Stop Making Sense

in reply to no specific person

What is the utlity of the extra margin you get from the ability
to handle lower weather conditions that a non-IFR-rated
pilot?

Imagine a VFR pilot (like Jay H.) not changing his weather
minimums (e.g., VMC only). Would he be safer with an
IFR rating?

--
Bob Noel
New NHL? what a joke

Bob Noel wrote:
in reply to no specific person

What is the utlity of the extra margin you get from the ability
to handle lower weather conditions that a non-IFR-rated
pilot?

Imagine a VFR pilot (like Jay H.) not changing his weather
minimums (e.g., VMC only). Would he be safer with an
IFR rating?



Safer? Not sure. More confident of being able to complete a weekend
trip? Absolutely. More precise flying? probably.

The at ease feeling when conditions aren't picture perfect, as in
borderline marginal VFR/VFR that would make for a sweaty palms VFR
flight, but is an easy IFR flight....well that is worth every cent of
the admission. If I told you 10% of my total time was in actual IMC,
that would be fudging it on the high side. But, It is now relatively
rare for me to cancel on account of weather, where before a serious
cross country frequently was either scrubbed or was a sweaty palms
flight. IFR is great as long as you leave yourself plenty of 'outs'.
There is plenty of weather that is comfortably flyable IFR that would be
a knucklebiter VFR here in the Northeast, and if you want to use the
plane for travel with a reasonable probability of getting where you want
to within a reasonable bracket around your target time you'll need the
rating and be willing to use it. I'm not talking hard IMC here either.
I can't tell you the number of times my home field has been IFR with a
lingering 700-1200 ft overcast, but it is VFR 50 miles to the west where
I am going. without the rating, I'd be sitting there most of the day
waiting for it to burn off or move out. With the rating I am on top by
4000' and on my way and within a half hour I am past the undercast.

Bob Noel wrote:
in reply to no specific person

What is the utlity of the extra margin you get from the ability
to handle lower weather conditions that a non-IFR-rated
pilot?

Imagine a VFR pilot (like Jay H.) not changing his weather
minimums (e.g., VMC only). Would he be safer with an
IFR rating?

Yes.

1. He would get better service from ATC when he files. Watching him
would not be optional, as it is with a pilot on VFR flight following.
yes, he's still responsible for separating himself from VFR traffic in
VMC, but ATC is watching him better than they do VFR traffic.

2. If nothing else, IFR training teaches you to be a much more precise
pilot.

3. Studies show that pilots who get advanced training are safter than
those who do not. Even if the utility is otherwise doubtful, this book
makes that case very strongly and encouraged me to finish my instrument
ticket when I was doubting the value of it:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/007...books&v=glance

Bob Noel wrote:
in reply to no specific person

What is the utlity of the extra margin you get from the ability
to handle lower weather conditions that a non-IFR-rated
pilot?
Lower weather... some utility. Utility from being able to punch clouds
and decks without worry, enormous.

Imagine a VFR pilot (like Jay H.) not changing his weather
minimums (e.g., VMC only). Would he be safer with an
IFR rating?

Yes. But only with the qualifier that he maintain proficiency. That's
the hard part. Without it, it can be argued that you are less safe -
VMC or whatever.

Flying VMC with IFR capability is different than VMC without it.
THere's plenty of VMC where 2 mins of IFR flight thru IMC makes the
flight pleasuable, faster, and safer. That's where the sweet spot of
utility is.

On 9-Jan-2006, Maule Driver wrote:

THere's plenty of VMC where 2 mins of IFR flight thru IMC makes the
flight pleasuable, faster, and safer. That's where the sweet spot of
utility is.


You've got that right! I remember a flight last spring from Helena, MT to
the Fargo, ND area. There was a low stratus deck over the entire route with
widespread rain showers. 10 minutes of IMC at the beginning and end of the
flight meant I could cruise in smooth air at 11,000 ft with a 20+ kt
tailwind for the 4 hr flight. VFR would have taken an hour longer, scud
running in the bumps below the stratus deck while dodging rain showers (and
antenna towers!).

--
-Elliott Drucker

I have similar experiences except they were before I was rated and I
ended up in the bumpy slow part of the sky.

It's ironic that while you train for approaches to 200feet and partial
panel misses, you end up using the rating to penetrate cloud decks at
thousands of feet and spend most of the flight regretting the fact that
you forgot your sunglasses.

The benefits aren't entirely obvious until you exercise them.

wrote:
THere's plenty of VMC where 2 mins of IFR flight thru IMC makes the
flight pleasuable, faster, and safer. That's where the sweet spot of
utility is.

You've got that right! I remember a flight last spring from Helena, MT to
the Fargo, ND area. There was a low stratus deck over the entire route with
widespread rain showers. 10 minutes of IMC at the beginning and end of the
flight meant I could cruise in smooth air at 11,000 ft with a 20+ kt
tailwind for the 4 hr flight. VFR would have taken an hour longer, scud
running in the bumps below the stratus deck while dodging rain showers (and
antenna towers!).