IFR ticket vs. professional training (MD, PhD...)

I think your MD friend is mostly correct. Flying is only mentally
challenging until you become competent, then it becomes automatic and easy
like driving. You can't really know that IFR flying will always be
challenging since you are so new to it that you don't even have the rating
yet. There are basically four phases to learning:

1) unconscious incompetent-you don't know what to do and you can't do the
task
2) conscious incompetent- you mentally know what to do but can't do it
3) conscious competent-you mentally know what to do and you cam do it
4) Unconsious competent-you can do the task without thinking about it.

As an instrument sutdent you are probably at level two.

Mike
MU-2

"G. Sylvester" wrote in message
m...

I got into a discussion with an non-pilot MD comparing
a professional degree versus flying.

My background, BS and MS from the top 2 bioengineering programs
in the US. (note, I put *much* more weight to experience over letters
after a name including my own). Flying-wise, I have a PPL and
about 33 hours into my IFR ticket. I should be able to complete
it in under 45 so I'm probably ahead of the curve but a I gotta put
much of this on my book and mental preparation before each
flight and ahead of time that others didn't commit to. I plan
on doing this for the challenge, excitement and unique lifestyle
of being a pilot. I might, in fact, probably will become a CFI(I)
but not full time. We'll see. If someone pays me $10 (or better
yet $500,000) to fly their challenger or Citation to wherever I want
to go, I'll consider. ;-) I've been in professional challenging
situations and none have come close to IFR in IMC.

Overall, my flying experience is just like everyone elses. It is
challenging but by the time you get your ticket and after that
still challenging as it is a never ending battle with learning to stay
ahead of the plane.
The IFR ticket is definitely a step above that as the consequences
is a LOT greater. It is a licence to kill and there is a NEVER ending
true battle with learning everything to save the asses to which the plane
is strapped to. IFR is and will always be for me, the non-professional,
challenging. Certainly after my training, my head hurts from the
concentration level required. All of this is absolutely impossible to
explain to a non-pilot...even a non-IFR pilot it is difficult.

Back to the original question. This person I had the discussion with
is under the impression of flying is probably more like driving and
anybody
can do it. This person is the typical MD, their way is the only way and
they
are the only ones who do it right and no one else can comprehend (I work
for a medical device company and have dealt with hundreds of
neurosurgeons, oncologists and medical physicists around the world).

So the big question, compared to a your profession, how does flying
VFR and IFR compare with regards to training, proficiency, continued
training, mental challenge and anything else that comes to mind? No
need to convince me but more to convince the non-pilot. In particular
I'd like to hear from the professions that require advanced degrees.

Gerald Sylvester

"Mike Rapoport" wrote:
4) Unconsious competent-you can do the task without thinking about it.

Have you made it to "unconscious competent" yet?

After 5+ years of instrument flying, I must say I haven't achieved this
state. I doubt I ever shall, flying only about ten actual approaches per
year plus a dozen for practice. I find that flying approaches in IMC still
requires intense, deliberate concentration for me to stay ahead of the
situation.
--
Dan
C-172RG at BFM

I think that I have. I recieved the IR in 1998 and have flown over 1500hrs
since then in the same airplane and virtually all of the flying in the MU-2
is IFR because of the fuel savings in the flight levels. I no longer
consciously "scan" the instruments, I just look at the panel and take in the
information. I also find that my skills don't atrophy as fast as they did
1000hrs ago. I get about 6hrs of simulator time every year at Simcom,
virtually all of which is IMC. I don't do any practice approaches or
training in the airplane. I don't know how much of this is avionics (Garmin
530/430, GPS roll steering, Flight Director, dual HSI's and RMI's) and a
stable airplane vs how much is applicable to experience.

I am somewhere between conscious competent and unconscious competent in the
Helio. I certainly haven't mastered the airplane but I no longer conciously
think about "dancing" on the rudder pedals and that kind of stuff.

Mike
MU-2


"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...

"Mike Rapoport" wrote:
4) Unconsious competent-you can do the task without thinking about it.

Have you made it to "unconscious competent" yet?

After 5+ years of instrument flying, I must say I haven't achieved this
state. I doubt I ever shall, flying only about ten actual approaches per
year plus a dozen for practice. I find that flying approaches in IMC
still
requires intense, deliberate concentration for me to stay ahead of the
situation.
--
Dan
C-172RG at BFM

I don't know how much of this is avionics (Garmin
530/430, GPS roll steering, Flight Director, dual HSI's and RMI's) and
a
stable airplane vs how much is applicable to experience.

I suspect it's mostly flight experience. My experience and outlook is
rather similar to yours, except that I do my recurrent training in the
airplane. My recurrent training cycle is about 3-5 hours every 6-10
months, mostly under the hood or in IMC. Last time I stretched it a
bit to fit in the ATP. I don't have any of those gadgets in my
airplane (not even a single HSI) and don't miss them. I find that an
approach is IMC is no particular challenge unless I'm doing something
unusual, like a full procedure NDB to mins where I've decided to
actually fly the ADF needle rather than LORAN/GPS.

Michael