CFI in IMC with Student

On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 22:37:06 -0500, Roy Smith wrote:

To be honest, though, if your level of experience is such that you talk
about "circular approaches", I have to wonder if you're in a position to be
passing judgment on other people's instrument flying.

I second this thought..... Minimums are there for a reason. Now if the
original poster said the instructor went below minimums, then he would have
reason to question him.

For me, there is nothing more magical then breaking out at minimums.

If you go to
http://www.archive.org/details/ALieb...pproachintoMBO and
download the video, this is a clip of one my circle to land approaches down
to minimums.

Allen

Well, I appreciate all the input this evening.
Seems I am on the wrong track and stand corrected.
Thanks to you all I will keep my mouth shut and sulk in the corner :-)

Regards
Roy



"A Lieberman" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 22:37:06 -0500, Roy Smith wrote:

To be honest, though, if your level of experience is such that you talk
about "circular approaches", I have to wonder if you're in a position to
be
passing judgment on other people's instrument flying.

I second this thought..... Minimums are there for a reason. Now if the
original poster said the instructor went below minimums, then he would
have
reason to question him.

For me, there is nothing more magical then breaking out at minimums.

If you go to
http://www.archive.org/details/ALieb...pproachintoMBO and
download the video, this is a clip of one my circle to land approaches
down
to minimums.

Allen

On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 02:50:34 GMT, "Roy Page"
wrote:

Ron, Thanks for your input.

My own feeling was that it might not be legal.
My reasoning was that a CFII has received a check out flying instruments
from the right seat.
Whereas, a regular CFI has not been checked out flying on the gages from the
right seat.
Am I correct ? I am not sure.

You asked about legality. There's no requirement in the regulations for
seat specific checkouts in small GA aircraft. There's no regulation
preventing me from flying right seat in IMC with passengers and acting as
PIC. I'm not aware of anything more restrictive for a CFI.


On the sensibility issue, I would agree it depends on the mission.
This particular mission was a jaunt in the clouds with a certified pilot in
the left seat who was having problems controlling the aircraft under the
hood.
So the CFI took that pilot into the clouds saying he was PIC but the pilot
in the right seat did all the flying.
The CFI says it was legal, but in my opinion, this is just another case
where this CFI showed poor judgment.

Assuming the CFI is rated and current, I see no legal problem with this
scenario. (I assume you meant the pilot in the left seat did the flying).
And, at least from what you present here, *I* would not even consider it to
represent poor judgement. Personally, I think it is an excellent idea for
all pilots to get exposed to IMC and if a pilot is rated, current, and
legal to act as PIC under IMC, it doesn't really matter to me whether or
not that pilot has a II.

I think if you are trying to make a case that this CFI is exercising poor
judgement, you'll need better examples.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

seems that part of the original question tried to ask if it was wise to
try to fly real hard ifr from the right seat. would the instrument
viewing-angle matter much?

dan

A Lieberman wrote:

Would you say I had poor judgment just because I enjoy flying in the clag,
and going down to minimums?

If I had performed the VOR approach accurately both times and still could
not get the airport in sight, that would be enough for me and I would have
been gone to another airport. I wouldn't have attempted a third.

Heck, if you have enough fuel, you could fly the VOR approach all day if
you wanted, but in reality, once you start flying for purpose instead of
practice, flying several approaches to the same airport is wishful
thinking... the type that has led to low fuel emergencies and fuel
exhaustion accidents.

--
Peter

Roy Page wrote:
: I am sure I can count on this newsgroup to give this question their best !

: Would it be legal for a CFI [Not CFII] to act as PIC from the right seat
: with a student in IMC ?

: In my opinion regardless of the legality, it would be less than sensible,
: what say the group ?

Others have expressed my sentiment fairly well, but I would just like to
reiterate that given the information you have provided, it's not only legal, but often
a good idea. I think that even primary student pilots taking their checkride never
having seen the inside of a cloud is reckless and irresponsible IMO.... let alone
people taking instrument checkrides with only hoodwork. The hood is *NOT* adequate
training for the disorientation that can arise from being in IMC.

