AOPA Pilot Magazine - February 2018 - 22

PROFICIENT PILOT

Getting rid of the rust

BY BARRY SCHIFF

A 'toy' that's no child's play

BARRY SCHIFF

obtained his
instrument rating in
a Stinson Voyager
in 1956. It did not
have gyros but
did have a lowfrequency receiver
for navigating with
four-course ranges.

IT'S BEEN ALMOST 20 YEARS since the FAA mandated
my retirement from TWA in 1998 at age 60. This was
when my instrument flying skills had reached a peak.
I was comfortable shooting Cat IIIb approaches (zero
ceiling, 300-foot runway visual range) into Paris as
well as weaving my way along the notorious Cheung
Chau Approach into Hong Kong's old Kai Tak Airport.
Following retirement, however, those IFR skills
began a long, downhill slide. What I found most interesting was that this erosion was so slow and inexorable
that I didn't fully appreciate how rusty I had become
even though I had been maintaining legal instrument
currency. After all, I was having no trouble making
instrument departures through coastal stratus layers
or shooting approaches to conditions well above minimums. These are the typical IFR operations required
of those who live in Southern California.
During a recent flight under the hood, an instructor/friend took it upon himself to increase my
workload and test my limits. The results were embarrassing, and I was compelled to acknowledge that I
needed to remove some serious rust.
A good friend, Michael Phillips, owns and operates
the Aviation Instruction Simulator Training Center at
Camarillo Airport, my home base. He had been inviting me for what seemed like forever to try out his
Redbird simulator, an FAA-approved advanced aviation training device (AATD) configured to emulate a
Cessna 182 or a Beechcraft Bonanza, take your pick.
I never accepted his offer because, you know, I was
a product of multimillion-dollar Level D simulators
with six degrees of motion. These simulators are so
sophisticated that a pilot can obtain a type rating in
such a "box" without ever having been in the actual
airplane it represents. I hate to admit it, but aviation
training devices seemed, well, beneath me. I was too
good for them.
Nevertheless, I needed some instrument instruction in a hurry, and the convenience of Phillips' AATD
was difficult to resist. Such instruction, I thought,
would also cost much less than in a rented airplane.
So what the heck. I decided to give it a shot.
My first hour was one of frustration. At first I
blamed my sloppiness on the sensitivity of the flight
controls, especially in pitch. But that wasn't my problem. It seemed as though I had left my instrument scan
in the trunk of my car. The slightest distraction-such

22 | AOPA PILOT February 2018

as changing a frequency-resulted in excessive altitude
and heading excursions. I was sloppy.
My second hour was better, primarily because I
stopped fighting myself and accepted the fact that I
needed to concentrate more. I began to settle down
and relax, but as soon as I did, Phillips threw an
approach plate in my lap. There would be no lollygagging, and in the period of an hour we did more work
than could have been accomplished in twice as much
time in an airplane.
A great advantage of the Redbird simulator as compared to a real airplane is that the instructor can fail
any of several instruments without warning to the
student. Recognizing and coping with such insidious
failures can be challenging. My first appreciation of
this was when Phillips failed the HSI without notice
as I rolled onto final during a back-course localizer
approach. This was truly confusing, but I was able to
save the day by concentrating on the indications of
other relevant instruments. The secret, I was learning, was to accept the Redbird as an airplane. Problem
recognition and solving then became more realistic.
This, I was beginning to understand, was not the "toy"
that I had expected it to be. This was a truly effective
training device.
I began to understand why the FAA allows using an
AATD to remain or become current. It can even be used
after your currency has expired by more than six months
to obtain an instrument proficiency check, except that
the circling approach and unusual attitudes portions of
an IPC must be demonstrated in a real airplane.
The AATD is programmed to allow practicing almost
every instrument approach in the United States and has
an effective wraparound visual system. During my most
recent session in the box, Phillips handed me the chart
for the VOR/DME approach to Runway 15 at Martin
State Airport in Baltimore, Maryland. Now this was a
challenge. You intercept and fly 86 degrees of a 14.7mile DME arc (including stepdown fixes) to the missed
approach point. If a miss is required, you turn toward
the VOR and intercept another arc. It keeps you busy.
The instrument panel I have been using consists of
steam gauges, but I soon will be flying the same AATD
configured with a Garmin G1000 glass cockpit. This is
getting to be fun.
AOPA
WEB

www.barryschiff.com

http://www.barryschiff.com

AOPA Pilot Magazine - February 2018

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of AOPA Pilot Magazine - February 2018