If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Tips on Getting Your Instrument Rating Sooner and at Lower Cost
Have you ever carefully studied what the regulations actually REQUIRE
regarding the various experience requirements for an instrument rating? The XC requirement in particular, is one that oftentimes unnecessarily adds to the cost of an instrument rating and delays getting it. According to the FAA, a pilot who already has a private pilot certificate and is RATED in the airplane, can log PIC time, even while receiving dual instruction. This means that an instrument training XC trip, which is NOT on an instrument flight plan (you don't have an instrument rating yet so you can't file IFR as PIC) but is under the hood with an instructor as safety pilot, can be logged as PIC XC.......so you can make the same time do double duty. Much instrument training is done this way, with the instructor acting as ATC. Most of your instrument training will be hood time. Do it on a XC using instrument navigation procedures and you can save as much as 20-30 hours or more of the additional cost of having to do it over twice. (The rules do not say SOLO XC the rules say PIC XC ) This means that most of your instrument time training can also be XC PIC IF you arrange your flights carefully in regard to what the regulations require and make your training part of an XC trip. (As a side note, this is a good way to get your training because you get to plan all aspects of the flight from the standpoint of FLYING an instrument trip. Take-off, climb, enroute, approach and landing are all included. Just do them to instrument standards under the hood and for all practical purposes you are conducting an instrument flight.....and getting double duty out of your flight dollar.). There are a number of other rules that require certain amounts of flight time under varying conditions that usually are done one at a time, rather than meeting several requirements on one flight. If you look at your logbook, and study the regulations, you will see many instances of this. If you are just getting started flying, this might be a good time to CAREFULLY STUDY the rules and ask your flight instructor about how to combine as many requirements on a flight as possible to make your learning experience more cost effective. If you are like most pilots, flying is expensive. Getting the most for your dolllar is important. KNOWING what the regulations REALLY require can save you a lot of money and get you on your way faster, without shortchanging your knowledge. Being organized and having knowledge of what the rules really say can save you a lot of money. Remember. If you have questions about the way the regulations are interpreted you can call your local FAA Flight Standards District Office and ask an Inspector. They are there to help you. P.S. You might like to read HOW TO TRAIN YOUR FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR http://webplus.locators.estates.co.uk/hint6.html#train |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
In my experience the #1 time-delay comes from getting the written test done.
If/when I decide to go for my commercial I'm not going to even start taking lessons until after I've done the written. Doing the same with my private & instrument would have saved me 3 calendar months on each. And in general, the fewer calendar months you spend training, the fewer hours you spend in the airplane fixing things you forgot from previous lessons. -cwk. "Fred" wrote in message ink.net... Have you ever carefully studied what the regulations actually REQUIRE regarding the various experience requirements for an instrument rating? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"C Kingsbury" wrote in message ink.net... In my experience the #1 time-delay comes from getting the written test done. If/when I decide to go for my commercial I'm not going to even start taking lessons until after I've done the written. Doing the same with my private & instrument would have saved me 3 calendar months on each. And in general, the fewer calendar months you spend training, the fewer hours you spend in the airplane fixing things you forgot from previous lessons. INDEED! -c |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"Fred" wrote in message
ink.net... This means that an instrument training XC trip, which is NOT on an instrument flight plan (you don't have an instrument rating yet so you can't file IFR as PIC) but is under the hood with an instructor as safety pilot, can be logged as PIC XC.......so you can make the same time do double duty. A private pilot can log PIC XC time for an instrument training XC trip even if the flight is IFR (or even in IMC). FAR 61.51e1i requires only that the pilot be rated for the aircraft in order to log PIC time as sole-manipulator. There is no requirement that the pilot be rated for the conditions of flight, or that the pilot actually be PIC. --Gary |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
This means that an instrument training XC trip, which is NOT on an instrument flight plan (you don't have an instrument rating yet so you can't file IFR as PIC) but is under the hood with an instructor as safety pilot, can be logged as PIC XC.......so you can make the same time do double duty. Well, sort of. You need to make this arrangement beforehand, because LOGGING PIC time and BEING PIC are two different animals, kind of like dolphin (the kind you eat) and dolphin (as in Flipper) are two different animals. You can =log= PIC time as a non-instrument-rated private pilot, even under an IFR flight plan that your instructor files, even though the instructor must =be= PIC(*). However, you can =not= use this time as the time required under 61.65(d)(1). Though it's in your logbook as PIC (sole manipulator, or "Hands On Time"), you were not PIC (Top Dog) on that flight. I know you didn't claim this to be true; I state it for completeness. You can also log PIC time if you are flying under VFR, under the hood, with the instructor also acting as safety pilot, irrespective of who =is= PIC. This is the case I believe you were referring to, and yes, if you and your instructor agree that =you= (the student) are to be Top Dog on that flight, then the time counts towards the time required under 61.65(d)(1). It might be the case that you need to do this (for example, if the instructor's medical has lapsed, I believe she can still give you required instruction, she just can't be Top Dog, though this would require another current pilot in the back to act as safety pilot, which is a required crewmember under the circumstances, which brings us back to the pathological case referred to earlier). On the other hand, it is also possible that the (current) instructor elects to act as Top Dog (and =be= PIC), in which case though you could log HOT time (PIC time) you could not use it as the time required under 61.65(d)(1). It might even be necessary (for example, if your own medical has lapsed, though I think that in that case you might not be able to log the time at all; 61.23 does not list "receiving flight instruction" as an exception) So, yes, you can make the time do double duty, but you need to read the regs carefully. Remember, HOT time doesn't make you Top Dog, and being Top Dog doesn't make you HOT. Jose == (*) OK, there are pathological cases where a third person sitting in the back could BE PIC, for now let's not go there.. oh, never mind, we already did. -- (for Email, make the obvious changes in my address) -- (for Email, make the obvious changes in my address) |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Fred" wrote in message ink.net... Have you ever carefully studied what the regulations actually REQUIRE regarding the various experience requirements for an instrument rating? The XC requirement in particular, is one that oftentimes unnecessarily adds to the cost of an instrument rating and delays getting it. According to the FAA, a pilot who already has a private pilot certificate and is RATED in the airplane, can log PIC time, even while receiving dual instruction. This means that an instrument training XC trip, which is NOT on an instrument flight plan (you don't have an instrument rating yet so you can't file IFR as PIC) but is under the hood with an instructor as safety pilot, can be logged as PIC XC.......so you can make the same time do double duty. Much instrument training is done this way, with the instructor acting as ATC. Most of your instrument training will be hood time. Do it on a XC using instrument navigation procedures and you can save as much as 20-30 hours or more of the additional cost of having to do it over twice. (The rules do not say SOLO XC the rules say PIC XC ) How do you come up with 20 to 30 hours? Doing cross countries is no place to start learning IFR procedures. You should spend time in a sim beforehand, then make your way to a plane. Your proposal I think is something that most people are aware of. Thanks for the "help." This means that most of your instrument time training can also be XC PIC IF you arrange your flights carefully in regard to what the regulations require and make your training part of an XC trip. (As a side note, this is a good way to get your training because you get to plan all aspects of the flight from the standpoint of FLYING an instrument trip. Take-off, climb, enroute, approach and landing are all included. Just do them to instrument standards under the hood and for all practical purposes you are conducting an instrument flight.....and getting double duty out of your flight dollar.). There are a number of other rules that require certain amounts of flight time under varying conditions that usually are done one at a time, rather than meeting several requirements on one flight. If you look at your logbook, and study the regulations, you will see many instances of this. If you are just getting started flying, this might be a good time to CAREFULLY STUDY the rules and ask your flight instructor about how to combine as many requirements on a flight as possible to make your learning experience more cost effective. If you are like most pilots, flying is expensive. Getting the most for your dolllar is important. KNOWING what the regulations REALLY require can save you a lot of money and get you on your way faster, without shortchanging your knowledge. Being organized and having knowledge of what the rules really say can save you a lot of money. Remember. If you have questions about the way the regulations are interpreted you can call your local FAA Flight Standards District Office and ask an Inspector. They are there to help you. P.S. You might like to read HOW TO TRAIN YOUR FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR http://webplus.locators.estates.co.uk/hint6.html#train |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Richard Hertz" no one@no one.com wrote in message et... "Fred" wrote in message ink.net... Have you ever carefully studied what the regulations actually REQUIRE regarding the various experience requirements for an instrument rating? The XC requirement in particular, is one that oftentimes unnecessarily adds to the cost of an instrument rating and delays getting it. According to the FAA, a pilot who already has a private pilot certificate and is RATED in the airplane, can log PIC time, even while receiving dual instruction. This means that an instrument training XC trip, which is NOT on an instrument flight plan (you don't have an instrument rating yet so you can't file IFR as PIC) but is under the hood with an instructor as safety pilot, can be logged as PIC XC.......so you can make the same time do double duty. Much instrument training is done this way, with the instructor acting as ATC. Most of your instrument training will be hood time. Do it on a XC using instrument navigation procedures and you can save as much as 20-30 hours or more of the additional cost of having to do it over twice. (The rules do not say SOLO XC the rules say PIC XC ) How do you come up with 20 to 30 hours? The rules require 10 hours with an instructor. The rest can be PIC with an instructor as safety pilot. 40-10 = 30. That adds up to 40 hours. Doing cross countries is no place to start learning IFR procedures. You should spend time in a sim beforehand, then make your way to a plane. Your proposal I think is something that most people are aware of. Thanks for the "help." Actually, I find a lot of pilots under the mis-impression that they have to have the 50 hours BEFORE they start the IFR or that the 50 hours has to be separate from the IFR training or in addition to it. I would respectfully disagree that doing cross countries is no place to start learning IFR procedures. I would suggest that cross countries are a very good place to start learning them, to practice them, and to master them because this is what IFR flying is all about, namely using the plane for XC under acceptable weather conditions that are not VFR. Flying IFR is not much different from flying VFR except that you are using the gauges instead of getting confused by looking at all the clutter on the maps and looking outside all the time. IFR charts are easier to read, easier to interpret, and easier to navigate with. You learned how to navigate by pilotage for your private and you learned how to dead reckon, deal with lost procedures etc so you already know how to do this. The next step is to learn to control the plane more precisely and doing it with the slight additional workload of keeping up with your times, etas, etc is not much more, IF you have learned to PLAN properly in the first place....... There is nothing wrong with practicing VFR XC when you feel like it, but if you are interested in getting on with getting your skills up to the highest level, as soon as possible, the sooner you learn the IFR procedures the sooner you can use them and, within limits, I would assert that you will be a safer pilot because of it. An Instrument rating certainly brings your skills to a much higher precision level and the training makes you much more aware of weather, the limitations it imposes, and gives you more latitude in dealing with the problems that weather presents and certainly makes you a more precise pilot. As you gain experience, hopefully your judgment gets better and better. The reason that I like to teach IFR things on an XC is that 1. You have to plan the trip, in advance, very well. This means that you have to think about the trip more, BEFORE you leave the ground, so you can have a low stress, enjoyable flight. This is what you should be doing VFR, but the IFR routine enforces it more. You have to consider the weather, terrain, winds, altitudes, etc a lot more, which you should on a VFR XC also.......but doing it IFR (or IFR under the hood in training) gives you more practice, sooner, rather than later, so you learn these important skills earlier in the game. That translates into thinking about setting up your frequencies ahead of time, setting up your radios ahead of time, and setting up your COURSES ahead of time, so mostly what you have to deal with is waiting for things to happen. i.e. to get to an intersection and change the direction, fly your new heading while maintaining your altitude and wait for the next heading or altitude change. Otherwise, all you have to do is keep the plane right side up, on heading and on altitude, and talk with ATC or your instructor and adhere to your "clearance". 2. The basics of navigation remain the same, except that it is a lot easier to navigate with radios than it is to navigate by DR and pilotage, especially at night, as well as, being generally safer, because, you can get a positive fix from your radios, whereas you often cannot when flying VFR at every second of the flight. When you learn this way, you reduce the overall problem to one of aircraft systems management and because you take things in the order that they happen and learn to expect them, you reduce a complex problem to something that comes in natural stages with a purpose. This all reduces the problem to controlling the airplane within IFR tolerances +/- 100 feet and +/- 10 degrees of heading and you have almost the entire flight to practice this skill, so you get a lot of practice tracking the VOR, intercepting courses, and when you get to the other end, you get to make an approach, which for the most part, is just flying headings and maintaining altitude. You need practice to get your skill level to stay within the altitude and heading tolerances. This is a good place to do it, because you don't have a lot of distractions and it has a purpose....ie.to get you to your destination. Mastering the ability to stay ahead of the airplane means PLANNING.....which means setting up your radios so you stay ahead of the airplane and wait for them to indicate you have reached a checkpoint, so you can do the next thing required. PLANNING is the essence of a stress free IFR flight and I have found that it is most easily learned by doing......which is what IFR flying is all about. When I was working on my instrument rating, I found that instructors usually would go out to teach a subject, such as intercepting a course, maintaining an altitude, flying an ADF course, or just holding heading and altitude, without having another purpose Sure, I knew we were "going to practice IFR under the hood", but it didn't have the same purpose of actually going somewhere and it made it much more difficult for me to understand why each thing was important...so we didn't go through the PLANNING stage which is essential to building IFR skills quickly. When I finally got to the XC stage, I had an additional burden of putting it all together and would continually forget to do things that needed to be done, well ahead of time, because in the incremental way I was taught, the crucial PLANNING OF THE FLIGHT was neglected, because we were really not going anywhere......just out to the VOR across to the ILS and down for an approach. This PLANNING is crucial when learning to fly IFR because you have to learn to stay ahead of the airplane. Going through the steps on an IFR XC gives you a lot more practice, it doesn't hit you so fast, so you have a little more time to get your flight stabilized, and is an overall better way to learn. Also, if you need a break, just tell your instructor and let him fly for a while. (Remember. If you are RATED in the plane and you have agreed that you are PIC in advance, you can still log the time. That's a privilege of being Captain and letting your instructor be your co-pilot, even if he is an instructor. He still can log the time also because he is an instructor. That is one of his privileges.) Another important part of the XC hood work is that you build up some endurance on a 2-3 hour flight. In the beginning, IFR can be tiresome, so you need to build up the endurance. When you do it for real, and are really in the soup, you are in it until you break out. You can't just take the hood off. So you need to build up your endurance. The more practice you get the better you can tolerate it. Last, this actually builds your overall skills very quickly. You might like to read how one pilot did it at http://10day.cjb.net (When the page comes up, wait a moment for the popup which is the story of David Sears, a candidate for the US Air Force Academy who wanted an instrument rating on his resume for his Congressional interview. David did it in 7 days of flying with 3 days when the weather was too bad to fly.). |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
What would you say is the best way to prepared for this with out going to
the flight schools classes. ( I live far enough away from there that if I make the trip I might as well go flying, cuz I don't want to do it that often) Apparently AOPA gave my name to Kings Schools and they had a salesman call to see if they could sell me the DVD course. I have been plodding through all the Gliems manuals. Any other ways? The Kings school DVD's are another 1.5 hours of dual, they way I look at it, but if they are super fantastic I guess I'll have to see about getting them. -- Dave A Aging Student Pilot KFRG "gatt" wrote in message ... "C Kingsbury" wrote in message ink.net... In my experience the #1 time-delay comes from getting the written test done. If/when I decide to go for my commercial I'm not going to even start taking lessons until after I've done the written. Doing the same with my private & instrument would have saved me 3 calendar months on each. And in general, the fewer calendar months you spend training, the fewer hours you spend in the airplane fixing things you forgot from previous lessons. INDEED! -c |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
It depends on what you need. I'm an information sponge and being 28 still have the psychology of test-taking pretty fresh in my mind. All I needed was practice and polishing to get the details right, so I used the Gleim software for both my private and my instrument. It has a "learning" mode where you go through the questions and it gives you an immediate explanation of why your answer was right or wrong. Plus it keeps track of scores, so you can see how you're doing. When you feel ready, it can do a full simulated test session exactly like what you'll see in the test center. I got most of my book learnin' from the Dogan book, and I was overall pleased with it. Anything that the Gleim description or the book didn't make clear I talked over with my instructor, and that took care of it. In the end I got an 82, but by that point I simply wanted to pass and get the damn thing over with as it was holding up my taking the checkride. I've taken enough standardized tests to know what they do and do not measure effectively. Best, -cwk. "Dave" wrote in message news:KWa9d.741$Ua.470@trndny03... What would you say is the best way to prepared for this with out going to the flight schools classes. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Instrument Rating Checkride PASSED (Very Long) | Alan Pendley | Instrument Flight Rules | 24 | December 16th 04 02:16 PM |
Tips on Getting Your Instrument Rating Sooner and at Lower Cost | Fred | Instrument Flight Rules | 21 | October 19th 04 07:31 AM |
Logging approaches | Ron Garrison | Instrument Flight Rules | 109 | March 2nd 04 05:54 PM |
"I Want To FLY!"-(Youth) My store to raise funds for flying lessons | Curtl33 | General Aviation | 7 | January 9th 04 11:35 PM |
PC flight simulators | Bjørnar Bolsøy | Military Aviation | 178 | December 14th 03 12:14 PM |