Talk About A Rude Company,

"Michael" wrote in message
ups.com...
They don't want to take a beginning IFR student in actual

That's actually reasonable, in my experience. At that point, actual
would
largely be a waste of your time and money.

I've heard that argument before, and I don't agree with it, though I
can easily see why it might sound compelling.

Maneuvers are all well and good, but IMO what a beginning instrument
student needs more than anything is just time controlling the airplane
by instruments - level flight, turns to headings, climbs and descents,
tracking a VOR/ADF/GPS/whatever - the fundamentals of IFR flight.
Sure, he might need a little help on the departure or approach, but
most of the flight he can handle - and it's great training. The reason
I think many instructors are not too comfortable with doing it is
simple - the student WILL bank the plane to 60 degrees. He WILL let
the airspeed decay almost to stall. He WILL mishandle the plane. But
truly, you need to be off heading for a while before you get off
course, and a 1000 ft block altitude is usually not hard to get. As
long as the instructor is comfortable that he can recover from an
unusual attitude (induced by the student) in IMC without drama, or
better yet talk the student through the recovery, it's not a big deal.
Thing is, some instructors are not terribly comfortable with that.

If the goal is to get the student to the checkride in minimum time,
then this isn't the most efficient way to go. In fact, if that's the
goal, doing any training at night and/or in IMC is not recommended.
But if the goal is to train a student capable of using his airplane to
go places in lousy weather (down to mins) day or night, then more and
earlier exposure to IMC is best. I'm a pretty strong advocate of IMC
early and often, and have even had a low time (about 150 hours) private
pilot with no complex or high performance experience flying actual
night IMC on his second IFR lesson - the first in his Bonanza that he
just purchased that day.

Michael


My feeling's also I am not trying to get it in the quickest time possible i
just love to fly, I fell if I get exposed to it early on the better I will
know what it feels like. I don't see how any one can do all their training
with a hood and feel save in actual but I have never been so I don't know
what that is like. My 150 costs me very little to operate why use a
simulator when I have the real thing available maybe it will take longer but
I feel I will get more skill actually flying then in a simulator. But all is
taken care of I have found me an instructor that don't mind actual but
prefers it and is ok using my 150 for the training now talk about a savings.

This is what we have planned sounds really fun.

30 to 50 hours in my 150 & about 10 hours in an arrow add the extra systems
to the mix of things (my choice)

I plan on flying 2 to 3 hours per day 4 to 5 times a week.

1 hour ground preflight

1 hour ground post flight.

I would like to fly 3 to 4 hours per day but he said 3 max in 1 day is
enough.

So how Much is 2 Much?

My 150 costs me very little to operate why use a
simulator when I have the real thing available maybe it will take
longer but
I feel I will get more skill actually flying then in a simulator.

Actually, I think you are off base there. There are things you can do
with a sim that you can't really do with the real airplane in terms of
system failures. Only thing is, certified sims (at the light GA level
- I'm not talking about the stuff with visuals and motion) are a waste
of time and money. They are inferior training tools to Microsoft
Flight Sim. No, you can't log the MSFS time (except as ground
instruction) but it's quite valuable - and a copy of MSFS costs less
than an hour in one of those sims.

BTW, I see nothing wrong with using a C-150 for IFR training. It's not
really a practical IFR travel machine, but it does fine if you want to
make hundred mile hops in benign IMC.

As for max 3 in a day - yes, usually, but I've had a student who was
able to handle more. Only one, though.

Michael