Flight Director

I’ve been told by two separate instructors not to use it

Unless that was for training purposes (in which case, fine), they are idiots. It is like saying not to use an autopilot or GPS as a blanket rule.

I’ve been told by two separate instructors not to use it?

For what reason?

Do they know something about that particular installation in that particular airframe which makes them say this?

Or are they unqualified on the equipment and don’t know how to use it themselves? In the latter case, they have no place instructing people on that airplane.

There seems to be a lack of understanding of the FD in the wider GA community ( not Euro GA ) and so one more time we hear the cry of the lesser spotted Luddite " don’t switch it on " they cry, no doubt for fear of dragons or the like. Just as when GPS turned up !

This is a great pity because to be safe with using the FD requires training, not people trying the FD with only vague idea of how it works.

The FD is a great tool for reducing cockpit workload and increasing the accuracy of your flying but without an understanding of the best way to use the systems and techniques to quickly identify and system failures it will paint you into a corner.

High time the training system woke up and smelt the money……….Oh should that be coffee ?

I use it extensively in the Jetprop – KFC225/Aspen for instrument flying. Once you get used to it, it is very intuitive and allows you to respond much quicker to small corrections than raw data interpretation. It is also the cornerstone for autopilot function since you are only one button away from engaging it knowing there should be no surprises as the AP will also follow it.
I can still hear my instructors mantra when he was first teaching me to use it…“follow the bars… follow the bars”.
I think that once you start operating in faster performing aircraft, the use of an integrated technology like this does lessen the workload.

Agreed to remove it for visual flying.

E

I find the FD guidance using the Stec 60-2 to be less than satisfactory and is too skitish and sometimes unrealistic. This may be due to the fact it is a rate controlled autopilot. If find the FD when used with the KFC autopilots to provide very satisfactory performance, and these autopilots are attitude based. I get the distinct impression with the Stec that it is an after thought and it feels like an open loop system.

I agree with A and C. In order to use an FD effectively, you need to be very familiar with the FMS / Autopilot set-up, so training is very important – not just in following the bars.

At the beginning, I did not use it. I was very comfortable flying raw data, I never flew AP coupled approaches and only used altitude hold and heading modes on the autopilot, and perhaps a level change mode and GPS coupled NAV mode in the cruise. This came from flying my first 100 or IFR hours in a Saratoga where that was all that was available, the ILS modes were pretty bad on the 30 year old electronics so I did not use them.

I carried this habit over into Avidyne/S-Tec 55X and then G1000/GFC700 equipped aircraft, until a particularly enlightened instructor, as part of an IR revalidation, INSISTED I demonstrate an AP coupled approach to minima… and then taught me how to do this properly, not just in theory.

At the beginning, it increased workload a bit (FMS/AP set-up), but now I quite like it. I still prefer hand-flying, but the command bar (or whatever the airplane triangle thingy is called these days) helps.

There is only one thing I still am not quite sure about. Very often, you know a bit better than the FD/AP. For example, turn anticipation in strong winds. Let’s say, the AP overshoots the ILS intercept, and instead of allowing this to happen you disconnect the AP and tighten the turn. With an FD flown approach, I briefly do NOT follow the commands, but do my own thing for a few seconds until everything is where I want it. Is that a good idea, or should I switch the FD off?

Isn’t that just a fact of life that few if any GA avionics compute a “mathematically exact” wind correction when flying an intercept? You need the wind data, for a start.

Define “GA” I’m pretty sure that a Global 6000 can compute and fly a decent intercept – or display it with the FD bars so that the pilots can use their arms as autopilot servo substitutes. But as you say, in order to do it well, the aircraft has either to be quite slow (100kt or less I would say) to give the autopilot/FD enough time to work out the solution. Or it needs enough sensory input to be able to compute the wind from it. Or be able to use GPS derived motion data to geometrically find an intercept solution. In this case, at some point the GPS derived data would have to gain preference over the localiser signal which might result in some certification issues.

The light-end bizjets that I am familiar with fly a pretty good intercept provided that they are in the right speed range, 160 to 200kt in my experience. Outside that range strange things can happen.

I’m pretty sure that a Global 6000 can compute and fly a decent intercept – or display it with the FD bars so that the pilots can use their arms as autopilot servo substitutes.

Same is true for single engine aircraft equipped with the GFC700 or DFC90 autopilots. Works perfectly without a flaw