Friday, May 06, 2022

Flying IFR - Lesson 56 - Getting Better, Maybe?

Finally I was flying N8570F again, and it agreed with me. Still had Rocky for this hop as the instructor.

So today the conditions were still light precipitation with the winds from the East and overcast at 8,000 per the ATIS and Metars.

However, at around 3,000 there was an  unforecast solid foggy layer where you could see ground contact below you, but forward visibility was nil, zip, zilch.

So I picked up an IFR pop-up clearance in the air as a result, and was told to climb to 4,000, just as we entered the soup, which lasted until we were close to Flint when visibility improved back to VFR conditions just as we got to the Final approach fix for the ILS 9.

Headed to Flint and did the ILS 9 approach and I did it rather well, got kinda blown off in the procedure turn again following the GPS instruction so I need to figure that out as apparently it lies, but not always.  Did it well, stayed in parameters and all was good.

Then it started getting pretty choppy, bit I did the VOR 18 Circle to 9 and had it pretty good except again dipped just under the 1,300 circle to land minimum while I descended to it.  You basically need to touch it and bounce off of it and I keep having trouble doing that as I either go up too much over 1,400 which is a fail, or I don't pull up enough and go a skosh under which is also a fail, so  it still doth suck.   Anyways, I did the circle and was in a perfect setup to land on 9. 

Then back to Pontiac and into the soup again, now with some light turbulence.  This heading into the soup caused confusion as Great Laes Approach had us remain VFR but as we did the hand-off we headed into IMC conditions.  Managed to get it confirmed with Detroit that were were still an IFR flight and Great Lakes hadn't bounced us out of IFR to VFR flight following. 

Then went to Pontiac did the Localizer 9R approach partial panel and had it going well (did start the timer late but I'll fix that next time) but then Tower had me side step to 9L which ended that approach a bit early.  Personal critique - I need to descend a little earlier, but not too early.  Landing was good.

Rocky said I did a ton better than last time and just need to improve a bit more.  

Yep, I'm back to the purgatory of being "almost there".  Woop de doo.  Better than epic failure from last time, I guess.

So now what? 

Well, I've decided I'm not taking lessons next week as this is basically a control problem and no point paying for an instructor and flight school rental rates when I can fly my "own" Archer.   I have the radio and procedures down, I know what I'm supposed to do, the problem is doing it within the altitude tolerances.

So, next week I'm going to shoot the approaches just on my own VFR and may even have a safety pilot aboard so I can wear foggles while doing so and get control practice in. 

I think that once I can fly the approaches with no deviations and fully within standards then it will be time to go back and get a final lesson or two in and get signed off and be done.  Until then there's just no point.

That's 1.5 with .6 actual and .6 simulated instrument, and a great landing.

3 comments:

B said...

POWER for altitude.
pitch for airspeed.

Aaron said...

B: In general yes, but specifically no.

Pitch changes definitely do affect altitude and not just airspeed. And yes, power matters, the problem I'm having is getting it to descend perfectly to touch the minimums and yet not dropping below at all on that descent and yet no climb over 50 feet above minimums after touching said minimums. Pitch and power both affect this.

Old NFO said...

Good idea. And yes, safety pilot!