Jump to content

IFR training tips in a C model - continuous thread


DXB

Recommended Posts

On 12/22/2017 at 3:59 PM, Bob_Belville said:

@mooneygirl finished her IR recently. Most of her training in busy SoCal was in her '65E which has a Johnson Bar Gear and no autopilot nor a certified GPS. (She had to do part of her work in a fixed gear C182 but I'd bet she much preferred the Mooney as an instrument platform JBGear and all. 

If swinging the gear is much of an issue I suppose you need more practice or your plane needs adjustment.  

You might want to have your gear pre-load checked.  Shouldn't be so hard to swing in my opinion. For me having 1000 hours or so in the E, getting the gear back up was the least of my worries.  Also trim is super important.  Congrats on the IR devotion. I received my rating November 17th and have flown about five flights IFR since then.  Great platform for learning.  As a PS:  I get my gear down before the FAF, then 100 on approach.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a great lesson today! Thanks to all who suggested the “dip” technique for j-bar retraction on the missed. I had never tried it in 3 years owning the plane, until now.  It made retraction at 100mph smooth and easy, whereas previously it was dang near impossible at that speed. Going forward, Ill use smooth increase to  WOT while pitching for about 100mph, and then do the ‘lil push forward on the yoke move while retracting.  There’s now no reason I see either to delay the retraction or to flirt with a departure stall by pitching steeper in order to get gear up on the missed. My crisis of faith in the J-bar as the One True Landing Gear System has been averted :lol:

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I  reviewed my lesson from yesterday, which included my first holds as well as the first ILS approach to minimums that I did without constant coaching. Combining the Cloud Ahoy debrief tool, a voice recording of the cockpit audio, and a review of the JPI data for power settings helped reinforce  learning I did while task saturated during the lesson.  I wanted to start personalizing the power/configuration chart from the MAPA manual based on real world experience.  It turns out this is yet another great application of a data-logging engine monitor. The plots of MAP, RPM, Altitude, and ground speed are below and together tell a nice story.  Don't make fun of my wobbly altitude holding - I'm working on it!  The ILS turned out well for a newbie, and so I really wanted to review the power settings. I then edited my chart based on what worked and what didn't during the lesson.  I realize these are rough numbers that depend on conditions, but I like having a starting point to memorize.

Picture1.thumb.png.b800536ea87862db7b829ddd5d47395e.pngPicture2.thumb.png.627f631c9c876753b04f4ae71527fdeb.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, MIm20c said:

Did you leave the flaps up the entire time?  Struggling with that because of the low extension speed. However, it’s nice when I’m at the 200 foot DA as I’m ready to land. I’ve been using 90mph from the FAF to the runway. 

His chart says flaps up for all configurations, and that is generally what I have done as well for the past 25 or so years flying "vintage" Mooneys.

The rationale I have (and was taught) is that an ILS has to be to a runway at least 5000' long, so there's no need to add flaps at less than 200' AGL since there's plenty of runway.

For a non-precision approach, it could be to a shorter runway, but the minimums are higher, with MDAs generally 500' AGL or higher.  In that case, you have the opportunity to deploy flaps prior to landing and when you are sure you (probably) won't have to go missed approach.  In scenarios like that, I'll only put out 2 pumps (takeoff) flaps until short final.

I wonder if anyone else has a different approach? (Pun intended)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, MIm20c said:

Did you leave the flaps up the entire time?  Struggling with that because of the low extension speed. However, it’s nice when I’m at the 200 foot DA as I’m ready to land. I’ve been using 90mph from the FAF to the runway. 

I never used flaps.   Holding level at 2300, 16" 1-2mi before the GS intercept gave plenty of margin to get to gear speed.  My flap speed of 125mph makes it not a particularly useful tool to get to gear speed of 120mph.  After the GS intercept with gear down, I was surprised how easy it was to stay on GS even with essentially no prior experience. It stabilized very nicely with 16" MAP, trimmed for 90kts.  Tracking the localizer was more challenging. I imagine that in the real world I'd dump in full flaps and re-trim immediately if I break out close to DA - this ain't a short field type activity anyway. Come to think of it, my whopping 9.5 simulated instrument hours to date makes me not the right guy to be giving advice on this topic :lol:.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never used flaps.   Holding level at 2300, 16" 1-2mi before the GS intercept gave plenty of margin to get to gear speed.  My flap speed of 125mph makes it not a particularly useful tool to get to gear speed of 120mph.  After the GS intercept with gear down, I was surprised how easy it was to stay on GS even with essentially no prior experience. It stabilized very nicely with 16" MAP, trimmed for 90kts.  Tracking the localizer was more challenging. I imagine that in the real world I'd dump in full flaps and re-trim immediately if I break out close to DA - this ain't a short field type activity anyway. Come to think of it, my whopping 9.5 simulated instrument hours to date makes me not the right guy to be giving advice on this topic :lol:.


