Accelerated Instrument Rating

"Jim Fisher" wrote:
I'll be damned.

This question has been posted quite frequently over
the years. All the nay-sayers say it just can't be as
good as your standard training.

I did it the traditional way, which was a 13-mo. slog with a very
experienced Part 135 pilot as an instructor. After I passed the 'ride
(including a re-test on the holding part) I found I still had a thousand
things to learn about the practical use of the rating.

FWIW, if I had it to do over again I'd do the PIC thing.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

Dan Luke wrote:

After I passed the 'ride
(including a re-test on the holding part) I found I still had a thousand
things to learn about the practical use of the rating.

While I was working on the rating (in the usual way), I was also doing my
own "regular" flying. This would occasionally generate questions that I'd
bring to my CFII that he'd turn into lessons.

I also flew in all four seasons during my IFR training. I'm not sure, but
I'd assume that the "actual" hours accumulated were all across the year.

We'd plenty of times where the CFII and I were studying the weather, both
current and predicted. This was not just to make the go/no-go decision,
but also to pick where the weather would be doing what when. Our goal was
to find the worse weather (up to a point), which is not the norm, but this
was still a practical study of weather over time.

Then we'd fly in it (or not {8^).

All of these would be necessarily diluted if my time with the CFII had
included none of my own normal flying and just a few days of weather.

- Andrew

"Andrew Gideon" wrote:
I also flew in all four seasons during my IFR training. I'm not sure, but

me and Stanley took off for KABE on 9/15/01, and were probably the first
Part 61 aircraft in the air in the whole country and almost got in trouble
for that. I think he told you the story

HECTOP
PP-ASEL-IA
http://www.maxho.com
maxho_at_maxho.com