| BMAA Online Forums > Public Forums > Microlight General Chat > Flying on instruments | Forum Quick Jump
|
|       
Rick Goddin
WFAeC - the Club to aspire to!
Date Joined Apr 2008
Total Posts : 1607 | Posted 14/Aug/2009 7:26 PM (GMT 0) |   | | A couple of us today were discussing our recent trip to Italy and how three of us, me in particular, got into major difficulties at the French Coast when hemmed in by very poor viz and a lowering cloud base. I won't bore you with the details again, it was entirely my fault, but the result was that my best option was to climb out to "on top" with the assistance of the electronic gyro AH which I bought a couple of years before and never really expected to use. Looking at my GPS track afterwards I was very close to the stall speed on two occasions during the climb out and had pre-stall buffet as a result of trying to raise the nose too aggressively.
Now I know that we should never get into a difficult position like this, but people occasionally do and some of them pay a very high price. I was lucky that day and it taught me several lessons.
Apart from the obvious one of trying to avoid a repetition through more cautious airmanship, I have been wondering about what we might do, as PPL (M) or NPPL (M) licence holders, to be able to cope with these conditions and, basically, to wake up breathing tomorrow. I know that we could do a Group A conversion, possibly, and as part of that do some IMC work. Can the IMC work be done in any other way, we thought? Is there a case for learning to use these instruments without actually going into cloud, as that is illegal, by flying with another pilot experienced on type, not necessarily an instructor. The pilot could then wear a pair of "foggles" which are used in IFR training but could take these off at any time, or the other pilot who would be designated P1 for the flight could take over the controls if things got out of hand.
This sort of idea led us to discuss whether a proper course (emergency IFR for microlighters) could be structured. One danger, we suppose, is that any proficiency thus gained might encourage people to do things which they ought not to do, but this could be a life-saver for anyone foolish enough to get caught out as I was.
Rick Goddin
PS: we have given up the idea of the bag on the head by the way, as this seems much safer.
"Fly higher - with the WFAeC!"Post Edited (Rick Goddin) : 15/08/2009 10:28:47 GMT | | Back to Top | | |
 |
Peter Kelsey (Ferryair) BMAA 6668
Ferryair Worldwide Ferrying Services
Date Joined Oct 2006
Total Posts : 3832 | Posted 14/Aug/2009 8:38 PM (GMT 0) | | Rick,
Haven't we discussed this before ? last time it was laughed at by many and I seem to recall that was why the paper bag became a topic of discussion 
Last time I said I thought the 'get out of trouble IMC training' would be a very valuable piece of training if structured into microlighting, but the general opinion was that it would lull pilots into a false sense of security and the nature of the beast is to go that little bit further 
Now I think we are looking at a 'double edged sword' I would love to see IMC training being offered to microlight pilots who have suitably equipped microlights or access to such microlights as it could save untrained microlighters from getting into trouble in IMC conditions, but exactly where do you define the cut off line ? MOST microlights are not equipped with ILS facility and that only leaves getting a PAR in really bad weather and 99% of pilots wouldn't cope that well flying a PAR under ATC instructions. So are you saying that you would want training restricted to just basic IMC flying to go up through cloud and to be safely able to descend through cloud.
The LAA are already in talks with the CAA about this very subject and would certainly give a basis if they get granted it 
I am sure that your idea of getting a Pilot to sit 'VFR' whilst the 'IFR' pilot dons a pair of goggles is a great idea, I have previously done this with a couple of pilots and as an example... one was bang on the ball in a GA plane, but applied the theory in anger in his microlight and then told me after that it went badly wrong  but no so bad that he wasn't around to talk about it. Horses for Courses is how I perceive it.
I would be almost confident enough to go into IMC in a Skyranger, but admit it would be suicidal to attempt it in a AX3 or Thruster. the instrument appreciation would help immensely, but still isn't fail safe
As I said before, I do think it would be something that would be beneficial to the likes of you, but it certainly isn't something that would suit everyone (or more to the point something that everyone could cope with) I think with the right structure of training put forward it could become a workable 'add on' rating for microlighters.
There is certainly mileage in pushing the idea forward... it has been proven that some microlight pilots have got into worsening weather conditions and these people are pretty intelligent people and with the right tuition could have an 'extra get out of trouble card' available to them.
The scary part is: by your own admission, you got very close to the stall on a couple of occasions and you must have felt the workload multiply rapidly, so taking that you are considered to be a competent pilot, it shows how relatively quickly it can go awry.
