Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - Proposed changes to sport pilot regs.

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Proposed changes to sport pilot regs.
Goto page Previous 1, 2

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Zenith-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

jmaynard

Joined: 27 Feb 2008
Posts: 394
Location: Fairmont, MN (FRM)

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 4:32 pm Post subject: Proposed changes to sport pilot regs.

On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 05:00:37PM -0700, Paul Mulwitz wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   Considering all that, single pilot IFR flight in a light small poorly 

 equipped plane is not something I would want to do.  However, being 

 able to survive brief periods of limited visibility and no clear 

 horizon to stay oriented is an ability I think all pilots and planes 

 should have.


	


"It's better to be on the ground wishing you were in the air than the other

way around."



Proper preflight planning and conservative decision making should keep me

out of trouble...but the possibility always exists, and I want as many tools

in the box as I can get. N55ZC is intended as a cross country cruiser, and

the IFR instrumentation and avionics may just save my hide one day. I'll be

happy if I never need it (at least, as things stand now). Even if I never

file an IFR flight plan.



If the rules change to the point that I can get an instrument rating, the

aircraft will be ready. Even then, my decision making will be biased toward

only going if it's practical. To that end, I plan to get with my friendly

neighborhood CFII and take a couple of real IFR trips in real, but light,

IMC just to see what it's like for real. Being able to file /G is a plus.

-- 

Jay Maynard, K5ZC                   http://www.conmicro.com

http://jmaynard.livejournal.com      http://www.tronguy.net

Fairmont, MN (FRM)                        (Yes, that's me!)

AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March, delivery 2 June)

_________________
Jay Maynard, K5ZC
AMD Zodiac XLi N55ZC

notsew_evets(at)frontiern
Guest

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 5:01 pm Post subject: Proposed changes to sport pilot regs.

I agree Paul.

If being able to depart the airport in limited visability and then bust out 

on top for that smooth and beautiful trip,  its a good thing.

If however people think that an experimental aircraft (most, not all) are as 

stable as a Cessna or Piper they may want to take an actual ride in the real 

IMC.

My past experience was that in my Cessnas and then Pipers,  I just went for 

the gusto..  But in my two other experimentals I had lots of other worries. 

Worries like that ol uncertified engine,  Did I tightend "that" bolt to 

specs etc...

I m one for not pushing the weather situation much.  Yes,  I ve scud run in 

the past.  After landing,  I thanked the BIG GUY for getting me through the 

mess.  Geeze,  in fact now days I dont fly at night.

Remember the thought of a power failure at night ?  First thing you do is to 

turn off all electricial.  Just before landing out there in a field you turn 

on the electricial/landing light.  If you dont like what you see,  turn off 

the electricial...

enjoy.................................................

---

Gig Giacona

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1416
Location: El Dorado Arkansas USA

Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 6:21 am Post subject: Re: Proposed changes to sport pilot regs.

All IFR isn't that bumpy and filing IFR even in VMC does from time to time have it's advantages.



While the class 3 may someday be lifted for VFR Private Cert holders I just don't see them dropping it for IFR flight.

 	  Jeyoung65(at)aol.com wrote: 	
		  Do you really plan on flying IFR in a 601 or 701? Would think you would  bounce too much to enjoy the flight. Maybe I am getting too old but I would not  plan on a IFR flight and would land ASAP if I hit IFR condititon. Jerry of  GA 

  

  In a message dated 4/15/2008 6:41:46 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  jmaynard(at)conmicro.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  



Yeah. It's for that day, or the day when they significantly    relax the

requirements for a class 3 medical, that I specified a fully    IFR-capable

aircraft.



do not  archive

_________________
W.R. "Gig" Giacona
601XL Under Construction
See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR

Jeyoung65(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 6:49 am Post subject: Proposed changes to sport pilot regs.

Thanks to all that responded to my question. Maybe I will add to my  airspeed 

and altimeter after the 40 hours test. Jerry of  GA       DO NOT ARCHIVE

 

 

In a message dated 4/16/2008 10:26:14 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  

wr.giacona(at)suddenlink.net writes:






All IFR isn't that bumpy and filing  IFR even in VMC does from time to time 

have it's advantages.



