Is it possible to switch from VFR to IFR and back?

In article ,
says...


"Blanche" wrote in message
| IMC - instrument meteorological conditions
| IFR - instrument flight rules
| IR - instrument rating
|
| Weather is IMC
| A pilot is Instrument Rated (IR)
| FAA rules of flight are either IFR or VFR

True. I was merely pointing out definitions and usage of the
acronyms.



Well, I can't tell you how relieved I am to learn that someone has
actually read at least the first page of an IFR training book. Even if it
is just the first page (or the inside cover) it's a start! One more page
and you will vastly exceed the general knowledge level to which this
discussion group has acquiesced of late!

GF

(PS no personal denigration intended whatsoever. My gripe is with the
level of discourse to which the group has sunk since the arrival of the
lead weight).

In article ,
says...


I recall reading that the vast majority of private pilots (80%?) are
not instrument rated, and that many accidents involving small planes
occur when non-IR pilots fly into IMC and become disoriented.


It is possible to read many things that are not true - particularly if you
hang out in places like this!!

The number of US private pilots who are instrument rated is much better than
this - which unfortunately does not preclude them from becoming disoriented
in IMC. The subject of instrument flight and training is very interesting,
but relatively complex, involving matters of human factors, training
methods, regulations and their interpretation, currency requirements and
their interpretation and usefuleness and I could go on - All of these
considerations put the subject out of reasonable bounds for those who have
no genuine interest in learning.

GF

Greg Farris writes:

It is possible to read many things that are not true - particularly if you
hang out in places like this!!

I don't remember where I read it.

The number of US private pilots who are instrument rated is much better than
this - which unfortunately does not preclude them from becoming disoriented
in IMC.

Does that include private pilots who fly only small GA aircraft, or is
it _all_ private pilots (including commercial airline pilots)?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

In article ,
Mxsmanic wrote:

Ron Garret writes:

Just ask ATC for a clearance. If they aren't too busy they will just
give you one. If they are busy you will need to contact flight service
by radio to file an IFR flight plan, then get back in touch with ATC to
activate it.

Do I have to work out a whole list of waypoints and stuff to give to
them?

Nope, they (actually their computer) will figure that out for you.

Can I just ask for IFR clearance to my destination (or to some
specific point where I expect to find VMC again), without specifying
waypoints or altitudes?

Yep.

Usually I have a VFR flight plan which in fact does include waypoints,
because I've worked something out with a chart beforehand, but not
always. If I've filed a VFR flight plan that mentions way points, can
I refer to it when asking ATC for IFR clearance?

Nope, ATC has no access to VFR flight plans.

In other words, just
convert part of the VFR flight plan to an IFR flight plan?

Nope.

Landing somewhere first is also an option.

Yes, but if I can't see anything out the window, this is not without
risk (mainly from conflicting traffic, even if I have instruments that
allow me to land in poor visibility).

If you can't see anything out the window and you are VFR then you're
already screwed. Time to declare an emergency.


Yes, you can switch from IFR to VFR at any time by simply telling ATC
that you are "canceling IFR."

Do I get in trouble if I file VFR, encounter IMC, and have to ask for
IFR clearance as a result?

Not unless you actually enter IMC without an IFR clearance.

I know I'm not supposed to take off in
IMC, but it seems like on a trip of substantial length, it's hard to
guarantee that it will all be fair weather, especially in some regions
of the world (the area around Seattle seems very pretty, although it
also seems that one can rarely _see_ the area around Seattle).

That's why having a plan B is always advisable.

Why? People fly IFR in VFR conditions all the time.

I recall reading that the vast majority of private pilots (80%?) are
not instrument rated, and that many accidents involving small planes
occur when non-IR pilots fly into IMC and become disoriented. So I
assume that it's rare for the pilot of a small plane to fly IFR
"unofficially" while under VFR. It sounds like a lot of them have no
idea how to do it.