BMAA 6668
"College-bred is a four-year loaf, using dad's dough, Coming out half-baked, with a lot of crust."
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Rick Goddin
WFAeC - the Club to aspire to!
Date Joined Apr 2008
Total Posts : 1607 | Posted 14/Aug/2009 8:53 PM (GMT 0) | | |
You make some very good points Peter, far more constructive than just saying that "you shouldn't do it". My replies below to a couple of your points
best rgds Rick
PS It wasn't a case of "pressing on" in bad weather. The abrupt change could not have been anticipated on this particular day. The difficulties arose after the decision to turn back had already been taken.
Peter Kelsey (Ferryair) BMAA 6668 said...
So are you saying that you would want training restricted to just basic IMC flying to go up through cloud and to be safely able to descend through cloud.
Probably yes, because this is where people can inadvertently get into trouble. I don't think anyone would be looking for an instrument landing.
The scary part is: by your own admission, you got very close to the stall on a couple of occasions and you must have felt the workload multiply rapidly, so taking that you are considered to be a competent pilot, it shows how relatively quickly it can go awry.
Yes it can quickly go wrong. Any training or practice would be better than nothing. The main thing is to stay alive in these circumstances.
"Fly higher - with the WFAeC!"Post Edited (Rick Goddin) : 15/08/2009 10:30:52 GMT | | Back to Top | | |
|
Peter Kelsey (Ferryair) BMAA 6668
Ferryair Worldwide Ferrying Services
Date Joined Oct 2006
Total Posts : 3832 | Posted 14/Aug/2009 9:00 PM (GMT 0) | | Roger Mole said...
Rick, I think you are looking at this from the wrong direction. What you did was ill-advised and actually illegal. There should have been no cause for you to have become IMC if you had done what you should have which is not pressed on and turned back. I have an IMC rating but have not used it for some time and would not be prepared to fly IMC without a great deal of refresher training (it's lapsed together with my PPL(A) anyway). And that's the point. You can't just do an 'IMC Lite' course so you are prepared in the possible event of having to use it and then do so months or years after the event. If you have an IMC rating you need to make use of it regularly to keep in practise or make regular refresher flights with an Instructor. Microlight flyers can't do that and if any were encouraged to go IMC because of having done an 'IMC LITE' months before a considerable proportion would get themselves into serious difficulties.
Roger,
Our posts clashed onto the board at exactly the same time, now I agree IMC flying does require refreshing to stay 100% current, but if someone has done the 'IMC Lite' course as you succinctly put it they are still significantly further ahead in the game than the pilot who has never experienced any training in flying in the clag. Why do you say that microlight flyers can't actually refresh their skills ? Rick has suggested a perfectly suitable option to complete practices by taking a 'safety VFR pilot' on mutual flights.
I learnt to do Maths at school in the early 60's and nearly 40yrs later I can still complete any mathematical problem, I also learnt to ride a bike nearly 43 yrs ago and still I manage to ride a bike, yet I don't stay current by refreshing my cycling skills yearly... ok I am getting close to needing stabilisers back on bikes now (but that is because I am now getting to be a doddery old bugger)
IMC is actually partly a self inflicted restriction: If I look out the front window of any aircraft in 10kms or more I can clearly see 5kms and everything over that can be less crystal clear but still visual, so my eyes can cope with 5000m perfectly well but not see 25km clearly anymore. If I cross the English Channel in gin clear conditions I don't see the White Cliffs of Dover or Cap Gris Nez UNBLURRED each time ( 5yrs ago I could )
BMAA 6668
"College-bred is a four-year loaf, using dad's dough, Coming out half-baked, with a lot of crust."
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Andy Fell
Wants to be up there!
Date Joined Dec 2006
Total Posts : 1899 | Posted 14/Aug/2009 9:05 PM (GMT 0) | | | | |
|
Rick Goddin
WFAeC - the Club to aspire to!
Date Joined Apr 2008
Total Posts : 1607 | Posted 14/Aug/2009 9:29 PM (GMT 0) | |
Paul: It was the turning back into rapidly developing coastal conditions that created the problem for us. Going on would have been a better strategy, although cloudbase in front was down to about 600 feet and some of the hills ahead were 650 ft  Some agility might have been needed. Rick
Paul Collins said...
Rick,
A small amount of instrument appreciation training is part of the PPLA. The primary purpose is to enable you to make a safe turn back out of cloud if you end up in it in error. Why not use this syllabus as a starting point? Anything much further would certainly need appropriate instrumentation such as an AI and radio nav aids. It is very important to keep current as it is not easy to do well.
