Reno Air Races -- 2600 Miles in 2 Days!

Dudley Henriques wrote:

Flying extended cross country VFR, especially over mountainous
terrain.....you just never know when all that instrument training might
come in handy some day.

Flying instruments in the mountains in a single like Jay's is the last
thing he needs an instrument rating for.

Dudley Henriques wrote:




or.......you could get the rating and NOT make stupid decisions and
become a much better pilot than you were before you got the rating,
which is exactly what happens to all but those who are accidents waiting
to happen anyway

Except the statistics say otherwise. Once you get in the 800-1000 hour
range, especially if you do it fairly quickly, all VFR, an IFR rating
will add little to nothing to your flying skills other than being able
to be legal.

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:CGU3d.79848$MQ5.5765@attbi_s52...
But, despite your barb on the instrument pilot, you have to remember
that
you are only half a pilot without the instrument rating.

Hrm. I would strongly disagree with that.

Don't worry, Dylan -- he always likes to throw that "I'm an instrument
rated
pilot" around, like it's some sort of badge of courage.



I don't know why you assume that. Actually, I do not have an instrument
rating.

However, that does not change the fact that most cross country flights,
especially into high density areas, are safer and vastly easier on an
instrument flight plan. If you are too busy to provide the safety net that
the IR provides at least your wife should have one.

Send me your FBO's email address. I'll Paypal them the funds for Mary's
first IR lesson.

I've safely flown from one end of this country to the other, for almost ten
years, VFR.

Dream on! By your own admission you haven't. Your own recent posting about
scud running with your wife and family vividly points that out.

I have a friend who thought a lot like you and owned a Cessna 185, very much
like my own. I can just see the two of you talking about how to scud run a
certain route.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...26X01293&key=1

This accident is now the focal point of the "Wings" program around here.
It's a case of compounded poor judgment.

You further naively insinuate that all instrument flying equates to
hazardous weather flying. I can't think of a single instrument flight I've
ever taken in a light aircraft (other than during my training with a mad
man) that involved any kind of hazardous weather.

Karl

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.

Jay Honeck wrote:
Just courious, and some people may consider this too much information,
but... what do you do for relief on those long legs?

Our longest leg was 5.4 hours -- almost two hours longer than our original
flight plan -- so this could truly have been a serious problem. Luckily, it
wasn't, thanks to long experience with cross-country flying.
Our secret? We carefully avoided drinking beverages before launching.
This, for a coffee addict like me, was one of the most difficult parts of
the trip! Flying at sunrise without my usual caffeine jolt was a true
hardship -- but it's one that's well worth enduring.
Actually, the reverse was true -- we became quite thirsty aloft. To help
with this, we kept a small water bottle on board, just to wet our lips and
cut the thirst to a manageable level.
Between limiting our fluid intake, and the extreme dryness at 11,000 feet,
we had amazingly little trouble "holding it" for that long. (We had relief
bags on board, just in case...)

"kage" writes:

But, despite your barb on the instrument pilot, you have to remember that
you are only half a pilot without the instrument rating.

Oh, baloney. I've heard this kind of nonsense on every activity I've
been involved since being a kid, whether it was ham radio,
photography, astronomy, flying... you're not a true ham until you can
copy 60wpm in your head, you're not a true photographer until you
spend four hours on your belly on a frozen lake to take one photo, and
so on.

Jay is a full pilot, who has posted numerous accounts of really cool
flights, and with great narrative I might add.

-jav (instrument rated since 1993, but not bragging or belittling anyone)

"Newps" wrote in message
...


Dudley Henriques wrote:

Flying extended cross country VFR, especially over mountainous
terrain.....you just never know when all that instrument training
might come in handy some day.

Flying instruments in the mountains in a single like Jay's is the last
thing he needs an instrument rating for.

Flying pre planned instruments in the mountains in a single isn't the
issue I'm talking about. Pre planned IFR requires a mating of weather,
terrain, equipment, and experience in any decision making process. Any
missing link in this equation is a basic 101 for anyone with even
average intelligence.
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.
.......and 2. Any pilot flying extended VFR cross country on any regular
basis is well served to have an instrument rating even if the flight has
been planned VFR and a VFR flight plan is being used. Considering a VFR
pilot who likes extended long range cross country ; the additional
training and the rating just could come in handy some day.
Anyway....the value of instrument training even to a VFR pilot is well
known and accepted as being totally positive, and aside from those few
who like to find the occasional story about some idiot who used his
rating to kill himself as a reason for not getting the rating; getting
the rating is generally considered to be a good idea by the professional
flight instruction community.
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Flight Instructor/Aerobatics/Retired

"Newps" wrote in message
...


Dudley Henriques wrote:




or.......you could get the rating and NOT make stupid decisions and
become a much better pilot than you were before you got the rating,
which is exactly what happens to all but those who are accidents
waiting to happen anyway

Except the statistics say otherwise. Once you get in the 800-1000
hour range, especially if you do it fairly quickly, all VFR, an IFR
rating will add little to nothing to your flying skills other than
being able to be legal.

In my experience this isn't the case at all. In fact, it would be just
the reverse.
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Flight Instructor/Aerobatics/Retired

I don't agree with that at all.
Depending on how much long cross country flying you do (500+ miles), and
unless you wait for only the good weather, you should have learned
something about weather patterns in the areas of your travels.
This will aid your decision making (local knowledge).
Also, that same flight hour experience will have honed your flight
control manipulation skills to the point where your holding altitude and
heading are second nature instead of work.
There may be some habits that will have to be broken, but these are
procedual things which will be replaced with repetition and efficiency.
The instrument rating requires that you think and plan the flight in an
orderly sequence. At each stage of the flight you must be doing
something to prepare for the next.
Depending upon how high you are cruising and the destination elevation,
you need to begin thinking about the descent 60 nm out.
By the time you reach 30-40 nm from the destination, you should have
copied the destination weather, know what runway to use and what
approach to brief.
20 nm miles out, you should have all the radios set and run your pre
landing checklist.
10 nm miles out you will already be on the approach or vectored to the
final approach fix.
5 nm you will be stabilized on speed, altitude or rate of descent and
configured for landing.
If you only fly VFR, you may or may not already fly this way.
If you are scud running, you don't have a plan, you are making it up as
you go along, depending on what you see as you progress deeper into the
scud.


Newps wrote:
Except the statistics say otherwise. Once you get in the 800-1000 hour
range, especially if you do it fairly quickly, all VFR, an IFR rating
will add little to nothing to your flying skills other than being able
to be legal.

In article , kage wrote:
However, that does not change the fact that most cross country flights,
especially into high density areas, are safer and vastly easier on an
instrument flight plan. If you are too busy to provide the safety net that
the IR provides at least your wife should have one.

I would STRONGLY disagree with that. Having an IR, I've flown on both
filthy weather days and fine weather days on an instrument flight plan.
I gave up filing on VFR days simply because it was much easier to just
use flight following instead. Most of my flying in the United States is
in high density areas (Houston's class B), and I've flown a light plane
in 26 states, including a coast-to-coast trip.

The only time I find an IFR flight plan and IFR procedures truly useful
in severe clear weather is at night at unfamiliar airports/territor.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

Newps wrote:

Except the statistics say otherwise.

What statistics? Would love to see them.


--
Jack Allison
PP-ASEL, IA Student

"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth
with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there
you will always long to return"
- Leonardo Da Vinci

(Remove the obvious from address to reply via e-mail)