I have no idea what you mean by 'flying IFR "unofficially"'. It's true
that many people don't have instrument ratings. Those people have fewer
options when flying cross-country.

It's much better to be IFR the whole way if there's any chance of
encountering instrument conditions anywhere on the flight.

Because ... ?

I'll leave that as an exercise for you to figure out.

rg

Ron Garret writes:

If you can't see anything out the window and you are VFR then you're
already screwed. Time to declare an emergency.

Well, if you are equipped for instrument flight and rated for it and
there isn't too much traffic, I wouldn't call it an emergency,
although you do need to get flight separation services or get back to
VMC as quickly as possible.

I have no idea what you mean by 'flying IFR "unofficially"'.

Flying using instruments even though you haven't filed an instrument
flight plan. For example, my habit of flying with a GPS or by
following VORs rather than looking for landmarks out the window.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

In article ,
Mxsmanic wrote:

Ron Garret writes:

If you can't see anything out the window and you are VFR then you're
already screwed. Time to declare an emergency.

Well, if you are equipped for instrument flight and rated for it and
there isn't too much traffic, I wouldn't call it an emergency,

Then you are missing something very fundamental: there is more to IFR
flight than simply flying by reference to instruments. It is also
flying according to a much more rigidly planned and stylized repertoire
of routes and maneuvers designed to keep you from hitting not only other
airplanes but also (and more importantly) terrain. That is why even
instrument-rated pilots flying instrument-equipped planes die on a
regular basis as a result of VFR flight into IMC.

although you do need to get flight separation services or get back to
VMC as quickly as possible.

That takes time. How are you going to keep from hitting things in the
meantime?

I have no idea what you mean by 'flying IFR "unofficially"'.

Flying using instruments even though you haven't filed an instrument
flight plan. For example, my habit of flying with a GPS or by
following VORs rather than looking for landmarks out the window.

Flying using instruments is NOT the same thing as flying IFR.

rg

"Greg Farris" wrote

(PS no personal denigration intended whatsoever. My gripe is with the
level of discourse to which the group has sunk since the arrival of the
lead weight).

The message needs to get to all of the members of this group, that any
non-adversarial communication with the lead weight will tend to make it
continue.

We all need to make it uncomfortable to be here, for the lead weight.
--
Jim in NC

PS Personal denigration intended.

"Mxsmanic" wrote

Does that include private pilots who fly only small GA aircraft, or is
it _all_ private pilots (including commercial airline pilots)?

It doesn't matter what the statistics are like in the real world. In your
simulator, the program will not change.
--
Jim in NC

"Ron Garret" wrote

That takes time. How are you going to keep from hitting things in the
meantime?

His simulator will not hit anything, and if it does, the game will start over
again.

Ron, just tell him to go ask the simulator folks. They have all of the
information he needs to know, for his game.
--
Jim in NC

Ron Garret writes:

Then you are missing something very fundamental: there is more to IFR
flight than simply flying by reference to instruments. It is also
flying according to a much more rigidly planned and stylized repertoire
of routes and maneuvers designed to keep you from hitting not only other
airplanes but also (and more importantly) terrain. That is why even
instrument-rated pilots flying instrument-equipped planes die on a
regular basis as a result of VFR flight into IMC.

If you have the right instruments, and an instrument rating, and ATC
to provide separation, why would it be dangerous?

I know that most IFR flights are rigidly planned, but it appears that
they don't have to be. You need to know where you are and where you
are going, but you don't have to plan every detail in advance.

That takes time. How are you going to keep from hitting things in the
meantime?

All it takes is a call to ATC. If you already know your instruments
and you already have your navaids and what-not set up, you already
know where you are and where you are going, irrespective of what you
can see out the window. You just look out the window for separation
and as an additional sanity check on your navigation, or just for
sightseeing. If visibility drops, you're covered, except for
separation--whence the call to ATC when you approach IMC.

Flying using instruments is NOT the same thing as flying IFR.

What are the differences? ATC provides separation and guidance for
IFR flights, but besides that, what changes?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.