Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Chairboy on December 30, 2007, 09:12:26 PM
-
I'm at 200.0 hours now, after 1.8 today flying around lovely rainy Oregon.
(http://hallert.net/images/eoy-flyinfool.jpg)
(My grinning mug today)
Hours flown:
2004: 5.5 hours - I had just started working on my ticket near the end of the year.
2005: 73.1 hours - The year I got my ticket, along with rentals up in Oregon. As some of you may remember, I moved to Oregon the day after passing my checkride at Santa Monica.
2006: 4.4 hours - So, I sorta got laid off at the end of 2005 and was unemployed for a while. 2006 was a lean year. This was when the whole pizza restaurant debacle reached it's fevered pitch in money loss and pain too.
2007: 117.0 - The year I got my plane! I have 114.8 hours on it since May, not too shabby.
2007 has been a fantastic year for flying for me. I've learned a _lot_, and I'm learning more every day. 2008 is going to be the year I buckle down on the instrument rating.
I'll be a low time pilot for a while, and I'm squarely in the middle of The Killing Zone (http://www.amazon.com/Killing-Zone-How-Why-Pilots/dp/007136269X) right now, so we'll see if I can keep fighting off the angry gods of complacency, machismo, and all the other killing traits that get folks where I am. I'll circle back in a year, and hopefully I'll be at least another hundred hours wiser and maybe with another checkride under my belt.
On a related note, I'm doing a panel upgrade for this over the winter. I'll be making the plane into a useful trainer. I'm going to document my progress here:
http://hallert.net/panelupgrade/
(in case anyone is interested). The goal is to IFR-icize the plane by being smart instead of just throwing money at it. I'll be doing most of the work myself, something that's probably about guaranteed to get some of the weaker hearts here a-flutterin'.
I'd like to hear some feedback on the equipment I picked. My goal isn't to have some big glass-cockpit or anything, I going to take the 'learn to drive in a stick' model and apply it to this so I'm forced to develop a solid skillbase.
So, anyhow, just wanted to give y'all a quick EOY report and mention the panel upgrade.
Cheers!
-
Awesome! Good luck and be safe.
-
I think that deserves an animated gif made with this one:
(http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x226/BlueJ17/Airplane-kid.jpg)
-
BTW, anyone have a transponder for sale? My KT-76 asploded, busted cavity tube.
-
Originally posted by Tac
I think that deserves an animated gif made with this one:
(http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x226/BlueJ17/Airplane-kid.jpg)
that is zoozoo screaming on the front
-
It's kind of funny you mention not being able to monitor more than one frequency... The T-37 is used for primary instrument training, and it only has one radio. Unless of course you count the fact that it has a backup guard transmitter/receiver, and you can monitor both the primary radio and guard freq at the same time...
As for no precision approaches, you could fly precision radar approaches but you'd be unlikely to be able to comply with most missed approach instructions without DME, so you'd always need alternate missed approach instructions.
If I had my druthers in a perfect world, I'd always rely on basic ILS/DME with the IAF in-line with the final approach course and defined by VOR/DME (or TACAN) with the VORTAC located either on the airfield or somewhere along the final approach course. I don't like having the VOR co-located with the FAF because it confuses things on non-precision approaches and can bork approach timing if you don't pass exactly over the thing.
Regarding rate turn indicators... Overrated :) We use approximate bank angles that give us standard or half-standard rates of turns at the airspeeds we might need to make that kind of turn. Except for showing students that the gauge exists and correlates to the bank angles we tell them to fly, I don't think I've ever actually used the rate turn indicator.
-
Sure, but I've already GOT one of those. ;)
-
Install an ILS/DME and appropriate CDI, and you're about as well equipped as a T-37 :)
-
And if I add an ADF, I'll be as well equipped as Amelia Earhart!
So... the KNS-80 actually gives me the DME & ILS. The MC-60 fulfills the role of CDI.