While the  class 3 may someday be lifted for VFR Private Cert holders I just 

don't see  them dropping it for IFR flight.



Jeyoung65(at)aol.com  wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   Do you really plan on flying IFR in a 601 or 701? Would think  you would  

bounce too much to enjoy the flight. Maybe I am getting too  old but I would 
	


not  plan on a IFR flight and would land ASAP if I hit  IFR condititon. Jerry of 

 GA

ggower_99(at)yahoo.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Apr 19, 2008 9:57 pm Post subject: Proposed changes to sport pilot regs.

Hello Paul,

   

  Think about this for a minute, please:

   

  The BIG problem with  IFR capable airplanes, are that the pilots "think" they are also capable... 

  I know that in a cross country flight when weather gets marginal,  the "get-home-itis"  pushes the pilot to believe he can make it -at least to the next airport in the plan-  but without enough IFR practice  is suicide.    

  How much IFR practice can a week end pilot get, if he probably flys around 50 hrs a year all together?  Probably an active comercial or airline pilot, flying a Sport Pilot for fun could have  chance, not the rest of us...

   

   What I think  (if someone gets in the beguining of bad weather: fog,  a shower that is getting worse, etc)  and  just left "good weather" behind.  

   The only practical chance could be a Wing leveler -autopilot- conected to the gps and make a real "flat and wide"  180  (with the autopilot knob)  to try to  get out of the cloud...  Hoping that the weather behind still is in acceptable conditions and the land is flat...

   

  Remember, we fly for fun, not to get "there __________" (put destination in line).  If weather gets bad, or headwind ends the afternoon earlier than expected...  Get a motel room or buy a comuter airline  ticket and the next week end come back for your still flyable and loved airplane that too much work and trouble cost you to have it.

  Is easyer in USA than in most of the worlds countries.

   

  Just my point of view

   

  Saludos

  Gary Gower

  Flying from Chapala, Mexico.



Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net> wrote:

    	  Quote: 	
		  --> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz 



 	  Quote: 	
		  Many aircraft are IFR "capable" but really should stay on the ground 

when IMC.....


	


Hi Steve,



I agree with you completely.



Still, in the real world real people who fly cross country fly into 

conditions where it is difficult to impossible to maintain control of 

their planes simply by outside visual reference. In these inevitable 

situations it is a life saver to be able to perform simple control of 

the airplane solely by reference to instruments. Needle, ball, and 

airspeed is enough. With no gyros or no instrument flying skills at 

all the outcome of these incidents is nearly always fatal. It just 

doesn't have to be that way.



The skill and equipment I am describing has very little to do with 

IFR flight. It is simple stick and  rudder skill with instruments 

replacing the windshield for pilot orientation. In many ways, IFR 

flight is more about dealing with the "System" than the airplane. It 

includes filing and following complicated flight 

plans. Understanding, copying and reading back 

clearances. Navigating without outside reference. Dealing with air 

traffic controllers, vectors, and all the complicated radio out 

procedures. On the airplane level, IFR flight includes doing things 

like zero/zero takeoffs, instrument approaches, and staying focused 

for hours while the whole world inside and outside your plane is 

trying to distract you. And then there is the whole area of dealing 

with weather you can't see like ice and thunderstorms.



Considering all that, single pilot IFR flight in a light small poorly 

equipped plane is not something I would want to do. However, being 

able to survive brief periods of limited visibility and no clear  

horizon to stay oriented is an ability I think all pilots and planes 

should have.



Paul

XL fuselage

do not archive

	


           Be a better friend, newshound, and  [quote][b]

psm(at)ATT.NET
Guest

Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 2:46 am Post subject: Proposed changes to sport pilot regs.

Hi Gary,



I always respect your opinion, but on this point we are going to disagree.



I believe "flight solely by reference to instruments" is a capability 

each plane and pilot should have.  Equipping the plane is easy.  All 

you need is a single gyro instrument.  It doesn't matter which 

instrument type you choose, but I think the turn and bank is the best 

choice.  Others would choose another instrument and that is OK.  The 

hardest part of this need is the skill of the pilot.  In the USA, all 

pilots except for Sport Pilots must demonstrate the ability to fly 

solely by reference to instruments to get their license.  With the 

new rule change, even Sport Pilots must receive some training in this 

skill.  The problem is that most pilots don't retain this skill for a 

long time.



