"Michael" wrote in message
om...
"Steven Barnes" wrote
snip
Even so, once I get the rating, I'm betting my ifr minimums will still
be
around the 2k agl mark (2-3 miles visibility).

In that case, you would benefit far more from some competent
instruction in how to fly marginal VFR than from an instrument rating.
Just my opinion as a practicing instrument instructor...

I wonder if minimums in this case are being misinterpreted. For me, the
reason for a 2k minimum (and at least 1 mile visibility) is not because I
don't feel comfortable shooting an ILS down to 200', it's because I fly a
single engine plane and I want an out if the engine decides to take the day
off. If I'm at least within gliding distance of higher ceilings, I know I
can break out and have a chance to find a place to land (side note: there's
a pretty good article in a recent IFR about practicing engine out under the
hood). I see this as conservative risk management (maybe more conservative
than others), not a lack of proficiency. By the same reasoning, regardless
of weather, I think twice about flying over mountains if something will
prevent me from getting decent altitude. I also don't fly at night (other
than the minimum that was required for the PP). As I gain experience, I may
lower my minimums to 1k, but I can't see going much lower than that, at
least not in my current plane.

What skills would a marginal VFR pilot need that they couldn't get from IFR
training? Even under IFR you may find yourself in marginal VFR conditions,
and you still have the responsibility to see and avoid, know what the
weather's doing, have as many outs as you think you need, etc. Or is it
that IFR training assumes these skills are already well developed?

mark