As long as the CFI is IFR current, has received a clearance, and is ensuring
they fly the clearance, it's perfectly legal. The regs do not say which seat one must
fly from. Whether or not it can be logged as dual is another question that I'm not
equipped to answer, but acting as PIC is fine.

WRT your comment about circling approaches, as long as he didn't decend below
minimums it's again not only safe and legal, but a GOOD IDEA to get practice in. The
PTSs (or IPCs?) have recently been updated to require some circling training.

Non-precision vs. ILS is another one. My home field (KBCB) has a LOC/DME
that'll get you down to 400'. The closest ILS (KPSK 16 miles west) only gets you to
300'. IMO, the LOC/DME is easier to fly, and in many ways with the mountains around
here, safer. Not irresponsible at all.

-Cory


--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

wrote:
As long as the CFI is IFR current, has received a clearance, and is
ensuring they fly the clearance, it's perfectly legal. The regs do not
say which seat one must fly from. Whether or not it can be logged as
dual is another question that I'm not equipped to answer, but acting as
PIC is fine.

Yes, the student can log it as PIC (if they are the "sole manipulator of
the controls"). What the student cannot do is count it as part of the
required hours of instrument instruction towards an instrument rating.
It's PIC time, it's instruction received time, it's instrument time, it
just doesn't count towards the rating.

On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 08:33:19 -0500, Peter R. wrote:

If I had performed the VOR approach accurately both times and still could
not get the airport in sight, that would be enough for me and I would have
been gone to another airport. I wouldn't have attempted a third.

Had I been by myself AND it was not a training (or practice) approaches, I
would have done the same thing Peter. 2 tries and I'm outta here.....

But since I was in a training session, and wanting as much IMC time I can
get with an instructor AND full tanks (58 gallons), I really was in no
hurry to come down. That lesson, I ended up with 1.6 actual. It was this
lesson that built the utmost respect for minimums, and also helped me build
up my confidence in IMC. It's too bad not all IFR students get to
experience going down to minimums.

Heck, if you have enough fuel, you could fly the VOR approach all day if
you wanted, but in reality, once you start flying for purpose instead of
practice, flying several approaches to the same airport is wishful
thinking... the type that has led to low fuel emergencies and fuel
exhaustion accidents.

I can see why you say what you do above as all the VOR approaches I have
done required a course reversal (procedure turn). This is not to say all
VOR approaches require a procedure turn, but the ones I have encountered
required it which of course adds to fuel burn time.

Allen

Roy Smith wrote:
: wrote:
: As long as the CFI is IFR current, has received a clearance, and is
: ensuring they fly the clearance, it's perfectly legal. The regs do not
: say which seat one must fly from. Whether or not it can be logged as
: dual is another question that I'm not equipped to answer, but acting as
: PIC is fine.

: Yes, the student can log it as PIC (if they are the "sole manipulator of
: the controls"). What the student cannot do is count it as part of the
: required hours of instrument instruction towards an instrument rating.
: It's PIC time, it's instruction received time, it's instrument time, it
: just doesn't count towards the rating.

I never said otherwise. I wasn't sure if there was anything in the
regulations about when an instructor can say he was giving dual. There probably
isn't... so yes... it's dual, it's instrument, it's PIC, but it's not applicable
dual for an instrument rating.

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

Roy Smith wrote:
wrote:

As long as the CFI is IFR current, has received a clearance, and is
ensuring they fly the clearance, it's perfectly legal. The regs do not
say which seat one must fly from. Whether or not it can be logged as
dual is another question that I'm not equipped to answer, but acting as
PIC is fine.


Yes, the student can log it as PIC (if they are the "sole manipulator of
the controls"). What the student cannot do is count it as part of the
required hours of instrument instruction towards an instrument rating.
It's PIC time, it's instruction received time, it's instrument time, it
just doesn't count towards the rating.

I haven't read the regs lately, but do they specifically require
simulated instrument flight in order to count?


Matt