Flight Director Tips

MidlifeFlyer

MidlifeFlyer

Well-Known Member
A lot of what I do with light piston owners is avionics transitions. Analog to glass. Most if not all of my clients have never flown with a flight director and it's not as intuitive as it seems. Some acclimate naturally; some struggle with it; some simply turn it off unless it's directing the autopilot.

So, I'm looking for training tips on using it beyond "turn it off if not following it." Where to look; how to correct; how to integrate with the overall scan. I figure this group would be a great source.

Chevron FD, not crosshairs.
 
Last edited:
One of the most important from my perspective is to learn the FD in your particular aircraft. For example, the 73 FD really overshoots in pitch during acceleration and cleanup and you’re better off flying a known good pitch attitude and letting the pitch bar figure itself out. Most other aircraft will have similar foibles I imagine.
 
My phraseology is to just tuck the triangle"airplane" up into the command bars. Make the airplane match the bars and then the airplane will be doing what you told the flight director you want. The problem becomes when the FD isn't giving useful information and its flying off to the left and high when you forgot to arm an approach or something. And then I see newer pilots just ignore it and fly the approach raw data. The trick is to convince them that the FD should be giving you something useful. And if it isn't find out why as long as doing so isn't a distraction. Have to fly the airplane first of course. If its a single G5 or something that can be a little tricky. Especially if they put it in the HSI position. G1000 type systems can be a little more intuitive to pick up. I remember when I first switched to G1000 from a 6 pack. The problem is almost information overload. Too much stuff to look at and process. Had to force myself to focus on what was important and worry about the peripheral stuff later.

This seems like rambling, and I'm not sure its helped or answered your question.
 
Roger Roger said:
One of the most important from my perspective is to learn the FD in your particular aircraft. For example, the 73 FD really overshoots in pitch during acceleration and cleanup and you’re better off flying a known good pitch attitude and letting the pitch bar figure itself out. Most other aircraft will have similar foibles I imagine.
Click to expand...
That may sound obvious, but it's really a description of the problem, particularly when combined with

Wardogg said:
just tuck the triangle"airplane" up into the command bars.
Click to expand...
Sounds simple, but that's where I see the problem. Most if not all of us had a tendency to overcorrect during our initial instrument training. When we're talking light GA, most of us eventually learned that when the needle is 2° left, we don't need a 30° bank. But unlike a pro, who might catch the tiniest deviation and correct immediately, most in this group don't tend to see the deviation until it becomes larger.

Translate that to a Flight Director, and I'm see a huge tendency to overcorrect by making an aggressive move toward the chevron. What I'm trying to figure out is exercises to use with a pilot to reduce that tendency. An understanding of the lag of the instrument and that the goal with, say, a 3° pitch deviation, is a small correction to fly toward the magenta chevron rather than to tuck under immediately. There's also definitely some fixation issues.
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
That may sound obvious, but it's really a description of the problem, particularly when combined with


Sounds simple, but that's where I see the problem. Most if not all of us had a tendency to overcorrect during our initial instrument training. When we're talking light GA, most of us eventually learned that when the needle is 2° left, we don't need a 30° bank. But unlike a pro, who might catch the tiniest deviation and correct immediately, most in this group don't tend to see the deviation until it becomes larger.

Translate that to a Flight Director, and I'm see a huge tendency to overcorrect by making an aggressive move toward the chevron. What I'm trying to figure out is exercises to use with a pilot to reduce that tendency. An understanding of the lag of the instrument and that the goal with, say, a 3° pitch deviation, is a small correction to fly toward the magenta chevron rather than to tuck under immediately. There's also definitely some fixation issues.
Click to expand...
Sadly, if the issue is as you have diagnosed it here, it speaks to a bit of a weakness in basic attitude instrument flying. That’s not arrogance or a criticism of either you or the student, all of us who have instructed know how adding new things can cause us to fumble on the basics (like when instrument students forget how to land). Perhaps a student in this case needs to be taken back a step and do a bit of basic attitude instrument flying without the FD or indeed any navigation guidance other than a heading bug before adding back in the FD? Especially if they are transitioning to a new aircraft type at the same time. I always take the perspective that I should know a handful of basic pitch/power combinations for the airplane I’m flying, especially if I’m only or primarily flying 1 type, and for me that is what helps me to see when the FD is doing something wonky.

Do these students primarily have synth vision as well? I never really taught with that but I can see how it could both be a hindrance or a useful teaching tool.
 
Last edited:
Hardest thing for me to understand initially (which didn’t take long to figure out), is that it looks like ILS needles, but it isn’t. You dont apply a correction to the needles, you just put the thing on the thing, and it corrects (over time) the underlying deviations from the raw navigation (if applicable), or synthetic guidance. If your pointer is in the center of the cross, you are either already on, or you are correcting. Obviously a million caveats apply to that last statement, but that is the simplest way I can think of to describe the basic theory, all other things being equal.
 
Roger Roger said:
Sadly, if the issue is as you have diagnosed it here, it speaks to a bit of a weakness in basic attitude instrument flying. That’s not arrogance or a criticism of either you or the student, all of us who have instructed know how adding new things can cause us to fumble on the basics (like when instrument students forget how to land). Perhaps a student in this case needs to be taken back a step and do a bit of basic attitude instrument flying without the FD or indeed any navigation guidance other than a heading bug before adding back in the FD?
Click to expand...
That would be helpful if I wasn’t referring to pilots whose basic attitude flying is just fine without a flight director.
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
That may sound obvious, but it's really a description of the problem, particularly when combined with


Sounds simple, but that's where I see the problem. Most if not all of us had a tendency to overcorrect during our initial instrument training. When we're talking light GA, most of us eventually learned that when the needle is 2° left, we don't need a 30° bank. But unlike a pro, who might catch the tiniest deviation and correct immediately, most in this group don't tend to see the deviation until it becomes larger.

Translate that to a Flight Director, and I'm see a huge tendency to overcorrect by making an aggressive move toward the chevron. What I'm trying to figure out is exercises to use with a pilot to reduce that tendency. An understanding of the lag of the instrument and that the goal with, say, a 3° pitch deviation, is a small correction to fly toward the magenta chevron rather than to tuck under immediately. There's also definitely some fixation issues.
Click to expand...
This is where an FTD or simulator would help. Are there any local flight schools you could partner with that have one?
 
CoffeeIcePapers said:
This is where an FTD or simulator would help. Are there any local flight schools you could partner with that have one?
Click to expand...
I have access to one. My question is about usage tips to help trainees use it properly. Actually use it the other day to deconstruct what I do so I can help trainees overcome their issues.
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
I have access to one. My question is about usage tips to help trainees use it properly. Actually use it the other day to deconstruct what I do so I can help trainees overcome their issues.
Click to expand...
Not sure it helps but whenever I was taught to fly that type of FD it was related like flying the #4 blue angel. You fit right into the slot. As close as possible but don't hit it. Nice and smooth corrections. Also anticipate what the FD is going to do next. If someone is jerky with controls while following a flight director they are being surprised by the command. Perhaps showing them a video of that will click something.

I would start straight and level. And have them accept zero deviation with small corrections. Then announce which way you are going to spin the heading knob. Let them picture what the FD is going to do and then execute. Keep doing this and slowly add climbs and descents. Also do this without a FD a couple times and then enable the FD once established in the turn and see if it matches. Until this is mastered I wouldn't even think about approaches.
 
mikecweb said:
Also anticipate what the FD is going to do next. If someone is jerky with controls while following a flight director they are being surprised by the command. Perhaps showing them a video of that will click something.
Click to expand...
I locked onto this part but your post is very helpful. I think that's exactly what I'm seeing. A form of chasing the flight director rather than using it as a guide. And yes, if one has solid instrument attitude flying skills, switching back and forth between FD/no FD should display minimal differences.

I really don't expect a light GA pilot to fly with zero deviation, but I am looking for ways to minimize chasing, jerkiness, and the attendant overcorrection. I like your straight & level → turns → climb & descent progression. 👌
 
I like to suggest to my FOs that the flight director is a tool, not a command. The biggest errors I see in people who otherwise have good flying skills tend to be the fact that they're trying too hard to follow the flight director because they've put all of their situational awareness there. Some of that, I've found, is training deficiency from the overemphasis on following automation and insufficient awareness ahead of the automation.

Ultimately, the pilot flying should already know what they need to do, and the flight director is just a trim input to that. So in short, people who are having trouble following the flight director are, in my experience, actually failing to fly the airplane because they're too focused on following the automation.
 
if the student is a solid attitude flyer before FDs, they should have some idea of what the aircraft will need to do without the command bars. mike and roger make some good points- essentially saying you need to know where the FD is going to be to fly it smoothly. This is also essential as a crosscheck to the information the FD is providing- garbage in garbage out.
It almost sounds like the student is fixating on FLYING THE FLIGHT DIRECTOR since that seems to be pounded into their heads when being introduced to the concept. I like to think of FDs as a tool to provide guidance at a higher gain for fine tuning flight path, they should have an idea of how the aircraft needs to be oriented and the flight director should largely agree. If it’s not where they think it should be, that’s a red flag for them to cross check their flight guidance to ensure it’s providing valid information
 
FD just augments the raw data, packages it up nicely, when it’s doing what it’s supposed to be doing and operating correctly. A good FD flyer maintains the SA in their instrument crosscheck, the crosscheck between the raw data and the FD display, and should know/expect/anticipate what the FD is going to be directing them to do in any phase of instrument flight. And more importantly, be able to instantly recognize when the FD is failing to do that and very quickly why it’s failing to.

Park the FD for contact flight work such as visual landings. If the FD isn’t tied to any data source, it’s not giving useful info. Hence why I turn it off for landings or pattern work or anywhere I’m not using an information source for it.
 
Agreed. I might be on the FD commands at some point, but I'm muttering "lined up left/right" in a crosswind and I'm looking outside and inside to balance that correction. You get a big enough deviation in close, and the FD isn't gonna fix it. Not that we do that, but that's the ultimate limitation IMO of FD's. You fly a smooth, mostly correct airplane, and they will continue to aid. If you fly binary corrections, bouncing between below average deviations, FD aint gonna fix that.
 
MikeD said:
FD just augments the raw data, packages it up nicely, when it’s doing what it’s supposed to be doing and operating correctly. A good FD flyer maintains the SA in their instrument crosscheck, the crosscheck between the raw data and the FD display, and should know/expect/anticipate what the FD is going to be directing them to do in any phase of instrument flight. And more importantly, be able to instantly recognize when the FD is failing to do that and very quickly why it’s failing to.

Park the FD for contact flight work such as visual landings. If the FD isn’t tied to any data source, it’s not giving useful info. Hence why I turn it off for landings or pattern work or anywhere I’m not using an information source for it.
Click to expand...

The 1900 just "kinda" had VOR track, GS/LOC track, but altitude was non-existent, it was just whatever pitch you had it synced at.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top