Philosophical question on owning & IFR rating

Dave Russell wrote:
The counter-point to Jay: If you aren't instrument rated and aren't
*really* serious about getting it, why pay for more stuff than you
need and then have to keep on paying more to maintain it? You can buy
a better VFR-only airplane with the same money, then upgrade it to IFR
or trade-up to an IFR platform when you need to.

That's like saying you shouldn't buy insurance if you are not planning
on using it.

Personally, I'd buy an IFR-certified plane, with the eventual intent of
getting the instrument rating. I've done that twice, now, although I
still haven't finished up the instrument rating. I have done a fair
amount
of instrument training in both planes, however -- something that would not
be possible if it were a VFR-only plane.

With an IFR platform to fly it's nice to know that I COULD get down
through
the clouds, if needed. It wouldn't be legal, but at least it would
possible.

I'm looking to buy in the spring 2005 time frame.
My intention is to find a decent IFR plane.
Probably a cherokee (right now, I'm shooting for a 180, but we'll see).
I'm not sure when I'll do my IFR training.
In the mean time, I can have the radios (which aren't really all that much)
in the plane, as Jay mentioned.
But, I don't think I'll have to keep it IFR certified until I'm ready to
begin my training...

The other thing I've seen advertised often is "IFR ready" aircraft.
Which I interpret to mean "has radios, not certified".
Maybe this route may be of interest.

Adam

The Weiss Family wrote:

But, I don't think I'll have to keep it IFR certified until I'm ready to
begin my training...


Doesn't have to be "IFR certified" then either. Train all you want -
just don't ask ATC for an IFR clearance in it.

Since this is a philosophical discussion, assume if I buy on my own I
will have to buy a VFR airplane to get a decent one that's affordable.
If I buy a VFR airplane that would rule out getting an instrument rating

My advise is to purchase an IFR aircraft.
Even if you never get the rating, it is safer and easier to sell.
My aircaft and I are IFR rated.
Hank N1441P

Hankal wrote:

Since this is a philosophical discussion, assume if I buy on my own I
will have to buy a VFR airplane to get a decent one that's affordable.
If I buy a VFR airplane that would rule out getting an instrument rating


My advise is to purchase an IFR aircraft.
Even if you never get the rating, it is safer and easier to sell.
My aircaft and I are IFR rated.
Hank N1441P

I agree that's best but this is a philosophical hypothetical question.
For argument's sake I've limited the choices to only two -- buy VFR
airplane OR get instrument rated. My own situation isn't really that
simple but it's a philosophical discussion.

TTA Cherokee Driver wrote:
I'd like to hear people's thoughts on having the hypothetical choice of
getting an IFR rating while continuing to rent, versus buying and
committing to being VFR-only for the forseeable future. I'm in North
Carolina, where the weather is VFR reasonably often but not so often
that it's a no-brainer like it would be in AZ or FL or some such place.


I would recommend getting yourself an instrument rating first... before
buying an airplane. An IFR capable airplane is not going to be cheap
but you need to know what your mission will inevitably be and what you
REALLY want in an IFR platform. The knowledge and experience in having
the rating with make you a more educated buyer of an airplane wherether
you realize it or not.

There is also something to be said for earning an instrument rating
while flying a number of differently equipped rental aircraft. During
my instrument training I flew pipers and Cessnas equipped with everything
from ancient KX-170's to Garmin 430's and everything in between. That
is good experience and helped me understand what is important to have
in a instrument platform.

Just my $.02

You're starting from the wrong point. Don't start with "what kind of
airplane do I want". Start with "what kind of flying do I want to do". If
I'm a day VFR pilot only, fly airplanes that are older than my Dad, have no
electrics and minimal instrumentation, have been all over France and the UK
and have a blast doing it. Decide what you want to do with your flying and
that will tell you what kind of airplane and whether to do your IFR ticket
or not. Are you happy to fly slow, or just tool around in the sky for the
sake of flying, or do you want to use it to go places and as a means of
travel? Do you want to be able to cruise at 150 kts or is 100 OK?

