Real Pilots

On Jan 27, 12:37*pm, (John Clear) wrote:

I think it is a combination of the level of training required to
fly, and the value for the money.
To stick with aviation, you really need to have the flying bug.

And money.

Practically, I think you have to train and remain proficient in IFR.
At least that's what's holding me back.

Right now we're in "saving for the uncertain future/retirement" mode.

Big plans, if the economy doesn't do the full flush I've been
predicting for 10 years.
-----

- gpsman

In article ,
gpsman wrote:

Practically, I think you have to train and remain proficient in IFR.
At least that's what's holding me back.

Depends what the local weather is like. I'm VFR only, as is Jay, who
flies a lot more then I do. And he has Midwest weather to deal with.

John
--
John Clear - http://www.clear-prop.org/

"John Clear" wrote

Depends what the local weather is like. I'm VFR only, as is Jay, who
flies a lot more then I do. And he has Midwest weather to deal with.

Not Midwest, now. He moved to Texas and bought a new hotel...
--
Jim in NC

Depends what the local weather is like. *I'm VFR only, as is Jay, who
flies a lot more then I do. *And he has Midwest weather to deal with.

John

Not any more. Now I've got tropical South Texas/Gulf of Mexico
weather to deal with.

Except for tonight. We're experiencing an ICE STORM, on an island in
the Gulf of Mexico! This damned global warming is just un-friggin'-
believable.

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Port Aransas, TX
Pathfinder N56993
www.HarborInnPortA.com

gpsman writes:

Practically, I think you have to train and remain proficient in IFR.

Eh? Not at all. Even in Seattle or such areas there are plenty of VFR
only pilots. Weather clears up in a few days. Cross country trips are
very much possible strictly VFR.

Of course, the above assumes flying for a hobby. Flying for
committments and deadlines, yes, IFR is necessary to be safe...or
safer.
--
Truth is for the minority.
~ Baltasar Gracián

On Jan 28, 8:57*pm, Bug Dout wrote:
gpsman writes:
Practically, I think you have to train and remain proficient in IFR.

Eh? Not at all. Even in Seattle or such areas there are plenty of VFR
only pilots. Weather clears up in a few days. *Cross country trips are
very much possible strictly VFR.

Of course, the above assumes flying for a hobby. *Flying for
committments and deadlines, yes, IFR is necessary to be safe...or
safer.

I've given the wrong impression. An instrument rating is my personal
standard of practicality/proficiency/saferness... that's tied to my
bank account.

I've accumulated 500 hours, over 34 years, and I'm just never
comfortable because I know I'm not really proficient.

So, I think I know more about the rust that forms from not flying than
I do actual flying, but the economy has put me 6-7 years from being
able to comfortably invest the time and money my definition of
proficient requires.
-----

- gpsman

On Jan 29, 8:33*am, gpsman wrote:
On Jan 28, 8:57*pm, Bug Dout wrote:

gpsman writes:
Practically, I think you have to train and remain proficient in IFR.

Eh? Not at all. Even in Seattle or such areas there are plenty of VFR
only pilots. Weather clears up in a few days. *Cross country trips are
very much possible strictly VFR.

Of course, the above assumes flying for a hobby. *Flying for
committments and deadlines, yes, IFR is necessary to be safe...or
safer.

I've given the wrong impression. *An instrument rating is my personal
standard of practicality/proficiency/saferness... that's tied to my
bank account.

I've accumulated 500 hours, over 34 years, and I'm just never
comfortable because I know I'm not really proficient.

So, I think I know more about the rust that forms from not flying than
I do actual flying, but the economy has put me 6-7 years from being
able to comfortably invest the time and money my definition of
proficient requires.
*-----

- gpsman

I concur with gpsman. I am a fairly high time pilot, use a Mooney for
business purposes so most often file IFR. Once a year or so I take a
trip that pretty much leads me across the country, visitng important
customers, and at the end of the trip I am a MUCH sharper pilot than
at the beginning. Hands on altitude holding gets to be plus or minus a
whisper, ILSs are within a dot, and best of all, towards the end of a
multiday trip the cockpit workload seems trivial: staying ahead of the
airplane is so much easier. The moral of this story is, to be
'current' may mean certain operations within the last 90 days, to be
proficient for me at least the time window is more nearly a week or
ten days. Real life precludes staying at that level of proficiency. so
probably there is a slight increase in risk. Now here's an interesting
question, given the mechanical failure rates of airplanes. Is flying
more often to maintain proficiency subjecting the pilot to increased
risk because of the exposure to equipment failure? Somewhere there's a
minimum or a cusp in that curve, I am not sure where it is.

Sorry spammers, this thread is actually aviation related!

On Jan 29, 8:33*am, gpsman wrote:
On Jan 28, 8:57*pm, Bug Dout wrote:

gpsman writes:
Practically, I think you have to train and remain proficient in IFR.

Eh? Not at all. Even in Seattle or such areas there are plenty of VFR
only pilots. Weather clears up in a few days. *Cross country trips are
very much possible strictly VFR.

Of course, the above assumes flying for a hobby. *Flying for
committments and deadlines, yes, IFR is necessary to be safe...or
safer.

I've given the wrong impression. *An instrument rating is my personal
standard of practicality/proficiency/saferness... that's tied to my
bank account.

I've accumulated 500 hours, over 34 years, and I'm just never
comfortable because I know I'm not really proficient.

So, I think I know more about the rust that forms from not flying than
I do actual flying, but the economy has put me 6-7 years from being
able to comfortably invest the time and money my definition of
proficient requires.
*-----

- gpsman

The proficiency factor vs the economy is definitely a player in the
flight safety area.
Quite frankly I'm surprised that there haven't been more instrument
proficiency related incidents and accidents due to decreased aircraft
use in the GA community.
It's absolutely a serious consideration that every instrument rated
pilot should be both aware of and concerned about.
Dudley Henriques

On Jan 29, 2:20*pm, Dudley Henriques
wrote:
On Jan 29, 8:33*am, gpsman wrote:



On Jan 28, 8:57*pm, Bug Dout wrote:

gpsman writes:
Practically, I think you have to train and remain proficient in IFR..

Eh? Not at all. Even in Seattle or such areas there are plenty of VFR
only pilots. Weather clears up in a few days. *Cross country trips are
very much possible strictly VFR.

Of course, the above assumes flying for a hobby. *Flying for
committments and deadlines, yes, IFR is necessary to be safe...or
safer.

I've given the wrong impression. *An instrument rating is my personal
standard of practicality/proficiency/saferness... that's tied to my
bank account.

I've accumulated 500 hours, over 34 years, and I'm just never
comfortable because I know I'm not really proficient.

So, I think I know more about the rust that forms from not flying than
I do actual flying, but the economy has put me 6-7 years from being
able to comfortably invest the time and money my definition of
proficient requires.
*-----

- gpsman

The proficiency factor vs the economy is definitely a player in the
flight safety area.
Quite frankly I'm surprised that there haven't been more instrument
proficiency related incidents and accidents due to decreased aircraft
use in the GA community.
It's absolutely a serious consideration that every instrument rated
pilot should be both aware of and concerned about.
Dudley Henriques

I'm guessing PICs with not much recent experience are simply
monitoring their autopilots as the electronics and servos fly the
airplane. The likelihood of electronic failures are pretty low. I get
my kicks hand flying the airplane most of the time, but suspect that
is not so common among us business owner/pilots these days. It could
also be there's less IMC or night or IMC and night flying these days
in the complex SEL crowd, although I don't hesitate to fly night IFR.
The fact is, if it's to solid minimums I'd rather fly a precision
approach at night.

Question for the other instrument rated pilots (assuming there are
more than a few of us still around) don't you agree a night approach
to minimums is easier than a day time one? So long as you don't turn
on the landing lights until out of the clouds of course.

On Jan 29, 6:17*pm, a wrote:
On Jan 29, 2:20*pm, Dudley Henriques
wrote:





On Jan 29, 8:33*am, gpsman wrote:

On Jan 28, 8:57*pm, Bug Dout wrote:

gpsman writes:
Practically, I think you have to train and remain proficient in IFR.

Eh? Not at all. Even in Seattle or such areas there are plenty of VFR
only pilots. Weather clears up in a few days. *Cross country trips are
very much possible strictly VFR.

Of course, the above assumes flying for a hobby. *Flying for
committments and deadlines, yes, IFR is necessary to be safe...or
safer.

I've given the wrong impression. *An instrument rating is my personal
standard of practicality/proficiency/saferness... that's tied to my
bank account.

I've accumulated 500 hours, over 34 years, and I'm just never
comfortable because I know I'm not really proficient.

So, I think I know more about the rust that forms from not flying than
I do actual flying, but the economy has put me 6-7 years from being
able to comfortably invest the time and money my definition of
proficient requires.
*-----

- gpsman

The proficiency factor vs the economy is definitely a player in the
flight safety area.
Quite frankly I'm surprised that there haven't been more instrument
proficiency related incidents and accidents due to decreased aircraft
use in the GA community.
It's absolutely a serious consideration that every instrument rated
pilot should be both aware of and concerned about.
Dudley Henriques

I'm guessing PICs with not much recent experience are simply
monitoring their autopilots as the electronics and servos fly the
airplane. The likelihood of electronic failures are pretty low. I get
my kicks hand flying the airplane most of the time, but suspect that
is not so common among us business owner/pilots these days. It could
also be there's less IMC or night or IMC and night flying these days
in the complex SEL crowd, although I don't hesitate to fly night IFR.
The fact is, if it's to solid minimums I'd rather fly a precision
approach at night.

Question for the other instrument rated pilots (assuming there are
more than a few of us still around) don't you agree a night approach
to minimums is easier than a day time one? *So long as you don't turn
on the landing lights until out of the clouds of course.

I think most of these points are relevant.
Probably the 3 most unwanted words in all of aviation are "Radar
service terminated" :-))
DH