Your idea about depending on autopilot for this need is OK.  I prefer 

to keep the pilot capable of doing this task, but an autopilot can 

save the plane and all its occupants in the sad event that the pilot 

is incapable of simple instrument flight.



Let me tell the story of the first time I had to fly on instruments 

in the real world.  I was departing Norfolk, VA and planned my flight 

to be completely over land except for the 1/2 mile or so of water 

between Norfolk and the main land.  All was well until I got 

airborne.  Then the tower controller ordered me to continue my climb 

on the runway heading to allow an inbound airline flight access to 

his runway.  He was flying down the middle of Chesapeake Bay, and I 

wound up flying over the water toward the eastern shore of the 

Del-Mar-Va peninsula.  There was around 8 miles visibility, and I had 

no trouble seeing the DC-9 below me and off to the left a little as 

he performed his instrument approach.  The problem came when I was 

released to continue my own navigation and turned west to cross the 

bay.  At that time the whole world looked grey.  The sky was grey, 

the water was grey, and the land ahead was invisible since it was 

about 20 miles away.  I had plenty of altitude (around 5,000 feet) 

and could see plenty of distance to avoid traffic, so it was 

perfectly legal VFR.  I just couldn't see anything out in front of 

the plane to keep myself oriented.



I found myself varying heading from my chosen one and had trouble 

keeping the plane going the way I wanted.  So I asked my wife, who 

was sitting in the copilot's seat to watch out for traffic and went 

completely on the instruments.  This was difficult to do well, but I 

was able to stabilize my heading and maintain altitude and made the 

crossing with no further problem.  After a couple of minutes I could 

see the land on the other side of the water and the problem was over.



I know there are many pilots flying for recreation that would not 

have survived that incident.  My goal with these posts is to improve 

the ability of Zenith pilots so they are not among the losers in this 

kind of incident.  The required skill is not very hard to get and 

maintain.  It takes a little bit of training and a little bit of 

recurring practice to maintain.  Since the reward is survival in this 

kind of situation which can and does happen from time to time no 

matter how hard we try to avoid it, I feel the small effort to train 

for this event is worth it.



I was surprised to learn that the fatality rate for pilots accidently 

entering IMC is nearly as high for instrument rated pilots as for 

those without instrument ratings.  I am not sure why this is.  Of 

course the instrument rated pilots have (or had) the necessary 

skills.  Still, many of them (about 50% over the years) still fail to 

control the airplane successfully when faced with unplanned 

IMC.  Perhaps they panic.  Perhaps they just can't adjust to the 

unexpected and unplanned need to switch to complete instrument flight 

and get out of the situation.  Whatever the reason, this situation is 

almost as likely to kill instrument rated pilots as unrated ones.



If my comments get a few of our list members to work on this skill 

and just one survives an unexpected need to fly on instruments then I 

will feel a great success.  If all I do is annoy a few list members 

with my point of view, then perhaps not much has been lost.



Best regards,



Paul

XL fuselage

do not archive

At 10:54 PM 4/19/2008, you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  I know that in a cross country flight when weather gets 

marginal,  the "get-home-itis"  pushes the pilot to believe he can 

make it -at least to the next airport in the plan-  but without 

enough IFR practice  is suicide.

How much IFR practice can a week end pilot get, if he probably flys 

around 50 hrs a year all together?  Probably an active comercial or 

airline pilot, flying a Sport Pilot for fun could have  chance, not 

the rest of us...

jmaynard

Joined: 27 Feb 2008
Posts: 394
Location: Fairmont, MN (FRM)

Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 4:22 am Post subject: Proposed changes to sport pilot regs.

On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 10:54:36PM -0700, Gary Gower wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		     The BIG problem with  IFR capable airplanes, are that the pilots "think"

   they are also capable...


