Ron did it!!

[Margy Natalie]

As of this morning Ron Natalie is an instrument rated pilot!! I guess
all those impromptu extra vacation days due to haze are over :-). This
is great!

Margy

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
Margy Natalie > wrote:

> As of this morning Ron Natalie is an instrument rated pilot!! I guess
> all those impromptu extra vacation days due to haze are over :-). This
> is great!

congrats!!

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[M[_1_]]

Congrats!

Now remember, IFR in a light plane can only really safely go in about
20% of the instrument weather mother nature can throw at you.

However, an instrument rated pilot can go in about 40% of the VFR
weather that would have been too risky for a VFR-only pilot to attempt,
due to the the risk of weather closing in being too great.

Therefore paradoxically, by getting an instrument rating you will find
yourself flying a lot more VFR than you had before :-)


Margy Natalie wrote:
> As of this morning Ron Natalie is an instrument rated pilot!! I guess
> all those impromptu extra vacation days due to haze are over :-). This
> is great!
>
> Margy

[Matt Barrow]

"Margy Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
> As of this morning Ron Natalie is an instrument rated pilot!! I guess all
> those impromptu extra vacation days due to haze are over :-). This is
> great!

Concrats to Ron. Of course, a lot of "excuses" have just vanished. :~)
--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO (MTJ)

[A Lieberma]

"M" > wrote in news:1159126950.376577.321490
@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com:

> Now remember, IFR in a light plane can only really safely go in about
> 20% of the instrument weather mother nature can throw at you.
>
> However, an instrument rated pilot can go in about 40% of the VFR
> weather that would have been too risky for a VFR-only pilot to attempt,
> due to the the risk of weather closing in being too great.

Really, sure hope you are saying the above "tongue in cheek"???? If
not, where are you getting your statistics as my own personal experiences
sure contradict what you say above???

Since getting my instrument ticket, I have only scrubbed two XC flights
due to thunderstorms in which one was this past friday from the long cold
front pushing through. Where I live, icing is a very rare encounter
(KMBO - Madison MS) though it does happen, just I have not had to scrub a
flight due to icing conditions. Can't speak for the northern folks.

Before my instrument ticket, I can't tell you how many XC flights I have
scrubbed due to benign IMC conditions. One was too many, but if I had to
guess it was between 7 and 10 flights.

> Therefore paradoxically, by getting an instrument rating you will find
> yourself flying a lot more VFR than you had before :-)

Nope, what happens is that you find yourself flying towards VFR
conditions, by getting on top of the cloud deck. The IA rating gives you
an expanded oppurtunity to getting to visual conditions rather then
having to scud run and the such.

Allen

[Emily[_1_]]

M wrote:
> Congrats!
>
> Now remember, IFR in a light plane can only really safely go in about
> 20% of the instrument weather mother nature can throw at you.
>
> However, an instrument rated pilot can go in about 40% of the VFR
> weather that would have been too risky for a VFR-only pilot to attempt,
> due to the the risk of weather closing in being too great.
>
> Therefore paradoxically, by getting an instrument rating you will find
> yourself flying a lot more VFR than you had before :-)

Uh, ok. That's not the case for me, nor most of the pilots I know.

Congratulations to Ron anyway. But...why isn't he posting all about the
ride?

[RK Henry]

On Sun, 24 Sep 2006 16:43:19 -0500, Emily >
wrote:

>M wrote:
>> Congrats!
>
>> Therefore paradoxically, by getting an instrument rating you will find
>> yourself flying a lot more VFR than you had before :-)
>
>Uh, ok. That's not the case for me, nor most of the pilots I know.

That may refer to the fact that most IFR flights are flown in VMC.
After a few minutes of climbing through IMC, you're in sunshine for
the rest of the flight. Considering that you'd be at home watching
television otherwise, you do more VFR flying.

RK Henry

[[email protected]]

Yea Ron! (and Margy for helping/waiting!)!

Jer/

In rec.aviation.student Margy Natalie > wrote:
> As of this morning Ron Natalie is an instrument rated pilot!! I guess
> all those impromptu extra vacation days due to haze are over :-). This
> is great!

> Margy


Best regards,

Jer/ "Flight instruction and mountain flying are my vocations!"
--
Jer/ (Slash) Eberhard, Mountain Flying Aviation, LTD, Ft Collins, CO
CELL 970 231-6325 EMAIL jer<at>frii.com http://users.frii.com/jer/
C-206 N9513G, CFII Airplane&Glider FAA-DEN Aviation Safety Counselor
CAP-CO Mission&Aircraft CheckPilot BM218 HAM N0FZD 240 Young Eagles!

