I learned on ventura powered needle/ball and airspeed because I couldn't find a reliable cat and duck.


THE CAT & DUCK METHOD OF IFR FLYING:

Today's flight age is an era highlighted with increasing emphasis
on safety. Instrumentation in the cockpit and in the traffic
control tower has reached new peaks of electronic perfection to
assist the pilot during take-offs , flight , and landings. For
whimsical contrast to these and other marvels of scientific
flight engineering , it is perhaps opportune to remind pilots of
the basic rules concerning the so-called Cat-and-Duck Method of
Flight , just in case something goes wrong with any of these new-
fangled flying instruments you find in today's aircraft.
Place a live cat on the cockpit floor. Because a cat always
remains upright , he or she can be used in lieu of a needle and
ball. Merely watch to see which way the cat leans to determine
if a wing is low and , if so , which one.
The duck is used for the instrument approach and landing.
Because any sensible duck will refuse to fly under instrument
conditions, it is only necessary to hurl your duck out of the
plane and follow her to the ground.

There are some limitations to the Cat-and-Duck Method, but
by rigidly adhering to the following check list , a degree of
success will be achieved.

1. Get a wide-awake cat. Most cats do not want to stand up
at all, at any time. It may be necessary to get a large fierce
dog in the cockpit to keep the cat at attention.

2. Make sure your cat is clean. Dirty cats will spend all
their time washing. Trying to follow a cat licking itself
usually results in a tight snap roll, followed by an inverted (or
flat) spin. You can see this is very unsanitary.

3. Old cats are best. Young cats have nine lives, but an
old used-up cat with only one life left has just as much to lose
an you do and will therefore be more dependable.

4. Beware of cowardly ducks. If the duck discovers that
you are using the cat to stay upright - or straight and level-
she will refuse to leave without the cat. Ducks are no better on
instruments than you are.

5. Be sure the duck has good eyesight. Nearsighted ducks
sometimes will go flogging off into the nearest hill. Very
short-sighted ducks will not realize they have been thrown out
and will descend to the ground in a sitting position. This
maneuver is quite difficult to follow in an airplane.

6. Use land-loving ducks. It is very discouraging to break
out and find yourself on final approach for some farm pound in
Iowa. Also, the farmers there suffer from temporary insanity
when chasing crows off their corn fields and will shoot anything
that flies.

7. Choose your duck carefully. It is easy to confuse ducks
with geese because many water birds look alike. While they are
very competent instrument flyers , geese seldom want to go in the
same direction you do. If your duck heads off for the Okefenokee
Swamp, you may be sure you have been given the goose.

On a more serious note, did you know that your iphone compass page 2 can save your life in an emergency.
It is a perfectly accurate and reliable substitute for your attitude indicator. It gives pitch and roll.

That's quite a change from the "classic" BD700 glass. I would love to take that differences course.

Glass. Especially if you're building the cockpit as well as flying it (and thus having to deal with the mess of connections required for a full set of analog instruments), it's just easier...


 

True.  It's interesting how different the two are.  If I've gone a week or two of flying the old Honneywells and then fly the Rockwell Collins, it's almost assholes and elbows.

I'm civilian rotary wing. Analog. I hate glass.

I try avoiding the ground unless I have to say hi to it.

Went from steam gauges in a Huey to the 1st all glass 5 tube EFIS with the GNS XLS in the C-12R with the Army Res.in "96 and haven't looked back.

Civilian I fly the AW139 with the Honeywell Primus Epic. Doesn't get much better than that.

I like the "iron sights to optics" analogy.


I prefer glass

Former military, fixed wing ATP.

Amen to that!  I'm back on -130s.  Nothing like 32 nasty old round dials, for the engines alone.  

I've worked with C-17 pilots who have literally never logged a single hour without a HUD in front of them.  Most are self admitted "HUD babies".  The bitch of it for them is that the MEL and MESL allow it to fly with one inop HUD.

Pretty sure they did...just might have been while they were students.

In one pilots case, no. He did his flight training with the Navy, T-6B to T-45 to C-17, all have HUDs.

Ah, makes sense.

I have seen way too many new "pilots" graduate from shake and bake flight schools with glass cockpit airplanes.   They come out to the airport and want to rent an 172.  They get in and have no idea how to fly the steam gauges.  

Its pathetic.  I really like the ones with an instrument add on.  Take them out then tell them to set up the radios and shoot an ILS or fly a back course or arcing DME. They cant do it.

This thread is suddenly relevant to me.

I have a job offer flying Airbuses starting next month!

Guess I'll get a chance to fly glass after all.

Airbuses aren't glass, they are fiberglass

Another vote for this.  The steam gauges are more difficult to learn, but I think you get a better understanding of what the aircraft is doing and where it is using steam and then going to glass.


That being said, I'm an all glass type of guy now, but in my head I'm still doing it the old way.

Touche...  

kfs35 is about to have a great time flying the bus... you might not actually be flying the plane, but being comfortable while the plane flies you is nice...