VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics


Go Back   VAF Forums > Main > RV General Discussion/News
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #71  
Old 08-24-2018, 09:54 AM
Feetwet Feetwet is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Seattle/Tucson
Posts: 46
Default Synthetic Vision

First define what you mean by synthetic vision. I worked in a human factors cockpit development lab for several years, and have seen everything from a bad wire terrain outline laid upon a 2D map called synthetic vision to a large panel screen that looks like you are looking at the ground through a window, with a heads up display on it. The later was generated by draping a terrain photograph over a 3d terrain construct, then generating a heads up display overlay. The first probably helps situational awareness somewhat, but the second allows someone with only vfr flying experience to interpret the display without having to train to relate the data on various multiple display instruments to the actual flight situation, that is he essentially can use the synthetic display to fly vfr under VMC or canopy obscured conditions. This of course ignores the legality of doing this under actual in-flight conditions. The question then becomes how accurate and up to date is the "synthetic VMC" display and how effectively can you translate between normal vfr flying and flying with this "synthetic VMC" display. If good enough, instrument flying then becomes a natural extension of normal vfr experience.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 08-24-2018, 01:58 PM
leok leok is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Clarkston, MI
Posts: 228
Default Not always a dark moonless night

A few years ago, flying t Oshkosh I was crossing Lake Michigan, midday, at 10,500 feet. In the 182 I was flying I was typically out of gliding distance of land for about 15 min. On this particular day the sky was hazy well past 10,500. At about the time the eastern shore disappeared into the haze behind me, the water and sky slowly blended into a uniform hazy blue. I immediately went on instruments. I was VFR in IMC conditions with easy 10 miles or better visibility.
I could still see the water if I looked straight down, but could not hold the plane level while doing so. In about 15 minutes I picked up the line of the west lake shore and started a slow decent with no issues.
Not having an IFR rating at the time, SV would have made holding level and on course a no brainer. Round gauges did the same, but with a much higher mental focus and concentration.
The new plane will have a G3X, so SV is part of my future.
__________________
Building my RV-10 since Oct 5th 2014
Flying .. once I figure out how to pay for everything
http://www.mykitlog.com/leok
RV Hotel
Dues paid 2018
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 08-24-2018, 02:37 PM
rmartingt's Avatar
rmartingt rmartingt is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Savannah, GA
Posts: 805
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by leok View Post
On this particular day the sky was hazy well past 10,500. At about the time the eastern shore disappeared into the haze behind me, the water and sky slowly blended into a uniform hazy blue. I immediately went on instruments. I was VFR in IMC conditions with easy 10 miles or better visibility.
I could still see the water if I looked straight down, but could not hold the plane level while doing so.
I had a very similar experience, in an airplane with minimum day-VFR instrumentation (and no attitude indicator).
__________________
RV-7ER - canoe flipped
There are two kinds of fool in the world. The first says "this is old, and therefore good"; the second says "this is new, and therefore better".
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 08-24-2018, 03:44 PM
Canadian_JOY Canadian_JOY is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,806
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by leok View Post
A few years ago, flying t Oshkosh I was crossing Lake Michigan, midday, at 10,500 feet. In the 182 I was flying I was typically out of gliding distance of land for about 15 min. On this particular day the sky was hazy well past 10,500. At about the time the eastern shore disappeared into the haze behind me, the water and sky slowly blended into a uniform hazy blue. I immediately went on instruments. I was VFR in IMC conditions with easy 10 miles or better visibility.
I could still see the water if I looked straight down, but could not hold the plane level while doing so. In about 15 minutes I picked up the line of the west lake shore and started a slow decent with no issues.
Not having an IFR rating at the time, SV would have made holding level and on course a no brainer. Round gauges did the same, but with a much higher mental focus and concentration.
The new plane will have a G3X, so SV is part of my future.
I don't wish to sound discouraging, especially since I am a fan of the additional situational awareness afforded by Synthetic Vision. Unfortunatelhy I have to say the situation you describe is one of those where the synthetic vision available to us in most "experimental" EFIS equipment likely would not have helped a great deal. In featureless terrain (is anything more featureless than a large body of water?) the SV would not have been able to provide any visual clues that would be more meaningful than an artificial horizon display, simply because there were no visual clues out there to be displayed.

On the flip side, trying to gain situational awareness by looking at a 6-pack really seems like hard work once one becomes accustomed to having all that info presented on an EFIS. Many "experienced" pilots shy away from putting glass in their new airplanes, based on having flown 6-packs all their lives. Some of them are amazed by how quickly they are able to assimilate the info provided on modern EFIS devices.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 08-24-2018, 04:00 PM
BobTurner BobTurner is online now
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Livermore, CA
Posts: 5,401
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by leok View Post
immediately went on instruments. I was VFR in IMC conditions with easy 10 miles or better visibility.
Not to nit-pick too much-we all know what you meant-but technically you were in VMC, not IMC, since there werenít any cloud considerations and you had 3 or more miles of visibility. The fact that there wasnít anything useful to be seen has been left, by the faa, to the pilotís discretion. The not-so-great fatality rate for night flying shows that these considerations should not be taken lightly.
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 08-25-2018, 06:17 AM
Tooch Tooch is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Amelia, Va
Posts: 205
Default Night IMC

Other countries require an IFR rating to fly at night. Probably not a bad idea.
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 08-25-2018, 09:51 AM
BMC_Dave BMC_Dave is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 208
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tooch View Post
Other countries require an IFR rating to fly at night. Probably not a bad idea.
Are you instrument rated Tooch?
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 08-25-2018, 10:32 AM
Paul 5r4 Paul 5r4 is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Foley, Al
Posts: 328
Default

In response to leok's post above. I feel what he describes is a perfect example of the benefits of this kind of technology. I was high in the haze over the panhandle of Florida a few years back. I lost site of the horizon. The only thing I could see was straight down. I felt like I was sitting on the top of a cone. Stations ahead were reporting VFR. By the FAA rules, I was legal but none the less not in a comfortable situation for me, (I'm not IFR rated). I didn't have and still don't have synthetic vision, (except on the ifly 740 but no way would I trust my life on it), so it seemed my only choice was to continue on with the autopilot flying the plane or descend to an altitude where I could actually visualize some landscape in front of the aircraft and not just below it. I decided to descend. Here's why. I was thinking if the only thing I can see was the ground directly below me... that ground could quickly and easily disappear. Then I would be illegal and in true IFR conditions.
If I had my plane to build over again. I would make sure I had SV available in the panel! Those bells and whistles came out not long after I purchased my avionics. Wish I had been just a year later! :-/

Edited: The point of my post is simply this. I don't know if guys really use SV to fly IFR but if a VFR guy like me somehow ends up in IFR conditions, then ANYTHING from an autopilot, SV or a monkey in the cockpit that could help would be welcomed! :-)
__________________
Paul Gray
Foley, Alabama
N729PG..... 300+ hrs
RV 7A, Lycoming 0 320 D1A, Sensenich FP propeller
pilotforfun2001@yahoo.com
VAF supporter $$$

Last edited by Paul 5r4 : 08-25-2018 at 10:44 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 08-25-2018, 10:36 AM
Schooner69 Schooner69 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 73
Default

"Other countries require an IFR rating to fly at night. Probably not a bad idea."


Not required. Overkill. To attain the night rating, an individual must acquire ten hours of night flying and ten hours of instrument time. That's enough to develop the basic skills required to undertake flight on the dark side.


Night flight is only scary for those that don't do it.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:47 PM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.