Reno Air Races -- 2600 Miles in 2 Days!

"Newps" wrote in message
...


The stats say an instrument rated pilot is much more likely to take up
farming by scud running than a VFR only pilot.


If that were true the insurance people would stop giving discounts to
instrument rated pilots.

Karl

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:mj54d.82724$MQ5.31705@attbi_s52...
If you don't already know it, you dehydrated yourselves.
The time you spent at altitude will take its toll without your realizing
it.
I learned my lesson the hard way back in 1986. My wife and I rode with
another couple in their C310 from Columbus OH to Ft Lauderdale FL.
Six hours at 11000 feet with only a small bottle of water inflight. When
we landed I had a severe headache. We went from the airport to a
restaurant for dinner. I couldn't eat, but I did drink two pitchers of
ice water before I felt better.

Interesting.

Neither of us had a headache, nor were we overly thirsty when we landed.
(Although a couple of Sam Adams DID go down really, REALLY fast at the
casino bar... ;-)

However, at the Air Races the next day, I was constantly, ravenously
thirsty. I'll bet I drank two gallons of water in the pit area, with the
sun, wind, and incredibly low relative humidity conspiring to dehydrate
me.

A delayed (or compounded) reaction, perhaps?
--
Jay Honeck

Hi Jay,

A touch of delayed reaction may have compounded the situation, but the
desert is very efficient at sucking moisture out of anyone / anything.

Here in Phoenix, in the summer, I can consume a 64oz Gatorade during a round
of golf and never ever have the urge to visit a men's room (I freeze them
into giant Gatorade-cicles...)

I always take a 20oz Gatorade or water with me when I go fly. I may not
drink all of it over the course of a 1 to 1.5 hour long lesson, but I can
sure suck it down after the fact.

As for Reno/Stead Airport, you're talking desert environs + an elevation of
5050'...it's enough to dehydrate a tortoise!

Great write-up by the way!

Regards,

Jay "The Other Jay" Beckman
Student Pilot - KCHD
48 Hrs ... Nowhere to go but up!

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
ink.net...
The issue is simply that 1. Instrument training increases even general
VFR pilot skills and as such is worthy of the effort in attaining that
training.

As I understood it, Jay had done most of the training required for
an IR but had not completed it.

I can see that the claim that the training makes you a better and
more accurate pilot would be true in the case of most VFR-only
pilots, but what about if you're as accurate already? Do you need
to take the IR course/tests if you fly pretty much this way anyway?

I suppose the question I'm asking is apart from being able to
legally fly in cloud and learning how to do instrument approaches,
how does doing an instrument course teach you to be a better
pilot?

Paul (IMC rated)

The stats say an instrument rated pilot is much more likely to take
up
farming by scud running than a VFR only pilot.

Worked for Frank Tallman anyway!

Does this stat also say how many instrumented rated pilots AVOIDED
trouble with those same IMC by using their added training and their
rating to alter a deteriorating VFR flight and end it safely?
For the purpose of this discussion, I fail to see where this stat will
stand alone without the other missing half of this equation :-)
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Flight Instructor/Aerobatics/Retired

Broad sweeps and wild stabs at statistics yanks the stats out of
context, I'm afraid.
Flawed reasoning in what otherwise could be an interesting thread.

Overconfident attitude inducing pilots to grossly misjudge their
limits, not the rating or lack thereof, is a major killer. Additional
training could inspire overconfidence as well as dampen it. You can
be overconfident at any level of training or experience.

One can generalize that the inexperienced tend to be more insecure,
more aware that there is a vast area they have yet to explore, and
less able to judge how to apply their knowledge. And that there are
levels of experience at which a pilot is particularly vulnerable to
the danger of overconfidence. Certainly continued training and
expanding the horizon helps to keep you on your toes, but that doesn't
mean that the person who doesn't make use of this or can't afford it
is by definition unsafe, or that the experienced don't misjudge their
limits.

Perhaps the most unsafe is bad behavior that is not checked and
becomes habit over time. Taking a good look at one's own limits from
time to time and regular reviews and tests help, but it's difficult to
measure "good airmanship".

Has anyone here read a little book by Avram Goldstein called "Flying
Out of Danger"? He made it a point to state cases that involve very
experienced pilots, just to prove that nobody is immune. Required
reading, IMHO.

FE.

"Grumpy Ditch" wrote in message
om...
Overconfident attitude inducing pilots to grossly misjudge their
limits, not the rating or lack thereof, is a major killer. Additional
training could inspire overconfidence as well as dampen it. You can
be overconfident at any level of training or experience.

One can generalize that the inexperienced tend to be more insecure,
more aware that there is a vast area they have yet to explore, and
less able to judge how to apply their knowledge. And that there are
levels of experience at which a pilot is particularly vulnerable to
the danger of overconfidence. Certainly continued training and
expanding the horizon helps to keep you on your toes, but that doesn't
mean that the person who doesn't make use of this or can't afford it
is by definition unsafe, or that the experienced don't misjudge their
limits.

This is a distinction I've thought about in relation to flying and to
driving...the difference betwen "good pilot" and "safe pilot". These
may go together, but they may not. A good pilot is probably quite
safe, but a safe pilot may not be particularly good. "Good" doesn't
have a single definition. Good in relation to whom and what? Dudley?
Bob Hoover? A 20,000 hour ATP? The Red Arrows?

This thread had gone in the direction of "doing IR training makes you
a better pilot" and in a different breath says "statistically it puts you in
more danger" (disputed by "so why are insurance rates lower?").

I don't know if I had a question in all that. Lost my train of thought
now! Must be lunchtime.

Paul

"Paul Sengupta" wrote in message
...
"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
ink.net...
The issue is simply that 1. Instrument training increases even
general
VFR pilot skills and as such is worthy of the effort in attaining
that
training.

As I understood it, Jay had done most of the training required for
an IR but had not completed it.

I can see that the claim that the training makes you a better and
more accurate pilot would be true in the case of most VFR-only
pilots, but what about if you're as accurate already? Do you need
to take the IR course/tests if you fly pretty much this way anyway?

I suppose the question I'm asking is apart from being able to
legally fly in cloud and learning how to do instrument approaches,
how does doing an instrument course teach you to be a better
pilot?

Paul (IMC rated)

You're kidding....right ?

Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Flight Instructor/Aerobatics/Retired

I can see that the claim that the training makes you a better and
more accurate pilot would be true in the case of most VFR-only
pilots, but what about if you're as accurate already? Do you need
to take the IR course/tests if you fly pretty much this way anyway?

Because I have an unusual, 2-pilot perspective, I can attest to the
effectiveness of the instrument training when it comes to instilling
precision. In fact, the one really valuable thing I took away from my
training was added precision, and -- as our total flying time has grown --
this is the one area that still clearly separates me from Mary, who started
flying several years after I got my ticket.

Mary, who has not done any instrument training, has a tendency to wander off
her assigned (or preferred) altitude, and has a more difficult time trimming
the plane. Having spent a bunch more hours under the hood, necessarily
flying to a higher degree of precision, I find that I am more precise on
both altitude and heading, and trimming is a no-brainer. (For reference,
she has around 470 hours, and I have around 900 hours.)

Does this make me a "better" pilot, in some measurable way? I suppose. Am
I safer than Mary because of it? I don't think so.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 04:01:36 GMT, "Mike Rapoport"
wrote in
et::

I wish that I had unlimited time! I have a job, a marrage, two six year
old
boys, three dogs, ten acres of meadow that needs mowing. Soon the North
Idaho winter will start and 1600' of driveway will need snowblowin'...I
think I'll stop now, this is getting depressing.

At some point one's possessions begin to own their owner.

My cat doesn't like being called a "Possession".

Mike
MU-2

kage wrote:
"Newps" wrote in message
...


The stats say an instrument rated pilot is much more likely to take up
farming by scud running than a VFR only pilot.



If that were true the insurance people would stop giving discounts to
instrument rated pilots.

It is true, as per AOPA, and insurance companies don't blindly give
discounts just because you have the rating. Get the rating with 1000
hours, most in the same plane like a 182 that you own and there will be
no discount.

Paul Sengupta wrote:

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
ink.net...

The issue is simply that 1. Instrument training increases even general
VFR pilot skills and as such is worthy of the effort in attaining that
training.


As I understood it, Jay had done most of the training required for
an IR but had not completed it.

I can see that the claim that the training makes you a better and
more accurate pilot would be true in the case of most VFR-only
pilots, but what about if you're as accurate already? Do you need
to take the IR course/tests if you fly pretty much this way anyway?

I suppose the question I'm asking is apart from being able to
legally fly in cloud and learning how to do instrument approaches,
how does doing an instrument course teach you to be a better
pilot?

It's a myth.