I think a lot of what will or won’t work for a particular Mooney is trying out different configurations. In my plane, setting the power around 15” 2400RPM allows me to get to flap speed of 109 KIAS. I drop in approach flaps and then bring the power up to 16”to stabilize me at 100 KIAS. at the FAF, I drop gear and that will set me up for 100 KIAS with 500 ft/min decent with slight power adjustments as needed. At the MDA or DA, runway in sight, I can either pull power and begin to slow down or add full flaps.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Marauder said:

I think a lot of what will or won’t work for a particular Mooney is trying out different configurations. In my plane, setting the power around 15” 2400RPM allows me to get to flap speed of 109 KIAS. I drop in approach flaps and then bring the power up to 16”to stabilize me at 100 KIAS. at the FAF, I drop gear and that will set me up for 100 KIAS with 500 ft/min decent with slight power adjustments as needed. At the MDA or DA, runway in sight, I can either pull power and begin to slow down or add full flaps.

 

I bet something comparable to this strategy would work in my plane since it has the 125mph Vfe, which appeared in '68 on the Cs. It might take a tad more MP given my 180 HP. I will come back to trying it at some point - the faster speed inside the FAF could be desirable in some settings.  Right now I'm keeping it simple as possible so brain doesn't explode.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lots of good info. 

I agree that you might have a Mooney guy look at your gear next annual.  It takes a little muscle at speed but it shouldn’t be bad.  Nerves may make it harder too. Lol

I’m glad your sticking with the Mooney for training.  This is the best time to learn about energy management.  

My method is reduce to gear speed before the FAF by throttling back to 15”-16”. Gear down just before FAF.  If you pull too early then just go back to around 20” and reduce to 16” for a stabilized approach. 

Congrats for making the decision to get the IR. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/23/2017 at 8:37 PM, mooneygirl said:

You might want to have your gear pre-load checked.  Shouldn't be so hard to swing in my opinion. For me having 1000 hours or so in the E, getting the gear back up was the least of my worries. 

 

19 hours ago, Pictreed said:

I agree that you might have a Mooney guy look at your gear next annual.  It takes a little muscle at speed but it shouldn’t be bad.  Nerves may make it harder too. Lol

I wouldn't ignore the 90 lb weakling factor in my case either :lol:.   Per my understanding a high preload would make the gear hard to latch or unlatch in the down position, but that's definitely not my issue. Also putting the gear down is never a problem, and preload has been checked twice at MSCs in the last 3 years of ownership.  Swinging to retract is easy as pie below 90mph, hit or miss in the 90-100 range, and a brutal two handed affair above 100mph requiring the right seat pilot to fly  - not something to mess with in at a critical time. After 350 hrs in the plane, I suspect I'm not getting any better at it except by going to the gym.  Doing the "dip" really does make a huge difference though.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

So- time to update this thread. I’m about 18 hrs into training and got my first real IMC today- over two hours of it.  I thought I had gotten decent at tracking a localizer/ glideslope.  But today I really sucked at the loc as we got close to KGED, which had a legit 250ft AGL ceiling this am.  My brain just did not work the same way as when under the foggles, and I was all over the place. I went almost  full scale deflection as we approached 300ft msl minimum.  I looked to my instructor and said “go missed?!”  with beads of sweat on my forehead.  At that moment he pointed out the runway, which was emerging way to the right in my visual field.  I was surprised at that point that I was able to put it down smoothly,  despite the extreme stress moments earlier. All part of the process I suppose.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/25/2017 at 2:39 PM, DXB said:

I bet something comparable to this strategy would work in my plane since it has the 125mph Vfe, which appeared in '68 on the Cs. It might take a tad more MP given my 180 HP. I will come back to trying it at some point - the faster speed inside the FAF could be desirable in some settings.  Right now I'm keeping it simple as possible so brain doesn't explode.  