	


I'm buying an IFR-capable Zodiac. I know damned good and well I'm not

instrument capable. Even after I get the hood time I want to with an

instructor, just to make sure my PPL-required skill level is back, I know

I'm still not instrument capable. I'm doing all that not because I want to

fly in the clouds, but because I want a fighting chance to survive should

all of my planning and decision making fail. Even so, the right answer is

not to get into that situation in the first place.



 	  Quote: 	
		     Remember, we fly for fun, not to get "there __________" (put destination

   in line).  If weather gets bad, or headwind ends the afternoon earlier

   than expected...  Get a motel room or buy a comuter airline ticket and

   the next week end come back for your still flyable and loved airplane

   that too much work and trouble cost you to have it.


	


That's exactly my approach. The only difference I see is that I have no

problem with the idea of using it to go someplace if the weather cooperates.

If it doesn't, I'll find another way to get there.

-- 

Jay Maynard, K5ZC                   http://www.conmicro.com

http://jmaynard.livejournal.com      http://www.tronguy.net

Fairmont, MN (FRM)                        (Yes, that's me!)

AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March, delivery 2 June)

_________________
Jay Maynard, K5ZC
AMD Zodiac XLi N55ZC

jmaynard

Joined: 27 Feb 2008
Posts: 394
Location: Fairmont, MN (FRM)

Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 4:24 am Post subject: Proposed changes to sport pilot regs.

On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 03:43:35AM -0700, Paul Mulwitz wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   Your idea about depending on autopilot for this need is OK.  I prefer 

 to keep the pilot capable of doing this task, but an autopilot can 

 save the plane and all its occupants in the sad event that the pilot 

 is incapable of simple instrument flight.


	


Well, when understood and used correctly, it can.



N55ZC will have a Digiflight IIVSG. It's another tool in the box. Like any

tool, it must be used correctly and safely, or it will bite.

-- 

Jay Maynard, K5ZC                   http://www.conmicro.com

http://jmaynard.livejournal.com      http://www.tronguy.net

Fairmont, MN (FRM)                        (Yes, that's me!)

AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March, delivery 2 June)

_________________
Jay Maynard, K5ZC
AMD Zodiac XLi N55ZC

NYTerminat(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 2:13 pm Post subject: Proposed changes to sport pilot regs.

On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 03:43:35AM -0700, Paul Mulwitz  wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   Your idea about depending on autopilot for this need is OK.   I prefer 

 to keep the pilot capable of doing this task, but an autopilot  can 

 save the plane and all its occupants in the sad event that the  pilot 

 is incapable of simple instrument flight.


	


Well, when  understood and used correctly, it can.

  

 Jay, you are right and if JFK junior had  used his autopilot on his fateful flight he might be around today. I flew from  NY to Chicago and back to NY on the same day that JFL JR. crashed and gladly  used my autopilot in the Cessna 337 I was flying. I flew VFR both ways with  flight following, while it was legal visibility, the haze made it difficult to  see the horizon. On the way back at night it was a little better and the ground  lights were more evident. 



 Yes I am Instrument rated and yes I could  have hand flown but why not use the equipment to make the flight less  stressful?  



N55ZC will have a Digiflight IIVSG. It's another tool in the box.  Like any

tool, it must be used correctly and safely, or it will bite.

 Again, I agree, it is a tool and will make  your flight more enjoyable. All IFR flight is not nasty weather. It could be a  low layer near the ground and once you pop through, it may be bright sunshine  and clear sailing. It could be a layer that you have at your destination that  you have to let down through. Either way IFR flying with a properly equipped  plane and pilot is not a bad thing.

Yes there are many days to stay on the ground, and I am a fair  weather IFR pilot myself, but there would be many missed flights if I didn't  have my IFR ticket. 



 Bob Spudis  

Jay Maynard,  K5ZC                



 

  



Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at AOL Autos.

  [quote][b]

jmcburney(at)pobox.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 6:26 am Post subject: Proposed changes to sport pilot regs.

Hi, Paul a(nd List),



I wholeheartedly agree with your post of  concerning operation into IMC.

Been there, done that.  I wonder if the large percentage of instrument-rated

pilots not surviving may have something to do with what you described, the

difference being that you had someone aboard that could do the

traffic-avoidance part while you flew the gauges.  My experience is that it

is harder to divide your attention between inside and outside than it is to

fly completely on the gauges.



