One of the instructors I had for my tailwheel endorsement finally blacked out the airspeed indicator because I kept looking at it on down wind, cross wind and final ! I didn't like it !
Bob
One of the instructors I had for my tailwheel endorsement finally blacked out the airspeed indicator because I kept looking at it on down wind, cross wind and final ! I didn't like it !
Bob
Robert, I think when the army used to train pilots in Stearmans, they would cover the panel before the pilot soloed. You can fly by attitude of the nose re the horizon, and knowing the manifold pressure and/or rpm setting for different parts of the pattern. Its a teaching drill, may be usefull, especially for some types of planes .However, airspeed control is important especially for some airplanes. I have landed once with no airspeed indicator, and I did it ok but, I had hundreds of hours of pilot time in that airplane, so I know what the power settings, boost and rpm should be, and I also had a pace plane fly next to me on long final as a check that I was at 90knots and I had a good runway ahead of me. What happened was I took off at Connie Edwards gravel strip on his ranch near Abilene and just as I lifted off the airspeed went to zero. All else was normal, no engine problems, so I flew on to Breckenridge. After landing Nelson came out with a compressed air hose and blew into the rear of the pilot head and a small white rock spit out the front onto the ground.
I wouldn't want to have to land a Mustang or jet without looking at the airspeed indicator, a good approach should be within 3 knots or so of ideal speed on short final,
LOL, I flew my Nieuport without a pitot tube or static probe for six months and never missed having an ASI or an altimeter.
Indeed, the only reason I put both in was simply to make them work to justify the expense of purchasing the instruments in the first place.
The only thing I look at in the cockpit is the slip indicator, oil temp and oil pressure.
The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.
Back when I was a young 'un, 16 years old and about 30 total hours, I rolled out the CAP Citabria for some touch-and-goes.
The first takeoff was a bit weird. The airspeed indicator showed rather slow acceleration, but the engine was roaring and the plane was handling crisply.
Things seemed normal on the downwind, though the speed was about 5-10 mph too slow.
I turned base, then final, cuttin the power and looking for my ususal 75 MPH approach speed. The needle dropped to 75 MPH.
Good.
It continued downward. I added forward stick. Speed kept dropping. I pushed forward more. No help. More. Nothing seemed to help; the airspeed indicator was heading towards a stall.
I finally gave up...didn't dare to push forward any more. Truth be told, I kind of froze on the stick, mesmerized as the the needle dropped towards stall speed.
It hit stall speed. Nothing happened, except the needle kept dropping.. It reached zero...and went THROUGH zero, like a clock running backward. It now was reading 220 MPH, and still dropping.
What the hey?
I skimmed the concrete, doing a touch-and-go with a bat outa hell speed. Power up, pitch up, and the airspeed began to rise.
Marvelling at the phenomenon, I went around a couple more times.
I landed, and when I taxied up to the tiedown spot, there was an older CAP senior member waiting.
"I'm going to talk to your instructor...you don't seem to be able to hold the airspeed indicator where it should be."
They found a bug in the pitot line, partially blocking it and turning it into a poor-man's altimeter.
A couple of days ago, I posted about the need for young pilots to fly, and to be allowed to make mistakes. I made several that day...the biggest one being not LANDING the plane when I realized something was wrong with it. But my instructor had given me a knowledge base sufficient to handle the basic emergency, and my flights without him on board had layered on sufficient skills to keep things under control.
Ron Wanttaja
Ya'll sure know how to complicate things. See us Canucks do it a lot simpler. I am an ultralight instructor, easy to get and I can teach in anything. Long as it has some type of lifting surface and doesn't weigh more than 1280 lbs. Even something called a basic ultralight, kind of like what you call an ultralight but can weigh 1200 lbs and can go as fast as you can make it go. Simple.
Another is the Owner Maintenance Category, if an airplane is out of production, and what isn't, it can be "de certified" into what for all intents and purposes is a homebuilt. A few restrictions but who is watching. Only restriction on OM is fixed gear and fixed pitch prop. Simple.
It sounds like the new weight restriction if it ever gets thru the millions of borocrates in your FAA will be like our OM, except the devil will be in the details. Who will inspect and maintain the new heavy LSA? OM is signed off by the owner. Simple.
Our ultralight license is simple, 5 hrs dual, 5 hrs solo, have to do at least 10 solo ricochets to get signed off. You can immediately take off with a passenger, provided they are also a pilot. Wanna take your neighbours kid for a ride you need 25 hrs PIC and take another ride with an instructor. Simple. Fly anywhere in the country even class C if you can talk to the gov't guys in a way they understand. Wait,,,,our gov't guys aren't gov't guys. They work for a private not for profit company which costs me around forty bucks a yr for all the services they provide. Simple.
Canucks, a bit simple,,,,but what the heck.
Ray, can you please come here and explain that to the leaders here in the so called "land of the free"?
Or, I think the FAA should just let U.S. pilots print out an "exemption card" to use Canadian rules.
Hey Ray, you said ya'll, cool. My first U/L, an 18 hp Nomad Honcho only had a CHT and that's it. I don't know why it had that, we never looked at it !
Great thread, now WAY off the original topic, but...
When I used to teach at the CAP National Flight Academy, I would cover up all the instruments except the tach and have the student pilots fly vertical S's, turns to headings, etc. (It was Wisconsin, road grids are effective compasses.) The students were amazed that they could do it. They were all microsoft flight simulator aces, so the challenge was to get them to look outside rather than fixate on instruments -- which, after all, are indicators and not direct measurments (especially in pre-glass Cessnas).
How did you do vertical s es . and what plane did you do them in? Unless my understanding is different this would be very hard to do in the typical CAP 182?
Vertical S is an instrument training maneuver. Level flight follows by a 500 fpm climb for one minute, level off, then a 500 fpm decent, and return to level flight at the same airspeed, altitude and heading as start.