Airborne_Again wrote:
Have you tried it yourself in real or simulated instrument conditions?
I have tried it first with visuals, then in simulated IMC. I don’t have easy access to an IFR aircraft, nor do I hold the license. However, I was able to keep the aircraft straight enough to make a difference over a non-gyro-cockpit
Are we really debating using a pendulum in a no gyro situation in IMC??
You guys are surely kidding.
You guys are surely kidding.
I tried it in a BATD and it worked incredibly well. 
mh wrote:
Airborne_Again wrote:
That has no chance of working. It is just as bad as nothing.
Actually, it works surprisingly well. Of course you don’t let it just hang, but similar to the Foucault pendulum you need to let it swing and it will turn out of direction, as soon as the plane turns. And with the ball centered, the plane just turns when the wing drops…
Don’t bother with the pendulum, read this.
I admit I have never tried it myself, but I trust some of you have, or will, and report back :-)
What are your partial panel skills like?
Well, not too bad, by my own mediocre standards. Although actually having been trained to use the AI (unlike Peter’s 99%), I managed a real vacuum failure and subsequent manoeuvring for 1½ hours in IMC during a proficiency check, above an overcast at 800 ft. I think the only reason I managed was that I had by then, fortunately, trained myself to fly IMC mostly using the turn indicator and VSI. We did not declare an emergency or anything else, and so made all the normal IFR procedures including holdings and missed approaches. One of the challenges was to fly the headings given when on vectors, with the compass bumping around in turbulence … I had to read the GPS track and adjust backwards for the estimated wind.
But the real challenge is in the detection. So maybe the question should be
What are your vacuum failure detection skills like ?
huv wrote:
I managed a real vacuum failure and subsequent manoeuvring for 1½ hours in IMC during a proficiency check, above an overcast at 800 ft. I think the only reason I managed was that I had by then, fortunately, trained myself to fly IMC mostly using the turn indicator and VSI. We did not declare an emergency or anything else, and so made all the normal IFR procedures including holdings and missed approaches.
Let me get this straight: You had a full vaccum AI +HI gyro failure, assuming no back-up AI, the cloud tops were 800 ft so the ceiling must have been below 400 ft. yet you shot the approach and never declared an emergency ?
Assuming all of the above is true, I would classify that as reckless and irresponsible.
Michael wrote:
Assuming all of the above is true, I would classify that as reckless and irresponsible
Well, not too bad, by my own mediocre standards.
Complacency kills.
Two rare posters suddenly popping up in 46 and 47…
Michael is in IFR training and doesn’t know that “reckless and irresponsible” soon becomes SOP 
Joking aside, partial panel in IMC is an emergency, no need to demonstrate one’s WWII hero pilot abilities for longer than it takes to get the aircraft down. I’ve had worse than partial panel — incorrect indications of worn out gyros without any sign of degradation in IMC. I immediately ripped out the complete panel and put in glass stuff. I think unreliable indications are more likely than a complete loss of gyros and they are much harder to deal with.
The only vacuum failure I experienced was 5 hours into my IR training in a C172 at night. Fortunately cloud base was high and we could proceed VFR under the clouds if needed. So I got some real world partial panel practice back to the airport.