Blue skies and tailwinds



Jim

CH-801

DeltaHawk diesel

Augusta GA

90% done, 90% left

ggower_99(at)yahoo.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:14 am Post subject: Proposed changes to sport pilot regs.

Hello Paul,

   

  Well, in fact we are talking about similar things,   the big problem with getting into IFR conditions is that this conditions  build up stress in the pilot the moment the visibility is lost, if the pilot is not proficient enough he can easy get panic, desoriented and the next step is a spin...  Your experience is the perfect example of "friendly"  conditions (no storm, turbulence or wind).   We all have to know the fact that aviation is learning, practice, and lots of fun.  I also hope that when eventually  there is the chance in this list, to learn a little more about flying our airplanes, someone gets the idea.

   

  Just to do a little clarify before I forget,  here also every pilot has to learn to use the instruments as referernce, also needs to fly by feeling, (instructor covers the  instruments,  and he needs to fly coordinate at diferent speeds and the normal manuvers,   but with time, if the pilot just flys around (not working out its own proficiency)  he will loose ability.   

   

  Just a Quiz:  Everyone (just think for yourself, no need to answer to the list)  

  When was the last time you greased a good landing exactly in the numbers (or the point you chosed)?  With some crosswind and/or turbulence?   

  If we always do our landings (flying , navigation, etc) as practice, as if the instructor or inspector was in the right seat.  In the rare case of a deadstick landing, weather or need to divert an airport etc.  we will have a better chance to save  our live (and passenger).

   

  This is the great thing about aviation,  we need to be self resposibles, an look ourselfs for  proficiency,     FAA or whatever  Authorites rule in our country, can give you a ticket, but "Aviation Rules"  will harm or kill any of us  if we fail...

   

  Saludos

  Gary Gower.

   

  



Paul Mulwitz <psm(at)att.net> wrote:

   	  Quote: 	
		  --> Zenith-List message posted by: Paul Mulwitz 



Hi Gary,



I always respect your opinion, but on this point we are going to disagree.



I believe "flight solely by reference to instruments" is a capability 

each plane and pilot should have. Equipping the plane is easy. All 

you need is a single gyro instrument. It doesn't matter which 

instrument type you choose, but I think the turn and bank is the best 

choice. Others would choose another instrument and that is OK. The  

hardest part of this need is the skill of the pilot. In the USA, all 

pilots except for Sport Pilots must demonstrate the ability to fly 

solely by reference to instruments to get their license. With the 

new rule change, even Sport Pilots must receive some training in this 

skill. The problem is that most pilots don't retain this skill for a 

long time.



Your idea about depending on autopilot for this need is OK. I prefer 

to keep the pilot capable of doing this task, but an autopilot can 

save the plane and all its occupants in the sad event that the pilot 

is incapable of simple instrument flight.



Let me tell the story of the first time I had to fly on instruments 

in the real world. I was departing Norfolk, VA and planned my flight 

to be completely over land except for the 1/2 mile or so of water 

between Norfolk and the main land. All was well until I got 

airborne. Then the tower controller ordered me to continue  my climb 

on the runway heading to allow an inbound airline flight access to 

his runway. He was flying down the middle of Chesapeake Bay, and I 

wound up flying over the water toward the eastern shore of the 

Del-Mar-Va peninsula. There was around 8 miles visibility, and I had 

no trouble seeing the DC-9 below me and off to the left a little as 

he performed his instrument approach. The problem came when I was 

released to continue my own navigation and turned west to cross the 

bay. At that time the whole world looked grey. The sky was grey, 

the water was grey, and the land ahead was invisible since it was 

about 20 miles away. I had plenty of altitude (around 5,000 feet) 

and could see plenty of distance to avoid traffic, so it was 

perfectly legal VFR. I just couldn't see anything out in front of 

the plane to keep myself oriented.



I found myself varying heading from my chosen one and had trouble 

keeping the plane  going the way I wanted. So I asked my wife, who 

was sitting in the copilot's seat to watch out for traffic and went 

completely on the instruments. This was difficult to do well, but I 

was able to stabilize my heading and maintain altitude and made the 

crossing with no further problem. After a couple of minutes I could 

see the land on the other side of the water and the problem was over.



