Instrument rating??

What skills would a marginal VFR pilot need that they couldn't get from IFR
training?


Pilotage. Ground reference maneuvers. Basic attitude flying. VFR chart
interpretation (wrt low altitude rubbernecking). These are the skills you need
for low level marginal vfr flight.
--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

"Teacherjh" wrote in message
...

What skills would a marginal VFR pilot need that they couldn't get from
IFR
training?


I concede that IFR training may not entail these subjects (except for
attitude flying and possibly ground reference), but you definitely need the
same skills, specifically:


Pilotage.

Better know how to do this even under IFR. Electrical systems don't care
whether you filed or not.

Ground reference maneuvers.

You could argue that "circle to land" requires similar skills, but I won't
make a fuss on this one.

Basic attitude flying.

This is DEFINITELY covered under IFR training.

VFR chart
interpretation (wrt low altitude rubbernecking).

Most CFIIs teach using both VFR and IFR charts in case Murphy shows up. I
guess the tacit assumption is that you already know how to read a VFR chart
and can recognize things that might get you in trouble in an emergency.

These are the skills you need
for low level marginal vfr flight.
--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

I concede that IFR training may not entail these subjects (except for
attitude flying and possibly ground reference), but you definitely need the
same skills...


Yes, you need all those skills (and others) for all flying. You may not use
them all on every flight, but you need them in your toolbox. But the question
is "...couldn't get from IFR training?" by which I infer "is specifically
taught in IFR training". Low altitude circle to land is NOT taught in the IFR
training I got, except once when I asked to do a complete low circling approach
and land. It was an eye opener.

IFR flight training is primarily about flying solely with reference to
instruments, and working in the system. Some weather may be covered.

Jose





--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

(Teacherjh) wrote
Low altitude circle to land is NOT taught in the IFR
training I got, except once when I asked to do a complete low circling
approach and land. It was an eye opener.

IMNSHO you were cheated. I consider low altitude circle to land an
important part of istrument training - I teach it to those I train for
the rating, I check it on an ICC, and I make it part of my own
recurrent training. I suppose to some extent my priorities are
colored by my experience - I am based out of an airport where no
straight-in approaches exist, and I have friends based at private
strips with no approaches at all. Thus I consider both the circling
maneuver and a maneuver where you shoot an approach into an airport,
break it off, and proceed low VFR to a nearby airport to be part of
the instrument pilot skill set.

In my opinion, there is HUGE overlap between proper instrument
training and training for low VFR. The only things you don't get as
part of the instrument training that you would get as part of proper
low VFR training would be off-airport precautionary landings and low
level flight planning and navigation.

Of course if you are simply trained to pass an instrument checkride,
this all goes out the window. It's quite possible to pass an
instrument ride (or even an instrument instructor ride) and be truly
dangerous in instrument conditions.

Michael

"Michael" wrote in message
m...
(Teacherjh) wrote
Low altitude circle to land is NOT taught in the IFR
training I got, except once when I asked to do a complete low circling
approach and land. It was an eye opener.

IMNSHO you were cheated. I consider low altitude circle to land an
important part of istrument training - I teach it to those I train for
the rating, I check it on an ICC, and I make it part of my own
recurrent training. I suppose to some extent my priorities are
colored by my experience - I am based out of an airport where no
straight-in approaches exist, and I have friends based at private
strips with no approaches at all. Thus I consider both the circling
maneuver and a maneuver where you shoot an approach into an airport,
break it off, and proceed low VFR to a nearby airport to be part of
the instrument pilot skill set.


I did a night circle to land with my instructor about a month ago (vfr,
under the hood). I can honestly say, I didn't like it. Learned alot, though.
He had always talked about how dangerous it can be and after doing one, even
if it was only simulated, was a big eye opener. Things just look all kinds
of wrong. :-)

"Steven Barnes" wrote
I did a night circle to land with my instructor about a month ago (vfr,
under the hood). I can honestly say, I didn't like it. Learned alot, though.
He had always talked about how dangerous it can be and after doing one, even
if it was only simulated, was a big eye opener. Things just look all kinds
of wrong. :-)

Tell me, did you like power-on stalls the first time you did them?
Spins? Canyon turns? Landing on very short obstructed strips?

In my opinion, circling maneuvers are not unacceptably dangerous, but
to a greater extent than normal flying they are quite unforgiving of
poor technique. In other words, there is more opportunity to screw up
and less opportunity to correct the screwups. Some people choose not
to do them, and this is their right - but it does reduce the utility
of the rating.

Like any other maneuver, this one can be taught. It's not something
that can be taught on paper - it requires a combination of ground and
flight training. The airlines don't do it.

The reason airlines don't do it is simple - when they moved all their
training to simulators rather than the real airplane - which, despite
anything they tell you, was for reasons of cost more than anything -
they eliminated from their operation anything that could not
effectively be trained in a sim of that era. Sims of that era did not
provide adequate visual and somatic cues for training in circling
approaches.

So I guess my bottom line is this - with proper training, the maneuver
will go from looking very wrong to just looking demanding. I hate to
say your training was improper, but tell me this:

Did you discuss how to select a runway and a circling pattern in
advance?
Did you discuss go-ahead points - meaning a point beyond which even if
you saw the runway you couldn't effectively land on it?
Did you discuss how instrument and visual references are combined to
accomplish the maneuver?

Just as a benchmark, I consider 45 minutes of ground training about
the minimum before going up for the first circling approach - and that
assumes the student has already read the regs and understands about
categories of aircraft, circling vs. straight-in mins, allowable
distance from the runway, etc. It's 45 minutes of just discussing how
to perform the maneuver.

Michael

"Michael" wrote in message
om...
"Steven Barnes" wrote
I did a night circle to land with my instructor about a month ago
(vfr,
under the hood). I can honestly say, I didn't like it. Learned alot,
though.
He had always talked about how dangerous it can be and after doing
one, even
if it was only simulated, was a big eye opener. Things just look all
kinds
of wrong. :-)

Tell me, did you like power-on stalls the first time you did them?
Spins? Canyon turns? Landing on very short obstructed strips?

In my opinion, circling maneuvers are not unacceptably dangerous, but
to a greater extent than normal flying they are quite unforgiving of
poor technique. In other words, there is more opportunity to screw up
and less opportunity to correct the screwups. Some people choose not
to do them, and this is their right - but it does reduce the utility
of the rating.

Like any other maneuver, this one can be taught. It's not something
that can be taught on paper - it requires a combination of ground and
flight training. The airlines don't do it.

The reason airlines don't do it is simple - when they moved all their
training to simulators rather than the real airplane - which, despite
anything they tell you, was for reasons of cost more than anything -
they eliminated from their operation anything that could not
effectively be trained in a sim of that era. Sims of that era did not
provide adequate visual and somatic cues for training in circling
approaches.

So I guess my bottom line is this - with proper training, the maneuver
will go from looking very wrong to just looking demanding. I hate to
say your training was improper, but tell me this:

Did you discuss how to select a runway and a circling pattern in
advance?
Did you discuss go-ahead points - meaning a point beyond which even if
you saw the runway you couldn't effectively land on it?
Did you discuss how instrument and visual references are combined to
accomplish the maneuver?

Just as a benchmark, I consider 45 minutes of ground training about
the minimum before going up for the first circling approach - and that
assumes the student has already read the regs and understands about
categories of aircraft, circling vs. straight-in mins, allowable
distance from the runway, etc. It's 45 minutes of just discussing how
to perform the maneuver.

Michael

Once I finally got the hang of centering the ball (sorta) power on stalls
didn't scare me as much. I let a wing drop quite a bit in a 172 in early
stall training. Scared me good. Now it's not as bad. Doing them in our
club's 182 was interesting...

We hadn't really planned on doing circle approaches that day. The airport
we went to only has one VOR approach, and the wind happend to require a
circle (funny how that one night he actually made me land instead of
miss...).

"All kinds of wrong" = not what I'm used to. Nice 1000' foot patterns.
Made me fly an entire pattern at an altitude I'm only used to being at when
I'm base turning final. Not wrong, I realize. Just different. I can see how
if you haven't planned ahead & have some good situational awareness about
the pattern, you can get in the wrong place very quickly.