182 crash at GON

"Richard Kaplan" wrote
Or just lack of recent IMC experience. Or in fact if he EVER flew an
ILS to minimums at all in actual weather -- no IMC is required to get
an IFR rating.

Richard, for someone in the instrument training business, I would
think that you would not refer to an "IFR rating". That puts you
on a level with all of the amateurs with their "PPL"s and "CPL"s.
This note is not intended for those of you in other parts of the
world where you indeed do have a "pilot license".
A couple of other points, in certain types of airspace, 4 miles of
visability and no cloud would constitute IMC.

From the FAA Instrument Flying Handbook:

"Instrument meteorological conditions (IMC). Meteorological
conditions expressed in terms of visibility, distance
from cloud, and ceiling less than the minimums specified for
visual meteorological conditions, requiring operations to be
conducted under IFR."

Again from the Instrument Flying Handbook:

"Holding the Instrument Rating does not necessarily make you
a competent weather pilot. The rating certifies only that you
have complied with the minimum experience requirements,
that you can plan and execute a flight under IFR, that you
can execute basic instrument maneuvers, and that you have
shown acceptable skill and judgment in performing these activities.
Your Instrument Rating permits you to fly into
instrument weather conditions with no previous instrument
weather experience. Your Instrument Rating is issued on the
assumption that you have the good judgment to avoid
situations beyond your capabilities."

I consider "Weather Flying" to be an entirely separate subject from
the Instrument Training course which I teach to the PTS standards.
If I find that a students airplane is adequately equipped and Wx
conditions are satisfactory, I will provide "Weather Flying" instruction
if desired, AFTER the student has obtained an Instrument Rating.

As I have pointed out previously in the newsgroups, I, and every other
Naval Aviator that left Advanced Training in Kingsville, TX, were
launched off into the wild-not-so-blue younder, fully qualified to
takeoff, approach, and land in 100-1/4 conditions in "really high"
performance aircraft without so-much-as a single minute of "flying in
the clouds" time.

We just need better instructors and better training in the civilian
world. Better use of "real" simulators and doing away with "joyriding"
with a safety pilot and counting it as instruction.

My rant for the day...but back to the subject, if one ascribes to
professionalism, one must carefully weigh each and every word.

Bob Moore
ATP CFII
Teaching Instrument Flying since 1962