The biggest safety investment in GA is...

Ron, in general, though (second hand experience speaking) if you're
going to a controlled airport, especially if it's not one you've used
much, aren't you better off flying an instrument approach, even if
it's circle to land? There's never a question of 'where is the
airport?" or of the tower not knowing where you are, known traffic
seperation, all that stuff, even in VMC? Maybe I've been exposed to
one style of general aviation for too long, but I'd be shocked after
engine start I didn't hear my personal PIC say "Clearance, Mooney N
xyz, instruments to . . ."

It could be he (we?) are mostly operating from controlled airports and
he considers himself 'professional'. In fact, he argues IMC is his
favorite weather since it keeps the unrated (and therefore less
experienced, or at least less qualified?) pilots on the ground.

As a professional shrink, I suppose I would agree with the REBUTTABLE
assumption that those who file IFR are better trained. Note the caps,
please. It's like saying those who hold a doctorate in psychology are
better qualified than those who stopped with an MS or MA. It may not
be true in all cases, but it's not a bad first (and rebuttable)
assumption. Hey, it's better than the hiring authority who only wanted
to hire lucky candidates, so he'd throw their CVs (resumes, for those
not in academia) down the stairs and hire the one whose documents went
the farthest.

Like all general rules, I freely admit there are many exceptions, and
in this newsgroup will even more freely admit as a non pilot my
observations hold only a little more weight than, say, MX whatever (I
claim more credibility because I can actually fl an ILS to minimums
from the right seat and land a real airplane pretty well, most of the
time). Hey, don't laugh until you land controlling the yoke with your
right hand and the thottle with your left, or for that matter, dance
backwards wearing high heels.

T.

On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 19:45:58 -0000, wrote:

Ron, in general, though (second hand experience speaking) if you're
going to a controlled airport, especially if it's not one you've used
much, aren't you better off flying an instrument approach, even if
it's circle to land? There's never a question of 'where is the
airport?" or of the tower not knowing where you are, known traffic
seperation, all that stuff, even in VMC? Maybe I've been exposed to
one style of general aviation for too long, but I'd be shocked after
engine start I didn't hear my personal PIC say "Clearance, Mooney N
xyz, instruments to . . .

What do you mean by an "instrument approach"? "familiar"?

Here's what I do.

I generally fly IFR to busy airports (e.g. KBOS, KFRG, KHPN) especially if
they are unfamiliar or at the end of long trips. And I do so because of
the ease of communication handoffs, and not having to worry about
controlled airspace issues.

I would not rely on the control tower to keep me separated from VFR
traffic, however. You'll probably be OK at a place like KBOS, or other
major airports in a CBA. And the tower will warn you if they see a
conflict, but separating you from VFR traffic is not a primary
responsibility.

Much of the time, when I operate under IFR to a controlled field, the
approach clearance is for a Visual Approach, locating the airport visually
is still required.

The two controlled airports to which I operate most frequently are KBGR and
KASH. I have no qualms about going VFR into either.

KFRG, because of the airspace/communications issues, I prefer IFR.

KBOS, because of familiarity, I will frequently go VFR (unless on an Angel
Flight mission).
--ron

On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 16:41:43 -0400, Ron Rosenfeld
wrote in
:

I would not rely on the control tower to keep me separated from VFR
traffic, however.

Right. That would be contrary to § 91.113

(b) General. When weather conditions permit, regardless of whether
an operation is conducted under instrument flight rules or visual
flight rules, vigilance shall be maintained by each person
operating an aircraft so as to see and avoid other aircraft.