[Margy Natalie]

M wrote:
> Congrats!
>
> Now remember, IFR in a light plane can only really safely go in about
> 20% of the instrument weather mother nature can throw at you.
>
> However, an instrument rated pilot can go in about 40% of the VFR
> weather that would have been too risky for a VFR-only pilot to attempt,
> due to the the risk of weather closing in being too great.
>
> Therefore paradoxically, by getting an instrument rating you will find
> yourself flying a lot more VFR than you had before :-)
>
>
> Margy Natalie wrote:
>
>>As of this morning Ron Natalie is an instrument rated pilot!! I guess
>>all those impromptu extra vacation days due to haze are over :-). This
>>is great!
>>
>>Margy
>
>
We tend to spend lots of time in the mountains of WVA (often when other
folks are plowing through VFR) not sure if the haze, clouds, mountains
and us will all meet at the same time. We tend to be on the fairly
conservative side although the XM weather makes some decisions easier
then they were before. Of course sometimes it paints up all sorts of
stuff we would never have imagined was out there before :-). We spent
an entire day at our home airport this summer waiting to go to OSH
because it was 700 broken and 1.5 miles. EVERY other airport within 20
miles was reporting CAVU. That really was not a good day!

Margy

[kontiki]

Please pass along my congratulations. That's a difficult rating but well
worth the effort. Along with the honor is also the responsiblity of maintaining
currency and expanding experience and competency but the reward is more
flying opportunities than before.

[kontiki]

M wrote:

> Now remember, IFR in a light plane can only really safely go in about
> 20% of the instrument weather mother nature can throw at you.

Where do you get that fact? Except for icing and altitudes requiring OX
there isn't anything particularly more limiting about light planes over
heavy planes.

[Dudley Henriques[_1_]]

Congrats Margy! Pass on a well done from me as well.
Dudley Henriques

"Margy Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
> As of this morning Ron Natalie is an instrument rated pilot!! I guess all
> those impromptu extra vacation days due to haze are over :-). This is
> great!
>
> Margy

[John Gaquin]

"Margy Natalie" > wrote in message news:4516cb8d$0

> As of this morning Ron Natalie is an instrument rated pilot!!

Well done!

[Margy Natalie]

Emily wrote:
> M wrote:
>
>> Congrats!
>>
>> Now remember, IFR in a light plane can only really safely go in about
>> 20% of the instrument weather mother nature can throw at you.
>>
>> However, an instrument rated pilot can go in about 40% of the VFR
>> weather that would have been too risky for a VFR-only pilot to attempt,
>> due to the the risk of weather closing in being too great.
>>
>> Therefore paradoxically, by getting an instrument rating you will find
>> yourself flying a lot more VFR than you had before :-)
>
>
> Uh, ok. That's not the case for me, nor most of the pilots I know.
>
> Congratulations to Ron anyway. But...why isn't he posting all about the
> ride?
Well, he woke up at 5 to go get the plane, fly it over to the examiner
.....

He got home about 1, we went to DC for a late lunch (double lobster
special) to celebrate, came home about 6 and he's taking a nap :-).
Probably shouldn't have scheduled a late, black-tie event the night
before an early checkride ;-).

Margy

[Peter R.]

Margy Natalie > wrote:

> As of this morning Ron Natalie is an instrument rated pilot!! I guess
> all those impromptu extra vacation days due to haze are over :-). This
> is great!

Excellent news. Now he will have to show up in rec.aviation.ifr.

--
Peter

[Roger (K8RI)]

On Sun, 24 Sep 2006 14:24:07 -0400, Margy Natalie >
wrote:

>As of this morning Ron Natalie is an instrument rated pilot!! I guess
>all those impromptu extra vacation days due to haze are over :-). This
>is great!
>

My congratulations!

Now, when is the first solo IMC flight?


>Margy
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Peter Duniho]

"Margy Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
> As of this morning Ron Natalie is an instrument rated pilot!! I guess all
> those impromptu extra vacation days due to haze are over :-). This is
> great!

Congratulations Ron!

[Jose[_1_]]

Congratulations to Ron! Now the trick is to keep on top of it. :)

Jose
--
"Never trust anything that can think for itself, if you can't see where
it keeps its brain." (chapter 10 of book 3 - Harry Potter).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Margy Natalie]

Peter R. wrote:
> Margy Natalie > wrote:
>
>
>>As of this morning Ron Natalie is an instrument rated pilot!! I guess
>>all those impromptu extra vacation days due to haze are over :-). This
>>is great!
>
>
> Excellent news. Now he will have to show up in rec.aviation.ifr.
>
I think he's been lurking there for years.

