IFR Passengers?

What are your standards for taking passengers up into actual conditions?

I've developed a decent feel for what people will tolerate VFR- who can take
a few bumps, who will get scared if its windy, etc. But I haven't got any
idea what to make of taking pax into the soup. Is it as disorienting for
them as it is for an untrained VFR pilot? Are they usually OK so long as
it's smooth? What do you tell them before you take them into actual for the
first time, if anything? Anybody ever have somebody get real scared, how did
you deal with it?

Just a few wonderings from a pretty green instrument pilot...

Best,
-cwk.

C Kingsbury wrote:
Is it as disorienting for
them as it is for an untrained VFR pilot?

It's my impression that they're not as disoriented. I think it's
because they don't really have to do anything.

Are they usually OK so long as it's smooth?

Yeah. They even expect it to be a little bumpier than "clear" air.
They seem more comfortable in mild turbulence in IMC than in VMC. Go
figure.

What do you tell them before you take them into actual for the
first time, if anything?

I usually describe the weather along the route. When I expect IMC, I
just tell them that we'll be in the clouds for some of the trip. It's
usually just interpreted as an "obstructed view".

Anybody ever have somebody get real scared, how did
you deal with it?

I surprised a passenger once. I was on a localizer approach, right
down to minimums (OVC005), and saw the runway right at the MAP. I was
still 500 feet above it, and I instinctively put it in a hard slip to
get down quickly.

I sensed a mild gasp from the right seat. My passenger had apparently
never flown sideways before. I very calmly (and confidently) said,
"This is called a side slip. It's a little trick to slow down and lose
altitude quickly, so we can land." That reassured her perfectly,
although she described the approach as "exciting" after we landed.

Brien K. Meehan wrote:

C Kingsbury wrote:

Anybody ever have somebody get real scared, how did
you deal with it?


I surprised a passenger once. I was on a localizer approach, right
down to minimums (OVC005), and saw the runway right at the MAP. I was
still 500 feet above it, and I instinctively put it in a hard slip to
get down quickly.

I sensed a mild gasp from the right seat. My passenger had apparently
never flown sideways before. I very calmly (and confidently) said,
"This is called a side slip. It's a little trick to slow down and lose
altitude quickly, so we can land." That reassured her perfectly,
although she described the approach as "exciting" after we landed.

I've done the same thing VFR ... with the same results. It is the one
thing I never think to brief the pax on in advance because, as you say,
it is simply instinctive for us and you just don't always know when you
are going to need a little slip.

Probably the biggest surpise I gave a passenger was coming into, I
think, Lynchburg, VA with a stong crosswind. I was crabbing probably 20
degrees on final and I had the pax helping to find the runway (also a
close to miniumums day). I forgot to tell the passenger to look for the
runway 20 degrees off the nose. He saw it first, but asked why it was
"crooked." :-)


Matt

In article .com,
Brien K. Meehan wrote:

Yeah. They even expect it to be a little bumpier than "clear" air.
They seem more comfortable in mild turbulence in IMC than in VMC. Go
figure.

My own tolerance for turbulence is much higher in the clear than in IMC
or under the hood.

--
Ben Jackson

http://www.ben.com/

Ben Jackson wrote:

In article .com,
Brien K. Meehan wrote:

Yeah. They even expect it to be a little bumpier than "clear" air.
They seem more comfortable in mild turbulence in IMC than in VMC. Go
figure.


My own tolerance for turbulence is much higher in the clear than in IMC
or under the hood.


No kidding. I'm just the opposite. When I can't see the real world
moving, I find it less objectionable. I also much prefer doing stalls
under the hood. They seem pretty benign when all I can see is the AI!

Although, since I now fly an Arrow rather than a Skylane, I've forgot
what a real stall is like!


Matt

In article . net, "C
Kingsbury" wrote:

What do you tell them before you take them into actual for
the
first time, if anything?

For your own peace of mind, if you are going to be flying anywhere
near thunderstorms, tell your passengers not to take any pictures
with the flash. A few years ago someone, I believe it was the Natalies,
posted a story about one of their passengers doing that to them.

--
Bob Noel
Seen on Kerry's campaign airplane: "the real deal"
oh yeah baby.