It works for me in my electric C. I'm generally low by this time, so set 2300 and reduce power to ~15". When speed bleeds below 125 mph, I drop Takeoff Flaps, slow down and retrim then add power to hold 90 KIAS = 105 MPHI. Dropping the gear a dot-and-a-half high starts a nice descent at the same speed, adjust throttle and trim to hold a nice 500 fpm. Landing is quite easy with half flaps, and it's also pretty easy to slow to decent landing speed.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DXB said:

So- time to update this thread. I’m about 18 hrs into training and got my first real IMC today- over two hours of it.  I thought I had gotten decent at tracking a localizer/ glideslope.  But today I really sucked at the loc as we got close to KGED, which had a legit 250ft AGL ceiling this am.  My brain just did not work the same way as when under the foggles, and I was all over the place. I went almost  full scale deflection as we approached 300ft msl minimum.  I looked to my instructor and said “go missed?!”  with beads of sweat on my forehead.  At that moment he pointed out the runway, which was emerging way to the right in my visual field.  I was surprised at that point that I was able to put it down smoothly,  despite the extreme stress moments earlier. All part of the process I suppose.

I like the image of your instructor calmly pointing :P 

IMC is MUCH different from working under the hood.  On the one hand, when under the hood you still get subtle cues about your orientation--shadows moving, the horizon out of the corner of your eye, the motion of glare from the sun, etc.  On the other hand, in IMC, you do get cues, but they are often misleading--false horizons, reflections from clouds, and having to move your eyes from inside to outside as you go in and out of VMC.

I'm "lucky"--there's no shortage of actual IMC out here in the Northwest for much of the year, so I actually did most of my dual time in IMC.  When I started doing hood time in VMC, it felt kind of like cheating.  Realistically, of course, training in actual IMC is important because you have to get used to looking outside the window as part of your scan, which you don't have to under the hood.

If IMC is forecast, try to collar your instructor any chance you get.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/22/2017 at 9:16 AM, pinerunner said:

One issue you brought up has been on my mind for a while; the missed approach with a J-bar, given that it's hard to get the gear up at higher speeds. I can see two solutions which I haven't tried out well enough to decide (my plane is in the shop while I work on my leaky right tank).

Solution 1 is don't bother to raise the gear at the start of the missed approach. Just give it full power and climb at 90 mph (I've got an older ASI). Keep it as simple as possible and worry about raising the gear when you have plenty of altitude and a stabilized climb.

Solution 2 is to give it the power in two steps, the first of which gives you positive rate of ascent at an airspeed that will allow easy retraction of the gear. The second step is full power of course. This solution may be too complicated at a point in time where you want to make things as simple as possible.

I guess I'll add in solution 3 where you give it full power and climb at such a high angle that you're at easy gear raising speed. I'm afraid you might be flirting with a power-on stall and all the attitude changes combined with reaching down for the handle might be disorienting. If it's done real slick the "Mooney Dip" you would probably do might end up in the perfect attitude for a maximum rate of climb.

I'm eager to see favorite missed approach procedures for J-bar Mooneys

Option 3 seems best to me: apply full power and climb at Vx, raising the gear during this portion.  I wouldn't worry too much about power-on stalling it...  Doing powered stalls with my instructor, she needs to be pitched up over 20 degrees to stall, and that was only using 18-20" MP.  At takeoff power, I'll usually see Vx around half that much pitch...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/24/2018 at 4:25 PM, DXB said:

So- time to update this thread. I’m about 18 hrs into training and got my first real IMC today- over two hours of it.  I thought I had gotten decent at tracking a localizer/ glideslope.  But today I really sucked at the loc as we got close to KGED, which had a legit 250ft AGL ceiling this am.  My brain just did not work the same way as when under the foggles, and I was all over the place. I went almost  full scale deflection as we approached 300ft msl minimum.  I looked to my instructor and said “go missed?!”  with beads of sweat on my forehead.  At that moment he pointed out the runway, which was emerging way to the right in my visual field.  I was surprised at that point that I was able to put it down smoothly,  despite the extreme stress moments earlier. All part of the process I suppose.