I know there are many pilots flying for recreation that would not 

have survived that incident. My goal with these posts is to improve 

the ability of Zenith pilots so they are not among the losers in this 

kind of incident. The required skill is not very hard to get and 

maintain. It takes a little bit of training and a little bit of 

recurring practice to maintain. Since the reward is survival in this 

kind of situation which can and does happen from time to time no 

matter how hard we try to avoid it, I feel the small effort to train  

for this event is worth it.



I was surprised to learn that the fatality rate for pilots accidently 

entering IMC is nearly as high for instrument rated pilots as for 

those without instrument ratings. I am not sure why this is. Of 

course the instrument rated pilots have (or had) the necessary 

skills. Still, many of them (about 50% over the years) still fail to 

control the airplane successfully when faced with unplanned 

IMC. Perhaps they panic. Perhaps they just can't adjust to the 

unexpected and unplanned need to switch to complete instrument flight 

and get out of the situation. Whatever the reason, this situation is 

almost as likely to kill instrument rated pilots as unrated ones.



If my comments get a few of our list members to work on this skill 

and just one survives an unexpected need to fly on instruments then I 

will feel a great success. If all I do is annoy a few list members 

with my point of view, then  perhaps not much has been lost.



Best regards,



Paul

XL fuselage

do not archive

At 10:54 PM 4/19/2008, you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  I know that in a cross country flight when weather gets 

marginal, the "get-home-itis" pushes the pilot to believe he can 

make it -at least to the next airport in the plan- but without 

enough IFR practice is suicide.

How much IFR practice can a week end pilot get, if he probably flys 

around 50 hrs a year all together? Probably an active comercial or 

airline pilot, flying a Sport Pilot for fun could have chance, not 

the rest of us...


	




	


         Be a better friend, newshound, and  [quote][b]

rtdin

Joined: 16 Mar 2008
Posts: 46
Location: Florida panhandle

Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 1:01 pm Post subject: Proposed changes to sport pilot regs.

I share the many opinions that some instrument training should be required for S.P.s. After all, the proposal is only that the pilot candidate receive one hour of training. No pass / fail, and its not included on the test. Can be done in any aircraft because its only dual. Like chicken soup, it can't hurt. Its also reasonable (with proper certification and equipment) to depart IFR in a light sport into improving conditions. I checked my log book a while back and found that every flight over 500 miles had at least a few minutes of weather time logged. Much of that likely not really required. No instrument training was required when I soloed years ago. That was on a CAA student permit. When I took my private test, my CFI informed me that the FAA was running things now and I had to demonstrate instrument ability for the man. The familiar Piper J-3 now had a T&B and a VSI installed. I even got the front seat for a change. A few years ago, I began to doubt my instrument ability. I realized that at the time all my flying was being done "coupled up" to the flight director. I shamelessly still logged the instrument time, however. My doubts went away each time I went off to the Flight Safety simulator. I got to hand fly her to the runway with 100 & 1/4 mi vis with most of the A/C inop and on fire. The sim instructor than offered to turn day into night for me so I could get my three night landings logged. Still 100 ovc & 1/4 mile. Instrument flying is like riding a bike, just harder to put cards in the spokes. A wing leveler would be a plus in my 601XL, but I'll pass on that. I've got most of the "sacred six" flight instruments on hand and I'll still plan trips over 500 miles. I'm going with steam gauges in spite of my years in glass cockpits and for good reason. I also plan to stay out of trouble. I'm retired now with no schedule. My wife has a special way of saying "Just what do you think you're doing?" One of my friends says that he always uses his outstanding judgment to avoid those situations that may require his awesome skills.

 

 Bob

 601XL/Lyc  Do not archive

**************

Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at AOL Autos.

      (http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)  [quote][b]

craig(at)craigandjean.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 1:38 pm Post subject: Proposed changes to sport pilot regs.

[quote]Good book for Sport (or any VFR) pilots: “IFR for VFR Pilots, An Exercise in Survival” by Richard L. Taylor. -- Craig  [b]

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Zenith-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2
Page 2 of 2

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum