The A2A Simulations Community

"Come share your passion for flight"
It is currently Sun Apr 22, 2018 3:00 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 75 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Dec 20, 2014 10:43 pm 
Offline
A2A Lieutenant Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 11:22 pm
Posts: 27232
Location: Beccles, Suffolk, UK
Gym is Robs attempt at not getting what has become called kebab belly in my household. Unfortunately it's too late for me and kebab belly has started to take hold, ILS glidescope or otherwise!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

_________________
A2A Facebook for news live to your social media newsfeed
A2A Youtube because a video can say a thousand screenshots,..
A2A Simulations Twitter for news live to your social media newsfeed
A2A Simulations Community Discord for voice/text chat


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 21, 2014 7:59 pm 
Offline
A2A First Lieutenant
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 1:06 pm
Posts: 5694
Location: United Kingdom
Lewis - A2A wrote:
Unfortunately it's too late for me and kebab belly has started to take hold

Quarter-to-four in the morning! :shock: I'm not surprised it's too late - I'd suggest sipping cocoa at that hour - not eating kebabs! :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 23, 2014 7:35 pm 
Offline
A2A First Lieutenant
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 1:06 pm
Posts: 5694
Location: United Kingdom
Okay - so I know Lewis doesn't really sit up at 4 in the morning eating kebabs and providing technical support... Well - at least I hope he doesn't! Anyway - I fear it's too late for me also: the ole' vin rougio and my special spaghetti sauce are the prime suspects!

Getting back on topic, I've recently identified one issue which was causing me to struggle with pitch control in the C182 in IMC. This will reinforce my earlier comment about 'trying to run before I can walk' but what I'd failed to do in the shiny new Skylane was properly adjust the little 'miniature aeroplane' symbol on the attitude indicator.

After trimming for level flight at 110 kias, I took the time to properly set-up the AI so that the little 'wings' symbol (does it have a proper name?) is exactly aligned so that in turns I can pivot the horizon reference line around on the little orange dot. Obviously this is pretty obvious stuff to those of you who have had proper training (or a modicum of common sense even), but hey - I never said I wasn't stupid! :oops:

I'm not sure if there's any specific protocol on how to adjust the AI in this respect, but having it in more-or-less the right place at manoeuvring speed sure helps! :wink: I think this also helps explain why I was finding flight in IMC easier in the tried-and-tested Cherokee...

Cheers,
Nick


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 24, 2014 7:10 pm 
Offline
A2A Lieutenant Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 11:22 pm
Posts: 27232
Location: Beccles, Suffolk, UK
Its 00:08 Christmas day here and I'm working, watch out this industry is more addictive that hard drugs! :shock:

_________________
A2A Facebook for news live to your social media newsfeed
A2A Youtube because a video can say a thousand screenshots,..
A2A Simulations Twitter for news live to your social media newsfeed
A2A Simulations Community Discord for voice/text chat


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 31, 2016 7:07 pm 
Offline
A2A First Lieutenant
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 1:06 pm
Posts: 5694
Location: United Kingdom
Apologies for resurrecting this rather old thread, but I just wanted to ask a quick question of the instrument pilots on the forums.

With as much practice as I can can find time for, my hand flown ILS approaches to minimums are a good bit prettier. Still not perfect by any standards, especially if I go several weeks without practising, but definitely less terrifying as we approach the MDA. :mrgreen: Certainly, the red lines on the 'flight analysis' tool are becoming less waggly when in the murk!

Image

Anyway, typically as I reach the FAF and start to descend on the glideslope I'll extend approach flaps and lower the gear if relevant too. Then, I'll attempt to stabilise my airspeed as soon as possible, and keep it there until the MDA or at least until I break out and become visual with the runway. For example, in the 182 I'll often aim to fly the entire approach from the FAF to the MDA at around 75 KIAS and with 10° of flaps. What I'd like to know is, is this more-or-less consistent with a real world CATI ILS approach, or would a reasonably proficient instrument pilot generally be expected to fly an approach in IMC whilst decelerating throughout the approach and reconfiguring the aircraft too? (Not to mention communicating and doing whatever other stuff is needed!)

For me, the reduced workload that results from a constant, modest airspeed certainly seems to help (75 KIAS ground speed equates to a nice round 400 fpm descent on a 3° glidslope too :) ), but would this kind of speed profile from ~2000 feet be considered a little pedestrian for real world ops?

Thanks,
Nick


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 31, 2016 7:33 pm 
Offline
Chief Master Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 7:30 pm
Posts: 3119
Location: Typically hanging around N07, 12N, KLDJ, KCDW
You sound like you're doing everything just fine, but I would fly the approach with 10 degrees of flaps extended and at around 90 KIAS. I fly approaches in both a 182 and 172 at 90KIAS with 10 degrees of flaps.

The way I was taught was to slow the airplane down, add in the rest of the flaps and land once visual contact was made. There is still plenty of time to do this safely at minimums on an ILS equipped runway. The runways are long and between reducing power and adding flaps the airplane will slow down to 65KIAS by short final.

Your plots look great! :)

_________________
Flight Simmer since 1983. Private Pilot
Paramus Flying Club http://www.flyingclub.org


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 31, 2016 7:58 pm 
Offline
A2A First Lieutenant
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 1:06 pm
Posts: 5694
Location: United Kingdom
Thanks Oracle, reassuring words and just the kind of advice I was after. I'll try some 90 KIAS approaches for my next practice sessions in the Cessnas. The main reason why I've always been reluctant to change the flap setting once I'm established on the glide slope is that I find it much trickier to trim out the sudden change in pitch trim when the only reference is the attitude indicator.

The plot above was a calm weather one I should say. Still need to work on hand flying in IMC when there's more in the way of wind and turbulence!

Cheers,
Nick


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 31, 2016 11:40 pm 
Offline
Chief Master Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 26, 2013 5:03 am
Posts: 3663
Then also, there are some airports that 'encourage' you to maintain some minimum speed until some way down on the approach. Of course, those speeds tend to be rather extreme for most GA fleet (160 kts seems quite typical), so you would end up notifying the ATC that you're unable for that. Sometimes, apparently, they then ask what you're able to keep up, and handle you accordingly.

Never done any IR training myself, nor have I specifically asked about it, so I can't comment how such situations are instructed.

-Esa

_________________
Scientists see things as they are and ask, Why?
Engineers see things as they could be and ask, Why not?
      - Robert F. Kennedy


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 01, 2016 11:52 am 
Offline
A2A Test Pilot
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 3:49 pm
Posts: 2054
Location: KUMP
Nick,

+1 to what Oracle said.

10° Flaps can come in at the IAF. Certainly before the FAF e.g. if being vectored, so that you just need to pull throttle at GS intercept. As per your concern, right, you don't want to be screwing around changing the configuration e.g. adding flaps during the approach. Like he said, NP adding in the rest of the flaps once you break out. You're slow enough at 90kts that by pulling power, you can be below Vfe in short order and get the rest of the flaps lowered. Gear can come down either one dot above or at the FAF.

When working to get the hang of this stuff, sure 75kts can give you more time to work things through, and that's fine. It is a bit too slow (at least imo) especially when trying to fit in with faster traffic. Also the airplane a bit less affected by the winds. 90kts still allows you to use Approach Category A minimums and keeps you close to Vfe-full flaps. It also has you in a better position speed-wise for the Missed Approach.

_________________
Rob Osborne
Flight Instructor - CFI, CFII, MEI, MEII
A & P Mechanic


FAASTeam - Safer Skies Through Education
Professionalism in aviation is the pursuit of excellence through discipline, ethical behavior and continuous improvement. NBAA


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 01, 2016 2:03 pm 
Offline
A2A First Lieutenant
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 1:06 pm
Posts: 5694
Location: United Kingdom
Thanks Rob - appreciate the extra pointers. Yeah, if I can make sure the aircraft is properly configured well before the FAF, that should make intercepting the glideslope a bit tider. At the moment I often tend to find things are still a bit unstable between the FAF and about 1000' AGL or so, and the profiles will sometimes look more like this...

Image

Besides aiding traffic separation and being better safer in the event of a missed approach, I guess a higher approach speed will also improve the odds a bit in the event of an engine failure or partial power loss. It strikes me that this would be a really bad time to encounter loss of power, but the conditions during an ILS approach through cloud and rain are typically among the riskiest for carb icing I suppose.

I have every respect for those of you that do or have done this stuff for real! 8)

Cheers,
Nick


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 01, 2016 2:55 pm 
Offline
A2A Test Pilot
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 3:49 pm
Posts: 2054
Location: KUMP
Ok... I am looking at your horizontal track... how did you intercept the localizer in this case?

Btw... just keep practicing using good technique. Practice some of those instrument exercises from time to time. Know what power & pitch settings you need for certain airspeeds / configurations so you can go right to them. The work will pay off. You'll see.

_________________
Rob Osborne
Flight Instructor - CFI, CFII, MEI, MEII
A & P Mechanic


FAASTeam - Safer Skies Through Education
Professionalism in aviation is the pursuit of excellence through discipline, ethical behavior and continuous improvement. NBAA


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 01, 2016 4:21 pm 
Offline
A2A First Lieutenant
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 1:06 pm
Posts: 5694
Location: United Kingdom
Great Ozzie wrote:
I am looking at your horizontal track... how did you intercept the localizer in this case?
The flight was a few weeks ago Rob (just a screen grab I happened to have saved) but I think it was just a short hop from Elma Municipal (48W) to Bowerman. As such, I'd just have flown a heading that took me towards the HQ LOM until such a time as the CDI indicated I was intercepting the localizer.

Actually, this was a pretty poor choice of approach to show for a couple of reasons, both related to the very nice KHQM Orbx scenery I've used for a while. Firstly the HQ NDB doesn't exist any more but was 'reinstated' by the Orbx .bgl file in question and, secondly, the glideslope angle in the pics above is outdated. The glideslope angle was increased from 3° to 3.5° in around 2009 I believe, but the Orbx scenery overwrites the corrected navdata for this airport. This means that when I tried to fly the current altitude restriction for the FAF from the approach plate (2,200 feet I think?*) I wound up a few hundred feet above the glideslope at the point I should be intercepting it... Hardly ideal! When I realised what the issue was, I manually corrected both the ILS and PAPI angle to 3.5°.

I think that for the original 3° glideslope at KHQM, the MDA at the FAF would have been 1,800 feet or thereabouts. For my (admittedly rather silly) little IMC 'hop' I decided to just climb to 2,000 feet and remain there until I intercepted the glideslope. I know this kind of instrument flying is nothing like the stuff would form part of an instrument rating syllabus, but I find these little hops are a fun way to cram an instrument takeoff, some level flight and an ILS descent into the shortest possible time. (Quarter of an hour in this case.)

It's not usually possible to follow the published approach plates properly when doing this kind of thing, but, hey, it's FSX! :mrgreen:

Cheers,
Nick

P.S. I'll give those instrument exercises a proper try one of these days, I promise. :wink:

*Edit: actually it was 2,100 feet but still well above the outdated 3° glideslope at the FAF.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2016 9:17 am 
Offline
A2A Test Pilot
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 3:49 pm
Posts: 2054
Location: KUMP
Nick M wrote:
but I think it was just a short hop from Elma Municipal (48W) to Bowerman. As such, I'd just have flown a heading that took me towards the HQ LOM until such a time as the CDI indicated I was intercepting the localizer.

Ok. That looks like a great way to setup for a quick approach. However, I would have intercepted before LAMMB so that you are established on the localizer well prior to the FAF (PFAF). In fact, very close to Elma is SOUPY, which is an IAF for that approach. And it shows "2300 NoPT to LAMMB, 286° (5.9)". So you could depart Elma, climb to 2300 heading 285°(or 2100 would be fine too) and that should put you close (outside of) LAMMB for a 45° on the intercept.

If you were being vectored, ATC would have (hopefully!) stuck you a good couple miles from the PFAF for your turn inbound, giving you time to get established on the localizer course.

Nick M wrote:
secondly, the glideslope angle in the pics above is outdated. The glideslope angle was increased from 3° to 3.5° in around 2009 I believe, but the Orbx scenery overwrites the corrected navdata for this airport. This means that when I tried to fly the current altitude restriction for the FAF from the approach plate (2,200 feet I think?) I wound up a few hundred feet above the glideslope at the point I should be intercepting it... Hardly ideal! When I realised what the issue was, I manually corrected both the ILS and PAPI angle to 3.5°.

Ah... you mean for what your GS tracking looked like afterwards? No problemo. As above, I was just commenting on how close you intercepted the LOC course from the marker.

Nick M wrote:
I think that for the original 3° glideslope at KHQM, the MDA at the FAF would have been 1,800 feet or thereabouts. For my (admittedly rather silly) little IMC 'hop' I decided to just climb to 2,000 feet and remain there until I intercepted the glideslope. I know this kind of instrument flying is nothing like the stuff would form part of an instrument rating syllabus, but I find these little hops are a fun way to cram an instrument takeoff, some level flight and an ILS descent into the shortest possible time. (Quarter of an hour in this case.)

Not silly at all... all good for the practice imo. Excellent to find a little airport like that, so close so one can do just exactly what you did. I actually prefer doing that myself (find a nearby airport) rather than slewing or using the map to move the aircraft.

the MDA at the FAF would have been 1,800 feet or thereabouts.
This would be the "glideslope intercept altitude" - and the lightning bolt shows the intercept point. It could also be called the FAF altitude. MDA refers to the lowest altitude authorized on final approach (or circling) for a non-precision approach. (sorry to pick nits :P )

Nick M wrote:
It's not usually possible to follow the published approach plates properly when doing this kind of thing, but, hey, it's FSX!

Actually Nick, I try to follow the current approach chart as best I can - because it's all I got! :lol: It usually works out pretty well for me, the only thing I will typically modify is the heading(s). Although in this case I might ignore the LOM for the GS intercept (might use it to base the procedure turn off it).

_________________
Rob Osborne
Flight Instructor - CFI, CFII, MEI, MEII
A & P Mechanic


FAASTeam - Safer Skies Through Education
Professionalism in aviation is the pursuit of excellence through discipline, ethical behavior and continuous improvement. NBAA


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2016 9:45 am 
Offline
Chief Master Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 26, 2013 5:03 am
Posts: 3663
As it turns out, one of my favorite places to practice basic instrument stuff in the sim is Yakutat, AK (PAYA). There is a very good Orbx scenery (the BGL of which I've edited to account for its discrepancies....), and it has good ILS and VOR approaches you can actually fly basically from the takeoff thorough, giving a nice, tight IFR hop and there is also that NDB around which you can create your own but very standard NDB approach.

Plus the scenery is great with the addon!

Plus the weather is generally IFR automatically if using real! :mrgreen:

-Esa

_________________
Scientists see things as they are and ask, Why?
Engineers see things as they could be and ask, Why not?
      - Robert F. Kennedy


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2016 6:03 pm 
Offline
A2A First Lieutenant
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 1:06 pm
Posts: 5694
Location: United Kingdom
Great Ozzie wrote:
However, I would have intercepted before LAMMB so that you are established on the localizer well prior to the FAF (PFAF).
Yeah, makes sense that if I can can get established properly on the localizer and get the aircraft configured with approach flaps well before the FAF, I'll have an easier time of it when I reduce power and begin trundling down the glideslope.

In fact, looking at my iffy glideslope tracking in that second screen grab above, it now seems pretty obvious that part of the reason was because I was trying to do too much, more-or-less simultaneously. Turning to intercept the localizer (albeit with a shallow intercept angle), reducing power and descending onto the glideslope, then extending approach flaps and re-trimming.

I can't really blame the issue with the glideslope angle being different to the approach plate either, except that I found myself having to descend a bit earlier than expected - before the FAF and before I reached the LOM. Happily, the continued practice has helped me stabilise such situations a bit more effectively, rather than them going increasing pear-shaped the closer I get to the runway!

Anyway, this is really helpful stuff from yourself Rob and Oracle about getting stuff done sooner in the approach. Thanks for the continued support with my slightly erratic instrument 'training'!

Great Ozzie wrote:
This would be the "glideslope intercept altitude" - and the lightning bolt shows the intercept point. It could also be called the FAF altitude. MDA refers to the lowest altitude authorized on final approach (or circling) for a non-precision approach. (sorry to pick nits :P )
Oh, and please always feel free to nitpick away, with stuff like this. :) Because I've tended to pick up bits of info in a fairly ad-hoc way, there's always a very real chance that I'll muddle some of the terms. Of course, I won't let this stop me sprinkling them liberally throughout in my posts, in the hope I'll seem to know what I'm talking about! :mrgreen:

AKar wrote:
As it turns out, one of my favorite places to practice basic instrument stuff in the sim is Yakutat, AK (PAYA).
Thanks for the suggestion Esa. I don't have any of the Orbx stuff for Alaska yet, but I guess the scenery doesn't matter too much for the IMC-to-minimums stuff. I'll maybe give it a go there with the default scenery for now; at least the (updated) navaids should match the charts properly.

Another week or so before I'll be back home and able to inflict my instrument flying on FSX, but now I've got some more good ideas to put into practice when I do, so thanks again guys. :wink:

Nick


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 75 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group