![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Marco Leon (at) wrote: I'll chime in too. OK, I'll bite. I agree with Jay's basic statement that an IR is not a magic wand, but that's not saying much. The flying in IMC requires even more practice than a VFR-only ticket with less room for mistakes. Apples and oranges, to some degree. Flying a successful XC mission in the system is an order of magnitude more complex than simply surviving a VFR-into-IMC encounter. IFR students are typically capable of holding heading and altitude within a few hundred feet in the first 10 or so hours, while passing the checkride takes 50 or more. At least in my case, the first things I get rusty on are procedures, like hold entries. Basic attitude flying (you don't need to pass a checkride, just survive) will likely last a lot longer between re-training. Equipment limitations demand more respect as well. All of this means that an IR makes some people safer while others become more dangerous. Individually, yes. As a population, no. Why does every insurance company give discounts for IR? Why do they effectively require it for higher-performance planes? It sometimes seems to me that the only people suggesting the IR doesn't significantly increase safety are unrated pilots. Now, the -utility- of the rating is a whole 'nother question on which I have decidedly mixed feelings. -cwk. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|