I agree it would be a good thing. It certainly makes you learn to trust your instruments.
Why do you say the abrubt change in weather could not have been anticipated? This might also be something to think about as generally dewpoint and temperature information gives a lot of clues.
Paul
"Fly higher - with the WFAeC!"Post Edited (Rick Goddin) : 15/08/2009 10:31:43 GMT | | Back to Top | | |
|
Peter Kelsey (Ferryair) BMAA 6668
Ferryair Worldwide Ferrying Services
Date Joined Oct 2006
Total Posts : 3832 | Posted 14/Aug/2009 9:46 PM (GMT 0) | | Steve Girling from Brynamman said...You could always try a flight sim programme on the comp and lower the vis to nothing ! 
Steve,
it would need to be quite a sophisticated flight sim to replicate spatial disorientation that occurs in IMC conditions, to explain :
During flight, most of the senses are "fooled" by centrifugal force, and indicate to the brain that "down" is at the bottom of the cockpit no matter the actual attitude of the aircraft. Only the inner ear and the visual sense provide data to the contrary. The inner ear contains rotational "accelerometers," known as the semicircular canals, which provide information to the lower brain on rotational accelerations in the pitch, roll and yaw axes. This system is imperfect, and errors develop in the brain's estimate of rate and direction of turn in each axis. Normally these errors are corrected using information from the visual sense, in particular an external visual horizon. Once an aircraft enters conditions under which the pilot cannot see a distinct visual horizon, the drift in the inner ear continues uncorrected. Errors in the perceived rate of turn about any axis can build up at a rate of 0.2 to 0.3 degrees per second. If the pilot is not proficient in the use of gyroscopic flight instruments, these errors will build up to a point that control of the aircraft is lost, usually in a steep, diving turn known as a graveyard spiral. During the entire time, leading up to and well into the maneuver the pilot remains unaware that he is turning, believing that he is maintaining straight flight.
The graveyard spiral usually terminates when the g-forces on the aircraft build up to and exceed the structural strength of the airframe, resulting in catastrophic failure, or when the aircraft contacts the ground. In a 1954 study, the Air Safety Foundation found that out of 20 non-instrument-rated subject pilots, 19 of the 20 entered a graveyard spiral soon after entering simulated instrument conditions. The 20th pilot also lost control of his aircraft, but in another maneuver. The average time between onset of instrument conditions and loss of control was 178 seconds.
Spatial disorientation can also affect instrument-rated pilots in certain conditions. A powerful tumbling sensation (vertigo) can be set up if the pilot moves his head too much during instrument flight. This is called the Coriolis illusion. Pilots are also susceptible to spatial disorientation during night flight over featureless terrain.
Spatial orientation is our ability to maintain our body orientation and/or posture in relation to the surrounding environment (physical space) at rest and during motion. Humans are designed to maintain spatial orientation on the ground. The three-dimensional environment of flight is unfamiliar to the human body, creating sensory conflicts and illusions that make spatial orientation difficult and sometimes impossible to achieve. Statistics show that between 5% and 10% of all general aviation accidents can be attributed to spatial disorientation, 90% of which are fatal.
Good spatial orientation on the ground relies on the use of visual, vestibular (organs of equilibrium located in the inner ear), and proprioceptive (receptors located in the skin, muscles, tendons, and joints) sensory information. Changes in linear acceleration, angular acceleration, and gravity are detected by the vestibular system and the proprioceptive receptors, and then compared in the brain with visual information.
Spatial orientation in flight is difficult to achieve because numerous sensory stimuli (visual, vestibular, and proprioceptive) vary in magnitude, direction, and frequency. Any differences or discrepancies between visual, vestibular, and proprioceptive sensory inputs result in a sensory mismatch that can produce illusions and lead to spatial disorientation
Two otolith organs, the saccule and utricle, are located in each ear and are set at right angles to each other. The utricle detects changes in linear acceleration in the horizontal plane, while the saccule detects gravity changes in the vertical plane. However, the inertial forces resulting from linear accelerations cannot be distinguished from the force of gravity (according to the theory of general relativity they are the same thing) therefore, gravity can also produce stimulation of the utricle and saccule.