Once you decide what kind of flying you want to do, then you can decide what
kind of airplane you want. I want to fly aerobatics so I got myself a
Pitts. No "systems", no lights, no gyros, pure day VFR - and I love every
minute of it. But, I can't take a mate to France for lunch in it.
Sometimes it's limiting but I don't value going places enough to part with
the kind of cash that requires. And don't underestimate that factor. A
Taylorcraft is a lot cheaper to buy, own, and operate than something that's
fully IFR certified or fast.

Hopefully that helps a bit.

Shawn


"TTA Cherokee Driver" wrote in message
...
I'm a 160-hour PPL and a club member. My club is great and economical,
but availability and flexibility are becoming big drawbacks, so I'm
toying with the idea of buying a plane.

It's hard to justify on strictly financial terms because the club is
such a good deal, but how many times can you schedule a plane for a
Saturday flight, have to reschedule for Sunday because of wx but whoops,
can't because all the planes are booked for Sunday. Or even schedule a
morning flight, but because of AM fog have to postpone a couple of
hours, but still have to be back by noon because someone else has it
right after you, so you might as well not go since the fog didn't lift
till 11:00. Etc.

So I've been thinking of buying a plane for the sole purpose of
improving my availability & flexibility. Other than that I am delighed
with the club. Because of my job and other responsibilities, if I'm
going to do a significant amount of flying I'm going to need
availability and flexibility without having to plan everyhing way ahead.
Also because of that, and also because of reluctance to get into bed
financially with others, I don't think a partnership is the way to go,
though I haven't ruled it out, but for argument's sake let's say it's
ruled out.

Since this is a philosophical discussion, assume if I buy on my own I
will have to buy a VFR airplane to get a decent one that's affordable.
If I buy a VFR airplane that would rule out getting an instrument rating
because I'm obviously not going to rent airplanes for over 40 hours of
IFR training if I just bought one.

I keep putting off starting my IFR training, so while I think it would
be good to do it's clearly not something I'm burning to do.
Availability and flexiblity has something to do with putting off the IFR
training too, it took me 2 years and 80 hours to get my PPL because of
those kinds of issues and I don't want to repeat that with an IFR rating.

I'd like to hear people's thoughts on having the hypothetical choice of
getting an IFR rating while continuing to rent, versus buying and
committing to being VFR-only for the forseeable future. I'm in North
Carolina, where the weather is VFR reasonably often but not so often
that it's a no-brainer like it would be in AZ or FL or some such place.

TIA

One other thing that I should have mentioned in my previous post:
The savings in lower insurance rates you will experience by having
the instrument rating will come close to paying for the cost of
the rating itself.

With respect to the weather conditions in North Carolina...
that doesn't matter much for IR training... in fact you will have
the opportunity for more "actual" hours which will benefit you
in the long run. Weather isn't as much of an impediment for an
IR rating as it is for a PPL rating.

In article ,
kontiki wrote:
One other thing that I should have mentioned in my previous post:
The savings in lower insurance rates you will experience by having
the instrument rating will come close to paying for the cost of
the rating itself.

I'm not so sure about that. I passed a lot of insurance milestones
in my first year of ownership (including getting my instrument rating
and 100 make&model, retract, etc) and my insurance only went down about
10%. It will take years to make back the cost of the IR, but that's not
why I did it!

--
Ben Jackson

http://www.ben.com/

Ben Jackson wrote:
I'm not so sure about that. I passed a lot of insurance milestones
in my first year of ownership (including getting my instrument rating
and 100 make&model, retract, etc) and my insurance only went down about
10%. It will take years to make back the cost of the IR, but that's not
why I did it!


Well... I wonder what your premium what have been initially had you
purchased the plane/policy initially having the rating Vs. not having
the rating? There are different forces at work when negotiating for
a policy having an instrument rating along with "X" number of PIC hours
going in Vs. a PPL VFR only. Expecting "Y" amount of $$ reduction on
your policy premium after getting the rating is not written into the
contract.

Its a matter of pay me now or pay me more later.. its all money...
better to spend it on training initally than pay for higher premiums
and have less $$ for training and/or flying later.