-
200hrs!
WTG! I'm struggling to get any stick time at all at the moment. :(
How's the Cozy coming along? I'm still getting messages from Dust asking how I'm going with my build :lol It's good to know he's still out there doing it.
-
Chair,
What is your budget precisely? There are some very good panel mods out there - but things to think about esp in terms of resale value.
ADF - HAS zero value (Yet costs $2,000 to install)
DME - Again, zero value (Costs $2,000 to install)
You need a precision approach capability - a 30 year old CDI with Glideslope in 1 unit will work. A good site for used equipment is http://www.avionicslist.com/
You can find a used King KX170B with NAV for cheap - some with a yellow tag.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&viewitem=&item=300185847927
The only thing you would then need would be a CDI with Glideslope, (http://www.avionicslist.com/listing_detail.php?id=280186815731&title=Collins+351C+CDI+Indicator)
and someway to tell DME.
Ideally, for DME - you get a GPS of some type - anything that is TSO'd will work. Garmin would be great - King if yr on a budget.
Which gets me to the meat of this. Your panel is pretty much virgin territory so far as upgrades. IF, I were to get your panel - this is what I would do upgrade wise.
Keep the current single axis VOR CDI. Keep the radios. Remove the DG and Attitude indicator and replace with an Aspen Avionics EFD-1000 Pro MFD.
http://www.aspenavionics.com/index.php/products/efd1000-pro//
(http://www.aspenavionics.com/images/evolution/evolution-img8.jpg)
It'll plug into your existing panel holes for the DG and AI, and now give you an HSI instead of the DG. Considering the overhaul cost of your AI and DG at around 7 grand, vac pump failure and other crap - it will happen sooner or later.
(http://www.aspenavionics.com/images/evolution/products/EFD1000Pro300pix.jpg)
Advantages here - you can keep your existing radios until you can afford to **** can the stack and put a Garmin 430 in its place (which is your upgrade path in reality). After that, you get the ARINC 429 data inputs and RS232 output from the Garmin - and you now have 2 moving maps - 1 with terrain, air data computer - and a pretty robust approach capability, and 3 points of failure driven off the Vacuum system now limited to 1 - which has a battery backup.
I think that'll run you about $8000 - which is less then overhauling the AI, DG and replacing the VAC pump every 600 hours. I was thinking about this on my SR-20, and I have a NSD-360A HSI with a slaved flux gate which I think runs around $10,000 and another $3000 if you need an overhaul. Some folks it's worked well - others not so well. So if it went another 1000 hours I might keep it. If not - its a possible path for me that I might explore down the line.
Some things to think about. Bottom line, you'll get a lot of bang for the buck if you go with #2 even if all you get at the beginning is an HSI. Thats a hellova lot better then anything you'll get on a budget - even if you were looking for an HSI with a yellowtag.
-
The aspen stuff looks nice, but it's still not available. Anyhow, that's a lot more than what I spent. If you check out the URL, I already bought the following:
KNS-80
MX-12
KMA-24
MC-60
Total cash outlay was around $1500. Somewhat lower than 10k.
-
dont go cheap on IFR gear. Real world single pilot IFR conditions are not a time to go cheap.
-
Write me a check if you'd rather I spent more, I accept all denominations. :D
In the meantime, I'm equipping the plane to be a reliable training platform with multiple failovers where it counts. I'm trying to be smart about where I spend my money, getting maximum bang-for-buck instead of just throwing cash at it until it stops making noise.
I know that's not as soundbyte friendly as "dont go cheap on ifr gear", but it's certainly a more accurate assessment.
-
OK, simply - get a used Garmin 396 so you don't lose SA.
You don't need the XM crap - but its a good solid WASS unit that you can even possibly tie into your existing panel.
-
no offense, just letting ya know. How much actual IFR time do you have?
-
At the risk of sounding like an jerk... did you read the original post? I'm setting up my panel to to be an instrument trainer so I can get my instrument ticket. My CFI-I and I have talked it out (the KNS-80 was his suggestion, a great one I think) and are planning for my learning.
I don't want to be one of these push-button IFR pilots that can't think for themselves when they don't have a nice big color map and synthetic vision driven by GPS and whatnot in front of them, I want to learn the basics and do the work.
I've got a PDA/GPS w/ aviation software that I sometimes use on long XCs, especially when I'm over the middle of nowhere in case I need a no-nonsense "Nearest airport" heading in an emergency, but I prefer to use a VOR and charts to keep proficient. GPS is easy, but RNAV forces you to develop good CRM and develop your skills. That's my logic.
-
This is how I hope to go with mine.
(http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a217/sarahjeanb/Panel3.jpg)
I had bigger plans, but I had serous doubts as to if it would all fit, and it definitely would have pushed buttons on the budgeting advisor to ask for that much in one hit. :lol
(http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a217/sarahjeanb/Panel2.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
At the risk of sounding like an jerk... did you read the original post? I'm setting up my panel to to be an instrument trainer so I can get my instrument ticket. My CFI-I and I have talked it out (the KNS-80 was his suggestion, a great one I think) and are planning for my learning.
I don't want to be one of these push-button IFR pilots that can't think for themselves when they don't have a nice big color map and synthetic vision driven by GPS and whatnot in front of them, I want to learn the basics and do the work.
I've got a PDA/GPS w/ aviation software that I sometimes use on long XCs, especially when I'm over the middle of nowhere in case I need a no-nonsense "Nearest airport" heading in an emergency, but I prefer to use a VOR and charts to keep proficient. GPS is easy, but RNAV forces you to develop good CRM and develop your skills. That's my logic.
OK iron man - what happens when your ground speed goes from the 110 knots that you are used working at, to 170 with a tail wind heading south and ATC switches an intersection to some off airway fix - the same rules apply to GPS units as for RNAV units. You plug in the wrong values - you end up just as dead.
I flew with the KNS-80 in a Mooney 201 for 10 years, and its just as difficult to work at 160 knots TAS as it is at 110 knots. They are great - but you'd better make damn sure you don't program them incorrectly because if I have to attend your funeral i'll beat the **** out of you when my time comes to meet with St. Anthony.
-
heh heh, fine points. Complacency has no place in the cockpit, I'm hoping that my instrument training leaves me a competent, live pilot. Plus, I'll appreciate the push button stuff more if I learn the basics first, right? ;)
-
Cheapest "smart" option.... rent a reliable IFR plane when you need to fly IFR.
There are a lot of changes in the works from the FAA regarding IFR flights in nav gear both in the air and on the ground. You could very easily spend a small fortune right now on something that's about to be phased out or worse, require an expensive replacement AD to keep your plane airworthy.
-
Nice hour building!
I'm afraid the only way I'll acrue any hours again will be to make the plunge into aircraft ownership too.
All those gadgets, why not be a hero and just use the sextant and compass :)
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
Plus, I'll appreciate the push button stuff more if I learn the basics first, right? ;)
I don't know Chair.
My career spanned the period from 1973 to 2003. My IFR training started out with some pretty crude instrumentation; it ended with the latest/greatest CRT displays, flight management computers, autopilits, instrumentation, yadda-yadda.
I can't honestly say that my appreciation or performance with the new stuff was improved by the fact that I learned on the earlier, cruder technology.
If it is affordable, the new stuff makes flying instruments easier and possibly even more safe. I say possibly because human error can kill you pretty quick no matter what instrumentation you have in front of you.
Generally, though, I think the new displays/instrumentation increase situational awareness.
The other thought I might toss in would be that the more modern your panel, the greater the resale at a later date. I think you'd get a higher percentage of your investment back with the newer stuff when you eventually sell.
Just my .02.