This is why I prefer to go practice in actual imc. The hood is just not the same as real world when you’re wing is getting picked up and pushed around and there are no shadows.  Nothing prepares you better than the real thing.  Do it often because if you don’t, there will be that one trip where you need to take your family somewhere and you aren’t prepared even if you think you are.  And, not all imc is equal.  Some is super stable and easy to fly, some is super difficult.    

Edited by Browncbr1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dev -  a few suggestions.

1- Consider getting a copy of x-plane, a joystick/yoke and the mooney model (its a J but flies close enough to yours).  Practice on that between flights.  In all sorts of crappy weather conditions.  Your life will be much easier when it comes to the real thing.  That practice translates.  Even though you can't log it, I prefer x-plane to almost all the FTDs I've flown and been able to log approaches on. 

2- I'm no jedi master, but knowing exactly what to expect - anticipate changing wind conditions through the descent, crab angle, etc., all helps you plan for and better execute the approach.  For example, even though I was flying an approach indicating 90 kias, I was about 120-130 over the ground necessitating and increased descent rate to be able to fly a stable approach "by the numbers".  I don't know how many times I've been so excited to fly the bars down to wherever and then be simultaneously surprised and disappointed that the runway was not in front of me - it was off to my right or left or wherever.  Then I started to anticipate my crab angle and look for the runway exactly where it should pop out (i.e. 5 degrees to the right at my 12-1 oclock).  Anticipating these things ahead of time means you will have a great mental picture of what the approach will look like all the way down to transition to the visual environment.  It helps to stay ahead of the plane at all times, which is even more critical for instrument flight. 

3- If your crosswind is significant.... HSI is the best tool.  If you are like me and have a DG / CDI having the GNS / GTN or whatever you are using set to display either A) both DTK and TRK or B - cross track error is like cheating and having an HSI.  Incorporate the cross track error into your scan and make small adjustments until it is zero.  Peg your heading bug there fly it.  Occasionally reference the cross track error in your scan.  Your deviations will become lesser and lesser with this method.  Flying an HSI with this piece of data can similarly help minimize coarse deviations.  GPS track as a tool is helpful no matter the type of approach. 

4- Yes it's okay to skid a little here and there for small coarse corrections during a stable approach.  It's just like using the kick to do a cross under while flying formation.  Unstable approach or getting bounced around three ways to Tuesday just stay coordinated.

Have fun!! The training is so rewarding. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I'm posting an update to this "Adventures in IFR Training" thread. I'm now at 30 hours, and being under the foggles all the time is frankly getting a little dull, so I will use this thread to enrich the experience.

Yesterday was the bumpiest day down low that I've trained in thus far - bad enough to leave me a bit queasy by the end. We did a VOR-A circle to missed, an LPV to missed, and an LPV to land.  The VOR-A and first LPV went well, though I was working quite hard with the wind shear demanding frequent pitch and bank inputs and heading corrections.   Sensing my fatigue, my instructor suggested I try out my autopilot on our final LPV approach.  Note I have the rate-based STEC-30 with GPSS provided by an Aspen PFD.  It doesn't know how to capture a localizer or follow a glideslope but seems quite accurate under normal conditions in holding a heading, tracking a course, and making GPS-guided anticipatory turns en route.  But when getting tossed around on the LPV, it really seemed to struggle at tracking the final approach course in TRK-hi mode (the appropriate approach setting for this autopilot). After watching it swing to half deflection to both sides, I tried out using less twitchy HDG mode with GPSS  engaged to track the course.  This setting was only sightly better, and so I went back to flying by hand, which  proved more precise.  

So I guess the good news is that I've gotten better at hand flying an approach.  The bad news is that my autopilot setup really won't be there for me in tough conditions when I'm tired and could most use a crutch. My instructor thought what he observed was just an innate limitation of rate based autopilots and not any malfunction in my setup. 

Any insights that I'm missing here?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DXB said:

So I guess the good news is that I've gotten better at hand flying an approach.  The bad news is that my autopilot setup really won't be there for me in tough conditions when I'm tired and could most use a crutch. My instructor thought what he observed was just an innate limitation of rate based autopilots and not any malfunction in my setup. 