C Kingsbury wrote:
What are your standards for taking passengers up into actual conditions?

They must be somewhere near 98.6F with an IQ above room temperature! :-)
Seriously, I've never given it much conscious thought I just admit.


I've developed a decent feel for what people will tolerate VFR- who can take
a few bumps, who will get scared if its windy, etc. But I haven't got any
idea what to make of taking pax into the soup. Is it as disorienting for
them as it is for an untrained VFR pilot? Are they usually OK so long as
it's smooth? What do you tell them before you take them into actual for the
first time, if anything? Anybody ever have somebody get real scared, how did
you deal with it?

I think I've only had family members or colleagues from work with me on
flights in actual. So far, nobody has had any problems other than
boredom. However, all of my colleagues are seasoned airline travelers
so they are used to flying when they can't see anything out the windows.
And my wife and kids seemed to not have any problem either.
Typically, disorientation comes from getting conflicting signals to your
senses (the instruments vs. your inner ear). If you can't see outside
and you don't look at the instruments, then there aren't any conflicting
signals (the inner ear wins if the eyes can't see anything). So, I
don't see why a passenger would get disoriented as long as they don't
know enough to look at the AI. The one exception I can think of is
flying between layers that are tilted enough to where your eyes think
you are tilted when you are actually straight and level. I've heard of
this, but have never experienced it myself. Whenever I've been between
layers, they didn't have enough tilt to be noticeable.

Good luck with your first passenger in actual.


Matt

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 03:30:49 GMT, "C Kingsbury"
wrote:


What are your standards for taking passengers up into actual conditions?

IFR in a nice stratus layer, or an IFR climb to VFR conditions above
is an easy choice. These rides tend to be smooth.

IFR in rain (especially heavier rain) tends to worry passengers.

IFR in and out of cumulus can be intimidating for a non-pilot
passenger. This is especially true if throttle jockeying is required
to keep airspeed in check. It is disconcerting to see the plane
approach the cloud, enter the cloud, hit the turbulence, see the pilot
making control corrections, and then start hearing the engine rev up
and down.

-Nathan

"C Kingsbury" wrote in message
ink.net...

What are your standards for taking passengers up into actual conditions?


I don't have any particular screening standards. I just apply the principle
of explaining to people what to expect, and to keep them informed as we go.
My experience is that passengers can tolerate a lot if they just aren't
surprised too much. I explain the general conditions expected during the
flight, that we may pass through some clouds, and that flight through and
around clouds is usually a little bumpier than in clear air. Especially
early in the flight, I explain what I am about to do regarding any
substantial changes in attitude or engine adjustments. Also, if I need to
slow down before or after entering a cloud, I explain that, just like
slowing down in a car before going over bumps in the road. A phase of
flight involving extensive maneuvering and power and attitude changes, like
departure and arrival, gets some advance explanation. Gentle maneuvering
around clouds, rather than penetration, can be useful with inexperienced
passengers.

I agree with another poster that rain is more of a problem, especially if it
is hard enough to make a lot of noise. Again, a confident, comforting
explanation helps. And just keep the music playing on the intercom! :-)

It would be great if all passengers were like my 6-yr old grandson. "Go
through that cloud, Papa!". "Now that one!" "Slice that one with your
right wing!" "Wheeee!"

Stan

"C Kingsbury" wrote:
What are your standards for taking passengers up into actual conditions?

Risk first, then comfort.

Most passengers cannot make informed decisions about the risks they are
accepting; they must leave that up to the pilot. Therefore, it is the
pilot's responsibility to gauge what is "too much" risk for other people.
That puts a pilot in some pretty grey decision making areas. I don't have a
good guideline for everyone to use, only my personal standards.
I will not take (non-pilot) passengers in my single-engine airplane in IMC:
At night.
If the departure airport is not at least 100' above minimums and forecast to
stay that way a while.
If the destination and a large area around it are forecast to be at
minimums.
The route does not offer plenty of "outs."
Icing is a possibility.

As for comfort, I guess you just have to know your passengers, and sometimes
you're going to be surprised one way or the other. I have one friend whom I
know from experience will be terrified by turbulence, but I never would have
guessed it before I saw it happen.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM