Question to the IFR Pilots Out There

I think some people tend to log actual when they are not suppose to.
How often do you stay in the clouds? once you can see again, your not in actual
and cant log it.

"Cecil E. Chapman" wrote:

For those of you who have your instrument ticket, how many hours of actual
IMC did you have when you got your ticket.

At approx 40 hours of instrument time I have a 'whopping' .9 hours of ACTUAL
IMC... I sincerely hope I'm going to get to see a lot more before I get my
instrument ticket - which I'm guessing should be around April or May at the
latest.

--
--
Good Flights!

Cecil E. Chapman, Jr.
PP-ASEL

"We who fly do so for the love of flying.
We are alive in the air with this miracle
that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"

- Cecil Day Lewis-

Check out my personal flying adventures: www.bayareapilot.com

the instrument ticket is priceless, 2 days ago I took my plane up for the first
time in a month (it had been in the shop getting new avionics installed)
went only about 40 miles out to the MMM VOR, when I turned around to head back,
the city was covered by low clouds and what looked like fog on the ground, I
thought I could go under it, but as I got closer it did not look do'able.

I was talking to nellis approach because I was entering class B, told them I
didnt think I could make it in without a clearence, they gave it to me and away
I went.
technically, it was not VFR, I did not actually go through any clouds, but I
skimmed them so I could not log it as actual. but once below the layer and I was
able to see the airport, I canceled IFR and did the visual approach.

You can see the las vegas valley in this picture and the fog, kinda sucked I
couldnt login as actual even tho it was not VFR.
http://216.158.136.206/newplane/clouds/image3.html

Here is the cloud I almost got to fly through
http://216.158.136.206/newplane/clouds/image2.html


Jeff

"Cecil E. Chapman" wrote:

For those of you who have your instrument ticket, how many hours of actual
IMC did you have when you got your ticket.

At approx 40 hours of instrument time I have a 'whopping' .9 hours of ACTUAL
IMC... I sincerely hope I'm going to get to see a lot more before I get my
instrument ticket - which I'm guessing should be around April or May at the
latest.

--
--
Good Flights!

Cecil E. Chapman, Jr.
PP-ASEL

"We who fly do so for the love of flying.
We are alive in the air with this miracle
that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"

- Cecil Day Lewis-

Check out my personal flying adventures: www.bayareapilot.com

In article , wrote:

there is a lot of
difference between being minimally competent (basically a freshly
minted
instrument pilot) and being a confident, proficient, expert instrument
pilot.

sure. but if the freshly minted instrument pilot isn't good enough
for IMC, then the minimum test standards aren't good enough.

Define what "IMC" is? And how do you test for all aspects of IMC in a
test that lasts less than a month?

You know the definition of IMC. What I'm trying to point out is
that minimum test standards are, by definition, good enough. If
you don't think so, then feel free to change the minimum standard.

btw - more challenging than testing skill is testing judgement.
I hope we both agree that good judgement is a heck of a lot more
important than skill.

--
Bob Noel

In article ,
wrote:

Sorry, but no test can cover every eventuality. And there is a lot of
difference between being minimally competent (basically a freshly
minted
instrument pilot) and being a confident, proficient, expert instrument
pilot.

Then the training was lacking.

Baloney. Training and capability and confidence learned through
experience are two different things entirely. I don't care if we are
talking about flying, driving, or a profession, the training/education
are just the beginning. Practice and experience beyond that is what
makes you a good driver, pilot, doctor, engineer or whatever. If you
really don't know the difference here, then I feel really sorry for you.

you forgot to include good judgement.

[snip]

That simply isn't practical. I'm an engineer by training, but my four
years in school hardly prepared me for EVERYTHING I'd encounter as an
engineer. Same is true for flying. Training and certification testing
is only intended to get one to a point where they are competent to
function at a minimum standard and able to progress from there.

I'm a licensed professional engineer. I specialized in communications
and digital systems. I can legally stamp plans for a power system. I
would be crazy to do so given that I have had little education in power
systems and no experience designing them. What is legal and what is
smart/prudent, are two different things.

more accurately, they are not necessarily the same.

--
Bob Noel

In article , "Cecil E.
Chapman" wrote:

I'm not surprised at all. I remember reading an AOPA magazine article
mentioning the very same thing. While a few replies to my original
thread
didn't seem to think it was an issue that one only had hood time - my
limited experience with real IMC begs me to differ. As you said, with
the
hood or foggles on you are still aware of a peripheral 'outside', however
when you are in real IMC the experience is quite different, especially
seeing the quick movement of the cloud texture past your side windows in
your peripheral view.

another fun aspect of IMC is needing to transition from looking
outside to looking inside to looking outside to looking inside
as you fly in and out of the clouds. Hard to simulate.

--
Bob Noel

Gary L. Drescher wrote:
"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

I don't think having some arbitrary number of hours makes much
difference. I think the more important issue is how you begin to use
your new ticket. I've seen a number of authors of IFR books provide
something like this:

1. Start by taking off from an airport with VMC conditions, climb
through a fairly thin cloud layer to VMC conditions on top and then land
at an airport with VMC.

2. Take off in VMC, fly enroute in a thin layer, land in VMC.

3. Take off in IMC, fly enroute in IMC, but land in VMC.

4. Take off in ICM, fly enroute in IMC, land in "easy" IMC.

5. Repeat 4 gradually working closer to an approach in minimums and
adding in worse weather enroute.


I don't quite understand the theory behind this advice. I do agree that IMC
is harder than hood flying, because the latter provides peripheral cues as
to changes in attitude. For that reason, I made sure to have adequate dual
practice in IMC before trying it on my own.

Because flying in the real world tends to get more involved that flying
in a training environment. I flew a lot at night after a full day at
work. This helped induce a fatique factor, but it still is nothing like
shooting an approach at the end of a four hour flight, all in IMC with
no autopilot. Very hard to realistically simulate that in training.


On the other hand, once basic attitude flying in IMC becomes comfortable, it
doesn't strike me that flying an approach to minimums in IMC is then any
harder than doing it under the hood. And since doing it reliably under the
hood is a required part of instrument training, I don't really see why
pilots shouldn't fly single-pilot IMC to minimums soon after flying
single-pilot IMC at all.

I don't think it is any harder in actual, generally. The key point is
"IMC becomes comfortable." I found my comfort level increased long
after I got my ticket. I thought I was reasonably comfortable the day I
passed my flight ride, but I wasn't.


But I readily admit there could be good reasons that don't occur to me. If
so, I'd like to hear them.

Some pilots may be able to shoot to minimums the next day. I think I
could have, but I wouldn't have unless I had to. It is nice to have the
confidence of having shot a few real approaches to something above
minimums a few times to really ensure you have the system down pat.

Many surgeons train on cadavers and now even with computer simulation.
They technically are qualified to then operate on a live person.
However, sometimes things go wrong with live people that don't go wrong
with cadavers. Similar things are true in instrument flying. Your
training simply can't cover everything, unless you want to spend 500
hours in training.

And did you get 100 on your written? I was close, I missed one
question. The last I knew, only 70 was required to pass. What if a key
thing you missed wasn't caught during your training or oral? This might
be the piece you need to know on a dark and stormy night when things
start to go wrong. As your experience builds, some of these gaps get
filled in. That is why, up to a point, the safety record improves with
experience level of the pilot ... until cockiness, over confidence and
complacency sets in....


Matt

Thanks for the reply!

BTW, great photos,, do you have anymore on-line?

--
--
Good Flights!

Cecil E. Chapman, Jr.
PP-ASEL

"We who fly do so for the love of flying.
We are alive in the air with this miracle
that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"

- Cecil Day Lewis-

Check out my personal flying adventures: www.bayareapilot.com
"Jeff" wrote in message ...
the instrument ticket is priceless, 2 days ago I took my plane up for the
first
time in a month (it had been in the shop getting new avionics installed)
went only about 40 miles out to the MMM VOR, when I turned around to head
back,
the city was covered by low clouds and what looked like fog on the ground,
I
thought I could go under it, but as I got closer it did not look do'able.

I was talking to nellis approach because I was entering class B, told them
I
didnt think I could make it in without a clearence, they gave it to me and
away
I went.
technically, it was not VFR, I did not actually go through any clouds, but
I
skimmed them so I could not log it as actual. but once below the layer and
I was
able to see the airport, I canceled IFR and did the visual approach.

You can see the las vegas valley in this picture and the fog, kinda sucked
I
couldnt login as actual even tho it was not VFR.
http://216.158.136.206/newplane/clouds/image3.html

Here is the cloud I almost got to fly through
http://216.158.136.206/newplane/clouds/image2.html


Jeff

"Cecil E. Chapman" wrote:

For those of you who have your instrument ticket, how many hours of
actual
IMC did you have when you got your ticket.

