Instrument ride passed

F

farwellbooth

Well-Known Member
Well over a year later I'm finally an instrument pilot!!!! Logged .4 of actual in the soup with my examiner for a total of 1.8 hours. Approaches went well, one backcourse to a missed, an ILS with a T&G, steep turns, stalls, partial panel, a hold, and a VOR approach. The hardest was the hold... I had to hold on the 170 radial, right turns, 12 DME from the UBG VOR. My situational awareness was pretty wacked after flying by compass and timed turns but managed to figure out the parallel entry.

I had one radio tuned to the ILS for the ILS approach and the other VOR radio tuned to neighboring VOR for the upcoming VOR approach. After the ride he said to tune both radios to the localizer for confirmation vs. just letting the VOR needle dangle around. What do you think of this. I listened to every nav. aid id...

Also... I fly my approaches at 100kts. in a 172. He's a 737 captain and wanted me to configure at the FAF fix (he said this after the ride). I continue to fly at 100kts and then when I'm 300 ft. above DA or MDA I decrease power from about 1750 to 1350. I don't trim (in case I have to go missed) and just increase back pressure and the plane slows. Once I have the runway then add flaps. If I never see runway don't add flaps and I'm all set to go missed. What do you think about configuring i.e. adding flaps etc. at the FAF vs. closer in? It would make sense in a 737 or whatever when your approach speed is screaming but in a 172 that would take forever to get multiple approaches in. Not really from slower speed but waiting/holding for others... I don't know... different techniques.

I think the most exciting thing is graduating to the orange ASA commercial book!
 
Rock On and congrats. I just finished my long IFR XC and and getting ready for the ride. As for the getting set for the approach at the FAF, I found it somewhat easier to add on notch of flaps. It helped me get stabilized to fly at 90kts. Others will disagree but it works for me.
 
I do not agree with flying the approach that fast. I always try to fly the final segment at about 90 knots with 10 degrees of flaps. I'll fly the initial feeder routs or procedure turn faster, but once established I slow to 90 and add flaps. This helps stabilize the plane and also makes it much easier to slow down. I agree if doing practice approaches you may save some time the other way, but if your doing an ILS down to minimums at 100 knots with no flaps....even if you pull back to idle at minimums you will use up a ton of runway.

If you are a little slower and have some flaps in you are doing sort of a power on approach. Upon breaking out if you reduce your power you will decelerate yo landing speed much easier.

Just because you can fly the approach at 100 knots you still need to land around 40-45 knots....and a Skyhawk doesn't lose airspeed that quicky.
 
First off, congrats! That's a huge accomplishment in your career.

As for configuring at the FAF vs. after the FAF, I disagree with both. Certainly it's fine to add flaps when you have the runway made, but I disagree with doing anything drastic with the power that close to minimums. My own technique is to completely configure the aircraft for the final segment prior to the FAF. This is how I do it in a C172:

ILS: Flaps 10 with half-dot up on the glideslope before intercept. 80 knots on the approach.

Non-precision: Flaps 10, 80 knots when 2 DME prior to the FAF is reached. On a GPS approach, approach mode active is a great time to configure. If you don't have DME (ADF or no-DME VOR), you just have to wait until the ADF needle starts to get really sensitive, or when the CDI starts to move.

The point of all of this has nothing to do with saving time. That's really not a good reason to be screaming in on the approach. The real objective here is to stay stabilized all the way to the MAP. This technique also makes sure that the only thing you're doing after the FAF is flying the airplane (and doing a GUMP check if you're in a complex).

Anyways, just my 2 cents for what they're worth.
 
Congrats.

Regardint the ILS, I've seen it taught both ways.

I've always done ILS approaches as fast as possible in the skyhawk, usually around 115 KIAS (just about cruise power). This is done to accomodate faster jet traffic at the airports we typically shoot ILS's into. Ideally, you do want to configure the airplane with 10 degrees of flaps and slow to 90 KIAS in the C172 within half a dot of glideslope intercept, but with a 10 knot headwind, this will give you a groundspeed of 80 knots. You will not be on the controller's good side.

It's pretty rare for me to be cleared for an ILS in a C172 without being told "keep your speed up". Most airports with an ILS have 5000ft+ runways, and it's not a problem stopping the skyhawk within 75% of that distance, even going 115 over the middle marker at DH. However, if you were in a situation where you had a short runway with an ILS (do they make those?), you would definitely want to configure the airplane before glideslope intercept and ride 'er down at 90.
 
First off, like everyone else congrats. That ride was a headache for me, and I REALLY enjoy just flying around IFR now.

[ QUOTE ]
had one radio tuned to the ILS for the ILS approach and the other VOR radio tuned to neighboring VOR for the upcoming VOR approach. After the ride he said to tune both radios to the localizer for confirmation vs. just letting the VOR needle dangle around. What do you think of this. I listened to every nav. aid id...

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't agree. If you ID it, it should be good. I use the second VOR reciever for SA when being vectored for the airport. I know where I am, what radial I'm on, so if the controller screws up, I can say something. If your nav flag comes out on the LOC, then I'd switch 'em.

[ QUOTE ]
Also... I fly my approaches at 100kts. in a 172. He's a 737 captain and wanted me to configure at the FAF fix (he said this after the ride). I continue to fly at 100kts and then when I'm 300 ft. above DA or MDA I decrease power from about 1750 to 1350. I don't trim (in case I have to go missed) and just increase back pressure and the plane slows. Once I have the runway then add flaps. If I never see runway don't add flaps and I'm all set to go missed. What do you think about configuring i.e. adding flaps etc. at the FAF vs. closer in? It would make sense in a 737 or whatever when your approach speed is screaming but in a 172 that would take forever to get multiple approaches in.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not sure on this one, but this is what I do: 100 kts to the FAF, call FAF power back, 90 kt, 10 degrees of flaps, start the descent. No more flaps until I have the runway in sight, but I DO use the trim. Why make my life harder than it already is. If I'm in IMC flying a precision approach, the last thing I want to do is continue holding back pressure and exhausting myself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top