Any insights that I'm missing here?

I would agree with your instructor.  The rate based AP’s struggle with the weather conditions you mentioned.  I think the over controlling is magnified in the short body. However, they would likely keep you fresh on a long flight so your concentration would be available for approach.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DXB said:

So I guess the good news is that I've gotten better at hand flying an approach.  The bad news is that my autopilot setup really won't be there for me in tough conditions when I'm tired and could most use a crutch. My instructor thought what he observed was just an innate limitation of rate based autopilots and not any malfunction in my setup. 

Any insights that I'm missing here?

Come learn to fly formation with the Mooney Caravan. It's fun, educational, and once you learn proper station keeping, keeping the needles centered on an approach will be like child's play. :-)

But regardless, keep it up. An instrument rating really opens up lots of options with a Mooney.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DXB said:

Any insights that I'm missing here?

Practice more procedures (approaches and enroute) with the autopilot with your instructor.  That's the part I wished I had done more of with my instructor.  To use it safely, you need to know what it's doing and why at any given moment in any phase of flight.  Misunderstanding it could lead to serious mistakes.  If your hand-flying skills are good enough you're getting bored with the foggles, it might be time to add this in for maybe a part of every flight.

In real life, the autopilot will be used to free you up to maintain awareness, scan for traffic, communicate, and all the other tasks that are needed to maintain safety.  While skill at instrument hand flying is the basic neeed for instrument flight, if you don't use your autopilot often (and correctly) your margin of safety will be decreased.  I recall some NASA study suggesting autopilot should be used two-thirds of the time, but danged if I can find it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm posting an update to this "Adventures in IFR Training" thread. I'm now at 30 hours, and being under the foggles all the time is frankly getting a little dull, so I will use this thread to enrich the experience.
Yesterday was the bumpiest day down low that I've trained in thus far - bad enough to leave me a bit queasy by the end. We did a VOR-A circle to missed, an LPV to missed, and an LPV to land.  The VOR-A and first LPV went well, though I was working quite hard with the wind shear demanding frequent pitch and bank inputs and heading corrections.   Sensing my fatigue, my instructor suggested I try out my autopilot on our final LPV approach.  Note I have the rate-based STEC-30 with GPSS provided by an Aspen PFD.  It doesn't know how to capture a localizer or follow a glideslope but seems quite accurate under normal conditions in holding a heading, tracking a course, and making GPS-guided anticipatory turns en route.  But when getting tossed around on the LPV, it really seemed to struggle at tracking the final approach course in TRK-hi mode (the appropriate approach setting for this autopilot). After watching it swing to half deflection to both sides, I tried out using less twitchy HDG mode with GPSS  engaged to track the course.  This setting was only sightly better, and so I went back to flying by hand, which  proved more precise.  
So I guess the good news is that I've gotten better at hand flying an approach.  The bad news is that my autopilot setup really won't be there for me in tough conditions when I'm tired and could most use a crutch. My instructor thought what he observed was just an innate limitation of rate based autopilots and not any malfunction in my setup. 
Any insights that I'm missing here?


Any autopilot at some point will have problems keeping up with the constant changes in turbulent weather. They are even more pronounced on an approach.

The STEC 30 is a fine autopilot but the ones I have flown behind don’t have the same capability as the 55, 55X or 60-2. Not sure how the 30’s computer is different but I believe it behaves differently than the 60-2 I own.

The 60-2 on an approach goes into a soft capture mode that softens out minor deviations due to signal or upsets caused by turbulence. If it gets bumpy enough, it will go back into a capture mode or drop out. But you are talking about some serious bumps that would be better handled by hand flying.

Another feature on the 55, 55X and 60 series is the intercept capabilities. I think in addition to it’s primary function of initial intercept, this capability uses a lot of calculations needed for the intercept to help support the intercepted leg tracking. I know this because there have been times that when the intercepted course has a strong crosswind and the correction angle is already there when leveling out.

It will be interesting to see what this next generation of autopilots will bring.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

IR Checkride for tomorrow got cancelled because of weather.  My DPE is not available again for the next month :(.  Any other well-regarded DPEs in easy flying distance from Philly who I might try??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.