is no responsibility to maintain a log of "actual IFR" flight time. That is why after 1000 hours, I stopped counting. It was merely for interest sake.

Canadian Aviation Regulations state....

Quote:
401.08 (2) A personal log that is maintained for the purposes referred to in paragraphs (1)(a) and (b) shall contain the holder's name and the following information in respect of each flight:

(a) the date of the flight;

(b) the type of aircraft and its registration mark;

(c) the flight crew position in which the holder acted;

(d) the flight conditions with respect to day, night, VFR and IFR;

(e) in the case of a flight in a aeroplane or helicopter, the place of departure and the place of arrival;

(f) in the case of a flight in an aeroplane, all of the intermediate take-offs and landings;

(g) the flight time;

(h) in the case of a flight in a glider, the method of launch used for the flight; and

(i) in the case of a flight in a balloon, the method of inflation used for the flight.

Unless you can interpret that differently to me, I read that you are required to log all flight time when flight conditions (not flight plan) are IFR. This is consistent with ICAO.
“Don't be a show-off. Never be too proud to turn back. There are old pilots and bold pilots, but no old, bold pilots.” E. Hamilton Lee, 1949
 
Pihero
Posts: 4318
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

RE: Instrument Flying

Mon Sep 25, 2006 6:04 pm

Quoting Pilotpip (Reply 22):
I guess I'm lucky in the sense that I was taught from the beginning (and teach my students) that your personal minimums should increase at night

And credit to you and your students, too !

Cheers
Contrail designer

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: acmx, Lemmy, LH707330 and 13 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos