Control/Performance vs Primary/Supporting

pscraig

Well-Known Member
I'm studying for my instrument writtens, and am now familiar with both the control/performance and primary/supporting concepts. When training for the instrument rating, is the choice of which method to use up to the instructor or student? I've done some sessions in a Frasca and AST-300 and believe they were all control/performance oriented.

I realize that knowledge of both concepts is required for the written and possibly the oral exams, but am I required to actually USE both methods? The control/performance method seems much more natural to me.
 

Kingairer

'Tiger Team' Member
No youre not required to use either, i dont. Its just to much junk for the student to have to think about. If they are doing a proper scan all these things are happening your just not having to think about them. The examiner i did my ii with didnt like those methods either.
 

MikeD

Administrator
Staff member
[ QUOTE ]
No youre not required to use either, i dont. Its just to much junk for the student to have to think about. If they are doing a proper scan all these things are happening your just not having to think about them. The examiner i did my ii with didnt like those methods either.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree. Additionally, you'll find in the flying world that everyone has a "technique" to doing everything. There's a number of techniques out there for accomplishing the same task. It wouldn't hurt to try them out, but definately choose what's:

1. comfortable to you
2. yet can be accomplished with the least amount of brain bytes spent, and....
3. gets the job done.

And it won't always be the same for everyone.

MD
 

justme

New Member
I will second Kingairer's post. I am currently studying for my CFII and am putting together lesson plans for these topics. However, what you need to know for the writtens and what you need to know to fly the aircraft are generally two different things. I can't recall a single time when I was up flying and caught myself thinking "ok, I'm gonna make a left standard rate turn now so I first need to look at my attitude indicator then look at my TC...blah blah blah". It's all crap when you are actually flying. Just keep a good scan going and thats what its all about. So learn the two methods inside and out for the written and so you can talk about them in the checkride oral, but I wouldn't give them toooo much thought while you're flying. If you do you will probably be soo far behind the plane you're screwed anyway. Just my two cents.
 

jdflight

Well-Known Member
I noticed that the written was very much oriented toward the primary/support method, fyi. But in flying, I agree with what's been said. You learn these methods on paper so that you have a basis for developing an efficient scan. What you use in the air will depend entirely upon you.
 

pscraig

Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
I can't recall a single time when I was up flying and caught myself thinking "ok, I'm gonna make a left standard rate turn now so I first need to look at my attitude indicator then look at my TC...blah blah blah". It's all crap when you are actually flying.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks-that is a big relief! Who comes up with this stuff anyway?
 

E_Dawg

Moderator
The FAA puts too much emphasis on this IMHO... as long as you can asertain the situation and respond accordingly you're fine for real situations.

For the written the Primary vs supporting is emphasised (sp) and on the oral I guess it depends on the DE.
 

EatSleepFly

Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
The FAA puts too much emphasis on this IMHO... as long as you can asertain the situation and respond accordingly you're fine for real situations.


[/ QUOTE ]

Do they? I don't think they do. These methods work really well for initial BAI work. Thats the point- they're just a building block. I would hate to teach a student BAI for an instrument rating without having them understand methods like this first. Without having learned these methods as a background, I dont think most people would be able to ascertain the situation and respond accordingly. Now, once you get comfortable flying by ref. to instruments, you don't think about these, just like you dont use any particular instrument scan.

...by the way...have you put in your order for the new 152 yet?
 

E_Dawg

Moderator
Well it is just a matter of preference; if it helps go for it!

And yeah... the first deliveries start in fourth quarter 2005
 

IP076

New Member
Both of these are actually quite important while developing BAI Skills. My school emphasises the Control/Performance method, in my opinion, the best one.

I can't believe people are teaching instrument students that these are not important.

Can anyone tell me what the instrument most commonly left out of a student's instrument scan is?

How about which instrument is the only direct indicating instrument in the six pack?

I'll bet you come up with the same answer, and its the one the Control/Performance method of Instrument Flying uses the most.

Pitch + Power = Performance.
 

aviator

New Member
They are both important and you should use which ever method is the most approriate for the condition of flight. I teach C+P in the transitions and P+S once established. The difference between the two is the reliance on the attitude indicator.

If you only practice using the C+P method what are you going to do in the event of a vacuum failure? How are you going to pass the partial panel non precsion approach on your IR ride?

I think that students find C+P an easier method to grasp but that Primary and supporting leads to more precise instrument flying in small aircraft. Pilots of large complex aircraft (like the MD-80) will use C+P almost exclusivily because they have the ability to calucate performance for a wide range of conditions. The performance data for small trainers is fairly limited in scope. Also these aircraft have numerous back up Attitude indicators, maybe Doug can answer how many systems have to fail before he doesn't have a reliable attitude indicator......
 

davetheflyer

New Member
They really aren't mutually exclusive.

Note that most of the performance instruments are what you find in the primary and supporting categories. You still set the pitch, bank and power with control instruments, then primary and supporting tells you which performance instruments are most pertinent to your phase of flight.

Example: In straight and level, set the airplane up with your control instruments. Then verify your performance with the AI, HI, and ASI. If any of them are moving, then it's back to control.

Here are two rules to help in designating primary instruments:

1. If it's moving, it ain't primary.
2. You can not have one instrument as primary for more than one thing.
 

davetheflyer

New Member
[ QUOTE ]

Can anyone tell me what the instrument most commonly left out of a student's instrument scan is?

How about which instrument is the only direct indicating instrument in the six pack?



[/ QUOTE ]

I think that you are looking for AI as the answer to both. For the first however, I would have to say the tach. In fact, I think that most students make two mistakes with the tachometer. They vary between fixating and omitting it.

I really don't think that AI is the most omitted anymore. If anything, I'd say that people fixate on it.
 

IP076

New Member
You're correct, I was actually kind of hoping someone brought that up too.

The Tach (or MP) is also highly omitted, or fixated upon. In my experience giving instrument stage checks and check rides, the first thing omitted when a student gets busy is the Attitude Indicator. They seem to focus on A/S, HDG, and ALT, because their instructor is always harping about those three things.

A Blueridger huh? When did you start there?
 
Top