Random Griz Aviation Musings

[wink]

I didn't fly and aircraft with an autopilot until I was at AA. None of the GA planes I have owned were IFR equipped or had auto pilots. But from what I hear from the program the High School kids I taught go into, it is pretty much as you discribe. Just enough autopilot training to learn how to use it. Then hand fly everything. Hell, they have full glass aircraft, that is advantage enough.?

 

[ChuckMK23]

Here's a question for discussion: Automation.

For Part 135, I can't hand-fly IFR, although the majority of my approaches on a checkride are hand-flown. Seems like a decent mix of practice.

But what about for GA? It's SPIFR too, so why not fly approaches with as much automation as you can (which is really only 1 1/2 axes, at most)? I've been wrestling with this dilemma lately. Yesterday I picked up a practice ILS and kept it coupled until about the last mile. It was a way to exercise the gear and also allow me to refine power settings for the approach. At the last mile, I couldn't keep up with power changes because of getting bumped around, so I decoupled and hand flew the rest of the approach to keep the needles centered.

It seemed like a decent combo. Thoughts?

So I am guessing for your operation its your Approved Flight Operations Manual that states the requirement for AP use when operating IFR in a SP configuration. Just like in Part 135 Airplane operations you need a SIC or an AP to operate IFR - that does not mean that the AP has to be used - it just has to be installed and functioning correctly.

Fr Part 91 IFR Airplane the minimum equipment is very very, well "minimum". Rate of turn indicator, slip/skid indicator, sensitive bar alt, clock, generator/alternator, attitude indicator, directional gyro, nav and comm gear for however you plan to navigate.

FOr your Instrument Rating if you drag an airplane to the checkride with an AP, the Examiner is required to have you demonstrate its use, typically on an approach. "To assist in management of the aircraft during the practical test, the applicant is expected to demonstrate automation management skills by utilizing installed equipment such as autopilot..." (from ACS)

That said you can also use the AP on your instrument checkride unless the DPE says otherwise.

As far as requiring the use of an AP IFR and IMC, the airplane is inherently stable in pitch and mostly stable roll - a far cry from your helicopter. I have students that get very confused when it comes to AP use - people who only fly 25-50 hours per year. Its often easier if they maintain their skills to hand fly, and have personal minimums set such they can manage an IFR flight with the skills they have.

 

[Gatordev]

Guys, I'm not asking for what the rules say. I'm asking for personal mins for personal flying. Or in another words, what are people's thoughts on balancing the manual stick skills with the convenience (and if proficient, the benefit) of flying an approach with an AP when SPIFR (again, just Part 91, in a personal airplane). I only brought up the job example to show how it's thought to be okay to be automated all the time in the professional scene (except on check rides, ironically).

Personally I think it's a balance, and hand-flying every once in a while is a good thing, but using the AP makes everything easier and safer when used most of the time. I was just looking for other opinions on that balance.

...that does not mean that the AP has to be used - it just has to be installed and functioning correctly.

Not quite. The OPSPECS state what you said in the first part (installed and functioning). The GOM states that I have to use it.

 

[Jim123]

Yep, unless the autopilot is on the TCDS (unlikely for a light piston single) and required equipment on there then all it is is nice to have.

(You covered Part 91 vs other parts and OPSSPECs, as applicable.)

The TCDS is the thing that says exactly what model of engine your plane was certificated with, what other engine models are approved, various accessories (for example, the generator or alternator model number), a lot of the imitations, and other stuff like that.

I have a link to all the TCDS on the FAA website somewhere around here... here it is (scroll down to TCDS, obviously): https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/


Personal mins... the a/p in my personal airplane is only a wing leveler (heading hold) with a couple modes to track a VOR radial or a LOC. I'd rather hand-fly and I'm comfortable flying an ILS down to 400 feet.

 

[Gatordev]

Posted an edit while you were posting, Jim.

 

[Griz882]

Yep, unless the autopilot is on the TCDS (unlikely for a light piston single) and required equipment on there then all it is is nice to have.

(You covered Part 91 vs other parts and OPSSPECs, as applicable.)

The TCDS is the thing that says exactly what model of engine your plane was certificated with, what other engine models are approved, various accessories (for example, the generator or alternator model number), a lot of the imitations, and other stuff like that.

I have a link to all the TCDS on the FAA website somewhere around here... here it is (scroll down to TCDS, obviously): https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/


Personal mins... the a/p in my personal airplane is only a wing leveler (heading hold) with a couple modes to track a VOR radial or a LOC. I'd rather hand-fly and I'm comfortable flying an ILS down to 400 feet.

Pretty impressive. My personal minimum is 800 (no AP)...but I'm a weakling.

 

[ChuckMK23]

Guys, I'm not asking for what the rules say. I'm asking for personal mins for personal flying.

Ahhh - good question. I use the AP in IMC unless there is some reason not to. On an instrument approach I’ll disconnect at 400’ agl. Most of the airplanes I fly have 2 axis KAP 140 AP’s - meaning I have to still manage power and rudders...

 

[Jim123]

Posted an edit while you were posting, Jim.