-
Originally posted by Wolfala
OK iron man - what happens when your ground speed goes from the 110 knots that you are used working at, to 170 with a tail wind heading south and ATC switches an intersection to some off airway fix...
If you know how to get to the off-airway fix, you just fly there. Headwind switching to tailwind is a simple correction as long as you understand ratios and the 60/1 rule, or have good rules of thumb that don't break down when you are outside normal cruise or approach speeds. If you can't get there (or in situations I've been in, where the fix is some obscure point not on any of my charts and not in either the approach or departure books) you reply "unable" and ask for an alternate clearance. If they are unwilling or unable to provide a clearance you can comply with, you do one of two things.
1. Cancel and proceed VFR
2. Declare an emergency, do whatever you feel like doing, and let the uptight controller deal with your sudden elevation in priority. And hope the FAA guy who comes out to interview you is understanding.
In the last 13 years, I've only had to twist the controller's arm about 3 times. One time, they were unwilling to clear me out of icing conditions. I was about 10 seconds from squawking emergency when they finally realized I was serious about not crashing that day and cleared me to climb out of the thin but ice-filled cloud deck they'd parked me in. Another time, I arrived during "rush hour" about 5 min ahead of my expected arrival slot, and the controller assigned me a penalty hold that would have taken me about 15 minutes beyond my expected arrival time. I didn't have 20 min of fuel to spare so I came back "unable". The controller fitted me into the arrival flow like a champ and didn't even complain about it. He was even gracious when he accidentally put me 1500 ft above glideslope at the FAF at night, after telling me to maintain max speed due to a 737 next in line. I made it work through some creative application of aerodynamic theory, and he thanked me for not going missed approach and making him have to fit me in a second time.
This one was more entertaining... I was #2 in a 7-ship string of tweets heading to florida, all instructor training so we had 14 IPs and no students. The first guy was cleared to some fix, and being the good IP I am, I immediately started looking for it too since I knew I'd get the same clearance in just a few minutes. The guy ahead of us gave sort of a "uhh yea cleared to whateverrequestinitialvectork thxbye" answer, so I knew he didn't know where the heck the fix was. I figured I had 5 min to find the fix. Well, I pulled out every book and chart we had in the plane, and couldn't find it. They gave us the same clearance plus a helpful initial vector, but I still couldn't find the fix. Not being willing to play stevie wonder with the approach, I told them I was unable to proceed on that clearance, and asked for something a caveman driving a wright flyer could do. The clue light clicked on at rapcon since this sort of thing happens anytime a VOR/ILS/DME only jet shows up (ie. a T-37), and the controller gave me something easy (direct to a VOR/DME IAF if I recall correctly). The guy ahead of me immediately piped up with "uh yea we're also... uh... unable... request uh....", and he got the same amended clearance. The guy behind me heard all this going on, and admitted defeat early. By now, the controller figured it out and the rest of the gaggle all ended up with an approach flow that was actually in our approach books.
To this day I still don't know where the heck that point was, but it may have been a fix on a SID, or a GPS or RNAV coord point. Why they'd use a point published only in a departure procedure to handle arrival flow, I don't know. But I do know that of the 14 IPs on that flight, not one of us were able to comply with the clearance.
The moral of the story of course is to know the capabilities of your system and to not hesitate to come back with "unable" if either your system is not capable of the navigation task, or if you are personally unable to comply. Either reason is perfectly valid, although if you routinely come back with "unable" for anything but vectors to final, sooner or later you're gonna piss off a controller and have a nice long chat with an FAA examiner.
-
Hey man, congrat on the 200H+:aok
As far as ur panel upgrade, why on earth would you spend big money on fancy stuff. Two NAV with 1 ILS, DME is all you need to cruise around at 100kts and poke the occasional cloud. When I see pictures of CRTs on those bug smashers panels, it ranks right next to pimp my ride's 3 Xbox in a 200,000 miles repainted Nissan X240.