Anyone in an aircraft that is making a coordinated turn, no matter how steep, will have little or no sensation of being tilted in the air unless the horizon is visible. Similarly, it is possible to gradually climb or descend without a noticeable change in pressure against the seat. In some aircraft, it is possible to execute a loop without pulling negative G so that without visual reference, the pilot could be upside down without being aware of it. That's because a gradual change in any direction of movement may not be strong enough to activate the fluid in the semicircular canals, so the pilot may not realize that the aircraft is accelerating, decelerating, or banking.
How to prevent spatial disorientation
Before flying with less than 3 miles visibility, obtain training and maintain proficiency in aircraft control by reference to instruments.
When flying in reduced visibility, use the flight instruments.
If only Visual Flight Rules-qualified, do not attempt visual flight when there is a possibility of getting trapped in deteriorating weather.
If you experience a vestibular illusion during flight, trust your instruments and disregard your sensory perceptions.
(taken from training notes)
BMAA 6668
"College-bred is a four-year loaf, using dad's dough, Coming out half-baked, with a lot of crust." Post Edited (Peter Kelsey (Ferryair) BMAA 6668) : 14/08/2009 21:50:31 GMT | | Back to Top | | |
|
Donald Walker
Someone shut this guy up!
Date Joined Nov 2006
Total Posts : 1501 | Posted 14/Aug/2009 10:12 PM (GMT 0) | | Better hurry up chaps, because if EASA gets its way there will no longer be an IMC rating.
Donald | | Back to Top | | |
|
Kev Armstrong
Uncultured Northern Oik
Date Joined Dec 2005
Total Posts : 1876 | Posted 14/Aug/2009 10:28 PM (GMT 0) | | | As Donald commented, if I understand the issues correctly, the EASA view is actually less pragmatic than our own CAA, which has long had a sort of semi instrument rating as a Get Out Of Jail Card, which our European friends want nothing to do with.
Rick has found a decent subject to raise prompted by his own experience; I imagine that pilots in the nineteen twenties were making the same discoveries about weather that can bite the unwary, or even simply someone who hasn't yet been there. Disappointed with Roger's stance as in 'don't do it'; this prefect-ish approach merely alienates someone who has made a tiny error and had a severe scare or worse, and achieves absolutely nothing. Rick is thinking, better than the easy route of condemning.
Bad vis. happens; as Chuck Yeager comments in his book Britain has 'the worst flying weather in Europe'. Any constructive training or methodology to cope has got to be a good thing, like skid training in cars. An instructor on the back and foggles would be useful experience to see what the average pilot would do if vision was obscured. Flex or fixed wing.
Kev
| "Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." -- Albert Einstein | "The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly, is to fill the world with fools"... Herbert Spencer
"Flexwing microlights are the dog's testicles" ...Kevin Armstrong | | Back to Top | | |
|
Rick Goddin
WFAeC - the Club to aspire to!
Date Joined Apr 2008
Total Posts : 1607 | Posted 14/Aug/2009 10:59 PM (GMT 0) | | Yes, I don't think, Kev, that flying in foggles but without any instruments will prove other than what is known already, that it's easy to loose orientation and control. You need the instruments as well. Is it the case that an electronic gyro type AH wouldn't give you an horizon in a flexwing?
Rick
Peter Kelsey (Ferryair) BMAA 6668 said...Kev, EASA are being prompted by the CAA to maintain the IMC rating or at the very least substitute it with the IWR rating that EASA discussed a few yrs back, this would give the Microlight world an ' open door' if the new rating was implemented to discuss inclusion for microlight pilots flying suitably equipped microlights. Sadly even if a concession was made where microlighters were extended IMC/IWR privileges after training, this could never be extended to flexwing pilots (Flexwings simply cannot be equipped to fly in IMC conditions) Well maybe they can and I am fundamentally missing the point, so I will now bow to your superior knowledge and inwardly digest your response that I am sure will blow me away with such a well presented case to show how flexwings can safely fly in IMC scenarios. Simple clue: An AH on a Flexwing would serve as much use as fitting an Ashtray to the 'A' Frame !!!
"Fly higher - with the WFAeC!" | | Back to Top | | |
|
Robert Chandler
Bob Chandler
Date Joined Dec 2006
Total Posts : 76 | Posted 14/Aug/2009 11:12 PM (GMT 0) | | | | |
| 292 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Tuesday, February 09, 2010 4:07 AM
There are a total of 61,322 posts in 6,893 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 23 new threads and 128 reply posts. View Active Threads
| | Who's Online | This forum has 1568 registered members. Please welcome our newest member, Nick Stone.
23 Guest(s), 0 Registered Member(s) are currently online. Details
|
|
|