At approx 40 hours of instrument time I have a 'whopping' .9 hours of
ACTUAL
IMC... I sincerely hope I'm going to get to see a lot more before I get
my
instrument ticket - which I'm guessing should be around April or May at
the
latest.

--
--
Good Flights!

Cecil E. Chapman, Jr.
PP-ASEL

"We who fly do so for the love of flying.
We are alive in the air with this miracle
that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"

- Cecil Day Lewis-

Check out my personal flying adventures: www.bayareapilot.com

Tim wrote:

Then the training was lacking.

Baloney. Training and capability and confidence learned through
experience are two different things entirely. I don't care if we are
talking about flying, driving, or a profession, the training/education
are just the beginning. Practice and experience beyond that is what
makes you a good driver, pilot, doctor, engineer or whatever. If you
really don't know the difference here, then I feel really sorry for you.


No need to feel sorry for me. I already conceded that experience will make
you better. What you have still not convinced me of is that after I get my
rating I should be "prudent" and not actually fly to the standards I was
training at and took the practical? You are confusing two different
issues. What I would like someone to explain is why a person who just
passed the practical should not be able to file a plan, fly in actual and
complete an approach to minimums. I argue that if they can't then:

If you feel that you can fly to the edge of the envelope (fully utilize
everything legally available to you in IMC conditions) at day one, what
is left to gain from experience? I'm not being facetrious here, I'm
really curious as to what value you feel that experience will bring?
Generally, it brings additional capabilities beyond what you had at the
start. But since you can't legally fly in worse weather after 500 hours
than you can after 0 hours (I'm talking post rating here), what is left
to gain from your experience?


On your own without an instructor is no way to "learn" how to do an approach
to minimums. (I can not figure out how else you get to that point on your
own, since it seems that you are arguing that a person's training did not
prepare them to make a flight in IMC and land after doing an approach to
minimums)

I don't think anyone is claiming that you need to learn to do the
approach. It is a question of precision, confidence, and the ability to
handle the unforeseen that comes with experience. I believe any new
insrument pilot should have the knowledge to fly an approach to
minimums. They shouldn't need to learn anything from a "mechanical"
perspective. That isn't what experience usually brings. It is the
ability to recognize and deal with the non-mechanical aspects (fatique,
etc.) that occur in real flying much more so than during training.


That's unfortunate. My instrument test was nearly 3 hours long, about
1.5 on the ground and 1.5 in the air. I passed, but wouldn't launch
into low IFR to an airport reporting minimums at that point in my
instrument flying career.



Damn right it is unfortunate. Why wouldn't you have?

Because doing things in a simulated environment isn't the same as doing
things for real. I've learned this in many aspects of my personal and
professional life. If I'd had the occasion to fly several approaches to
minimums in actual during my training, then I'd have felt differently.
I simply chose to explore the areas incrementally where I'd not had the
chance to explore them "for real" during training.


I had already agreed to that. The point is that after the test you should
be expected to fly in IMC on your own and make an approach at minimums -
after all that is what you trained and tested for.

I will make it clear again - I am not arguing that a person who just passed
his practical is going to be a wunderkind and be able to fly better or has
better habits or is more capable than one who has been flying for years.

What capbilities will you be able to use after experience than you could
the day you got your rating? You can't arbitrarily fly to an MDA or DH
lower than what is published, just because you are now a better pilot.


As to your question: would you want a doctor who had just graduated from
medical school perform his/her first
quadruple bypass on you without a more experienced surgeon in the
operating room?


Totally different and your example is not even close in so many ways.

Such as?


Matt

Bob Noel wrote:
another fun aspect of IMC is needing to transition from looking
outside to looking inside to looking outside to looking inside
as you fly in and out of the clouds. Hard to simulate.

Sometime flying IFR in VMC can be more difficult. In VMC, you now have to
look outside about 90% of the time, while in the clouds you could devote
100% of your time inside. When I flew with a friend of mine soon after
getting his IR, I had to ensure that he looked outside when outside a
cloud - definitely higher workload. Unfortunately, this is something the
hood cannot simulate, and in fact, encourages the bad habit.

Hilton

vincent p. norris wrote

Bob, did you get a "White Card" when you got your wings?

I don't remember Vince, but I do remember flying "solo"
cross countries IFR in the S-2F while at Kingsville.
John Cuddy, another NAVCAD, and I set-out from Kingsville
to Pensacola and immediately looked for a cloud to fly
in since neither of us had ever been in a cloud before.
Maybe is was a special dispensation from the "white card"
requirement.

Bob Moore