Mwuahahahahahahaha!!!!

edit: Mwuahahahahahaha again! (And fixed spelling mistake in first mwuahahahahahaha.)

 

[Gatordev]

Ahhh - good question. I use the AP in IMC unless there is some reason not to. On an instrument approach I’ll disconnect at 400’ agl. Most of the airplanes I fly have 2 axis KAP 140 AP’s - meaning I have to still manage power and rudders...

I guess the power and rudders was assumed. Garmin has made some amazing progressions, but still not a "3-axis" system for GA! I'll have to pay attention to the altitude next time, although I'm sure I could do the math. Since I was flying these crazy things called "needles," I wasn't paying much attention to altitude on the ILS. That said, I wouldn't be surprised if the distance was close to matching the altitude. The bumps were just too strong for the AP to react quickly enough in close.

(And fixed spelling mistake in first mwuahahahahahaha.)

Thank goodness. For a minute I was embarrassed for you.

 

[ChuckMK23]

0730 launch this morning with fellow AW’er @PEPfromage - nice 2.0 1A1 day-dick-around ?

 

[Griz882]

Out at the same time. Flew over the mountains to KVBW, Bridgewater VA. While the field is “public,” it is owned by a company that does a lot of ISR and airborne data acquisition work. As seen in my pics, they fly King Airs and Dash 8’s...and they fix them from old ships. The guy at the ramp gave me his card, said they are always looking for pilots and just started in the H-60 business with a surplus army bird. They are getting more.

The group is Dynamic Aviation...the flight fun.

That little opening in the woods is KVKX heading toward Runway 6.

 

[wink]

Jealous of you guys. At 110F ((90F when I woke up) and a 10 gusting 19 knot cross wind I was sure to get the crap beat out of me flying, only to have to work at a cross wind landing in a sporty tail wheel plane I am not fully comfortable in yet. Oh, and I am starting with a DA of just over 5000 ft in a 65 hp chariot. This one goes to you. For now, I am remembering when you guys are on the deck with grey skies, driving rain and ice.

 

[ChuckMK23]

I guess the power and rudders was assumed. Garmin has made some amazing progressions, but still not a "3-axis" system for GA! I'll have to pay attention to the altitude next time, although I'm sure I could do the math. Since I was flying these crazy things called "needles," I wasn't paying much attention to altitude on the ILS. That said, I wouldn't be surprised if the distance was close to matching the altitude. The bumps were just too strong for the AP to react quickly enough in close.



Thank goodness. For a minute I was embarrassed for you.

So not having ever flown a FD equipped aircraft - what’s the goodness that you get from it - over good ol’ Raw data ?

 

[Griz882]

Jealous of you guys. At 110F ((90F when I woke up) and a 10 gusting 19 knot cross wind I was sure to get the crap beat out of me flying, only to have to work at a cross wind landing in a sporty tail wheel plane I am not fully comfortable in yet. Oh, and I am starting with a DA of just over 5000 ft in a 65 hp chariot. This one goes to you. For now, I am remembering when you guys are on the deck with grey skies, driving rain and ice.

Every dog has his day. Come November I’ll be looking at grey scud and you’ll be winging through clear air.

 

[Jim123]

So not having ever flown a FD equipped aircraft - what’s the goodness that you get from it - over good ol’ Raw data ?

Airspeed, altitude, and glideslope control pretty much, including leveling out at a target altitude and also starting down a glideslope at the same time you're going through configuration changes. The last thing is common at big airports when ATC tells you something like 170 to the outer marker, then you end up dropping the gear, adding one or two notches of flaps, and slowing down a lot all in about a mile... so the FD helps make that smoother when it could be quite a rodeo ride.

Really all a flight director is is an indication of what target pitch and roll that the autopilot is trying to do. If the autopilot is off the the FD is telling the meat servos what to do.

It leads rolling in and out of turns nicely too, but that's of not too much benefit at higher airspeeds. It helps a bit with wind-corrected tracking a localizer, a radial, or direct to a fix, but if you have a GPS track bug on an HSI then this is also of little benefit.

If you're good at flying the airplane and you have a good feel for power and pitch for a wide variety of flap settings and a wide range of airspeeds, then a FD is of much less benefit... but certainly still nice to have. You sort of already know what to pitch for so you almost "lead" the FD, because you can feel and expect what it is going to do, but then you end up flying what it is telling you anyway. It complements the VSI and airspeed nicely when you're trying to make pitch adjustments on the order of less than 1° at 200+ knots or close in on an ILS (which is usually where the wind is shifting).

If you have a really lousy feel then you end up chasing it and it's kinda ugly. If you have even a mediocre feel then it improves your flying a lot and you can learn to have a better feel a lot faster.

The biggest shortcomings are from the inputs- for example, a pitot-static (or air data computer as the case may be) that is erratic or say, a wavering localizer signal on the fringe of the service volume, then the bars will wander a bit too. But when those and everything else is working properly then the FD is usually nice and smooth too.

The fine (finer) pitch control is nice though.


Long winded but hope that helps. I'll defer to guys like @HAL Pilot , @wink , @webmaster , and of course @mad dog who have a lot more time behind them than me. But that's my still fresh perspective with about 500 hours flying a FD.