What happens in IMC

I'll chime in too. The flying in IMC requires even more practice than a
VFR-only ticket with less room for mistakes. Equipment limitations demand
more respect as well. All of this means that an IR makes some people safer
while others become more dangerous.

Marco Leon

"William Snow" wrote in message
. ..
I will second that Jay.

--
Bill Snow, CP, IA, ASEL

"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth
with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there
you will always long to return"
- Leonardo Da Vinci





Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

To go back to the original post - I'm going to play spoiler here...

Other than pointing the hapless pilot towards VFR Wx (which he should
have known before departing) after the pilot recovered the aircraft,
what did ATC contribute? Did the controller reach out and fly the
airplane?

As I hear the recording, after all the pilots screaming into the mike,
the controller's reply was soothing but that was all... By the time the
pilot replied without screaming, he had already seen a tower go by,
figured out where down was, corrected his attitude, and the airplane
was upright and in visual conditions (or at least semi visual)... ATC
then instructed him to climb back into hard IMC so they could document
the crash coordinates on radar!!!

While that pilot may believe that ATC saved his bacon I have a
different take on it... They held his hand on the radio which is
certainly to their credit (99.9% of controllers are good folks)... But
putting a VFR pilot back into the clouds was not the way to go...
Clouds rarely go all the way to the ground... The fact that he could
climb the airplane back into hard IMC and maintain control while
changing headings, etc.., means he is a better pilot than given credit
for... If he had climbed back into the clag and then yanked the wings
off, ATC would have been answering hard questions to his wife's
lawyers...

He was lucky to survive his error resulting in a spiral (complete rolls
unlikely, just a confused inner ear)... ATC was lucky to survive their
error in climbing a vfr pilot back into imc...

denny

Denny wrote:

While that pilot may believe that ATC saved his bacon I have a
different take on it... They held his hand on the radio which is
certainly to their credit (99.9% of controllers are good folks)... But
putting a VFR pilot back into the clouds was not the way to go...

Listen again. The FSS guy said "remain VFR if able" and the pilot said
"climbing to 3000" and later that he was in complete IFR. Seems to me
the pilot made the call to go back up.

-cwk.

I'd like to know what kind of editing was done on the piece. I find the
transition from dramatic panic to calm to be a little too quick. The
fact that it's part of a campaign doesn't help make me any less
skeptical either.
--
Gene Seibel
Tales of Flight - http://pad39a.com/gene/tales.html
Because I fly, I envy no one.

Good point. One second he's screaming like a panicked VFR pilot who
screwed up badly, the next second we have "Iceman."


Just another data point to suggest that flying is not for amateurs. At a
minimum, all should have IRF ticket.

Just another data point to suggest that flying is not for amateurs. At a
minimum, all should have IRF ticket.

I don't want to be around guys who are working on their "IRF" ticket...

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote:
Just another data point to suggest that flying is not for amateurs. At a
minimum, all should have IRF ticket.

I don't want to be around guys who are working on their "IRF" ticket...


That is the prerequisite for the IFR rating: "I read FARs". Everything you ever
wanted to know about flying.... AND MORE!!!!



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

VE

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.

wrote in
oups.com:


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.


Insurance companies look at statistics. All they actually see is that
as a group, people who have a IR have less accidents, that doesn't
automatically mean every pilot would be safer with an IR.

--
-- ET :-)

"A common mistake people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete
fools."---- Douglas Adams

ET wrote:
wrote in

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.

Insurance companies look at statistics. All they actually see is that
as a group, people who have a IR have less accidents, that doesn't
automatically mean every pilot would be safer with an IR.


All generalizations will fail on an individual level at some time. That
doesn't make them generally invalid. A pilot who obtains his instrument
rating to become a safer pilot is making a wise decision. An instrument
pilot who thinks himself invulnerable tempts the wrath of the gods.

-cwk.