Recently, Michael posted:

Further, I think that for a student, going up in actual low IMC with
the AVERAGE instructor is a bad thing, and all too likely to get one
killed, because the average CFI, while instrument rated (and possibly
a CFII) is not really qualified to instruct in IMC and quite likely
isn't even qualified to fly IMC himself, FAA certifications
notwithstanding. In other words, the issue is not only that the
instructor did not handle the situation properly, but that there was
never a reasonable expectation that he would.

Yes, instructors have been known to behave quite similarly to normal
people. ;-)

If one makes bad decisions, one is likely to have consequences. But,
differs from a blanket notion that primary students should not be exposed
to any kind of IMC, which is where these lawyers are heading. I really
hope that someone gives them a clue before trial.

When you have a primary student flying his first approach in actual
IMC, it's a lot different. You KNOW he's going to lose it - it's just
a question of when. You're just as much on instruments as if you were
flying yourself, but the airplane is constantly in a bad way - the
student can just barely keep it together. You have to help just
enough to keep him in the game, but not so much that he stops
learning. It's no longer a question of how best to control the
airplane, but of how bad you can let the control get before you have
to do something.

Let's not lose sight of the fact that there's IMC and there's below-VFR
minimums. While these are both technically IMC, flying below VFR minimums
doesn't necessarily require pure reliance on instruments or difficulty in
controlling the aircraft.

Regards,

Neil