For what it's worth, flying out of KBED (Hanscom Field, near Boston),
my log book shows 31% of my total time in IMC. These flights were
mostly done for business reasons (yeah, and I held board of directors
meetings by looking in a mirror) and so were on a schedule mostly
established before a reliable forcast for the ETD was available.
("Yeah, Jake, I'll fly into Rochester next Tuesday, let's plan on
meeting about 11 that morning").

It's also true that about 10%of those trips were cancelled ("Hey Jake,
there are embedded thunderstorms between here and there, let's
postpone the meeting until tomorrow.")

A further truth: it is a rare cross country flight, and I can't
remember the last nighttime flight, that I did not fly under IFR. It's
simply a LOT easier to do it that way.




On Feb 28, 12:08 pm, "Jay Honeck" wrote:
As I sit on the ground, on a day off, not flying due to (yet more)
ice, I thought I'd share these interesting results with the group...

Pilots are always surprised when I tell them that Mary and I have
traveled the country extensively by light plane for 12 years, all
VFR. While it's true that we have to be flexible, my experience has
been that it is rare, indeed, that we must cancel a flight due to IFR
conditions that we would have flown in our Pathfinder (a Piper
Cherokee 235), even with the rating.

Many people have questioned the validity of our experience, wondering
if we scud-run everywhere, or are simply not telling the truth. Well,
in a strange twist of fate, a friend of mine recently completed a
study of ASOS observations from 2002 - 2004 here in Iowa City. His
primary goal was to determine prevailing wind direction while IFR
conditions existed, but he inadvertently turned up some interesting
data that supports my informal observations.

During that two year period, he looked at ~33,000 recorded hourly
observations at KIOW. Just 1765 of those observations were IFR, or
5.4%.

Now, of course, there were an unknown number of marginal VFR
conditions in the data set, but these results pretty well confirm my
(non-scientific) observation that showed us canceling just a handful
of flights each year due to weather, and a truly tiny set that were
canceled due to "soft IFR" conditions that we would feel safe flying
Atlas in. Most of our IFR weather in Iowa City is due to icing, fog,
or thunderstorms, meaning that we're not about to challenge Mother
Nature in a Piper Spam Can anyway.

What does this mean? A few conclusions:

1. VFR conditions prevail roughly 95% of the time, even here in the
rough-and-tumble Midwest.
2. VFR cross country flying can be safely done, with the right
attitude, even in marginal equipment like most of us fly.
3. Obtaining the instrument rating is an excellent exercise, and makes
you a much more precise (and thus proficient) pilot, but unless you're
moving up to heavier metal, it won't help you much.
4. This explains why just half of all pilots have pursued the
instrument rating, and why a very small percentage of instrument rated
pilots are current or proficient. There simply isn't much need for
it, unless you're flying on a schedule, in rated equipment.

My purpose in sharing this is not to belittle those who have obtained
the instrument rating. On the contrary, I am a much better pilot
thanks to the instrument training I have obtained, and intend to
finish up the rating when we have finished the hotel remodeling.

However, I no long harbor the notion that an IR is going to help us
fly more, or longer, or more regularly -- at least not until we can
afford something like a Pilatus.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"