Margy

[Margy Natalie]

Roger (K8RI) wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Sep 2006 14:24:07 -0400, Margy Natalie >
> wrote:
>
>
>>As of this morning Ron Natalie is an instrument rated pilot!! I guess
>>all those impromptu extra vacation days due to haze are over :-). This
>>is great!
>>
>
>
> My congratulations!
>
> Now, when is the first solo IMC flight?
>
>
>
>>Margy
>
> Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
> (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
> www.rogerhalstead.com
He almost never gets to fly solo :-). He rarely gets to fly both ways,
we usually split the trips unless one of us is sick. Now I guess I
should fly all the time, in case it's IFR on the way back so he gets
that leg ... Nah, I don't think I can manage to make that even close to
believable :-).

Margy

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
Margy Natalie > wrote:

> Now I guess I
> should fly all the time, in case it's IFR on the way back so he gets
> that leg ... Nah, I don't think I can manage to make that even close to
> believable :-).

You fly first leg - then he flies the return trip under the hood for practice.

<evil grin>

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[Emily[_1_]]

Bob Noel wrote:
> In article >,
> Margy Natalie > wrote:
>
>> Now I guess I
>> should fly all the time, in case it's IFR on the way back so he gets
>> that leg ... Nah, I don't think I can manage to make that even close to
>> believable :-).
>
> You fly first leg - then he flies the return trip under the hood for practice.
>
> <evil grin>
>
Minus a DG and AI.....

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
Emily > wrote:

> >> Now I guess I
> >> should fly all the time, in case it's IFR on the way back so he gets
> >> that leg ... Nah, I don't think I can manage to make that even close to
> >> believable :-).
> >
> > You fly first leg - then he flies the return trip under the hood for
> > practice.
> >
> > <evil grin>
> >
> Minus a DG and AI.....

ok, take away the GPS too. :-)

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[Emily[_1_]]

Bob Noel wrote:
> In article >,
> Emily > wrote:
>
>>>> Now I guess I
>>>> should fly all the time, in case it's IFR on the way back so he gets
>>>> that leg ... Nah, I don't think I can manage to make that even close to
>>>> believable :-).
>>> You fly first leg - then he flies the return trip under the hood for
>>> practice.
>>>
>>> <evil grin>
>>>
>> Minus a DG and AI.....
>
> ok, take away the GPS too. :-)
>
Well, of course. <g>

I think the first 50 hours after I got my instrument were spent flying
minus most of my instruments. I'd kill myself doing that now.

[karl gruber[_1_]]

Congratulations.................it's about time!!!!!

Karl
"Curator"


"Margy Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
> As of this morning Ron Natalie is an instrument rated pilot!! I guess all
> those impromptu extra vacation days due to haze are over :-). This is
> great!
>
> Margy

[Jack Allison[_1_]]

And he's not posting about it? What's up with that? :-)

Very cool. The instrument rating is quite a challenge.


--
Jack Allison
PP-ASEL-Instrument Airplane

"To become a Jedi knight, you must master a single force. To become
a private pilot you must strive to master four of them"
- Rod Machado

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

[[email protected]]

On 24-Sep-2006, "M" > wrote:

> Now remember, IFR in a light plane can only really safely go in about
> 20% of the instrument weather mother nature can throw at you.

Where, prey tell, does THAT number come from? Grossly pessimistic IMHO.

>
> However, an instrument rated pilot can go in about 40% of the VFR
> weather that would have been too risky for a VFR-only pilot to attempt,
> due to the the risk of weather closing in being too great.

Except in the case of thunderstorms (below which weather might be
technically VFR), virtually any VFR weather would be safe for IFR
operations. The only exception that comes to mind would be in cases where
cloud bases are below MEA but above VFR minimums and there is risk of icing
in the clouds at MEA or below.

>
> Therefore paradoxically, by getting an instrument rating you will find
> yourself flying a lot more VFR than you had before :-)

I hope not! if it's marginal VFR, you are probably MUCH safer flying IFR.



-Elliott Drucker

[Cecil Chapman]

Pass the congrats along! That is quite an accomplishment as the I.R. is
quite a challenge on so many levels!

Extra helping of celebration cake for Ron!

--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil E. Chapman
CFI-A, CP-ASEL-IA

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"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 -
"Margy Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
> As of this morning Ron Natalie is an instrument rated pilot!! I guess all
> those impromptu extra vacation days due to haze are over :-). This is
> great!
>
> Margy
>

[Dave S]

Congrats Ron...

Jay... yer next!! Even if you never file... its good training and
experience..

Dave


Margy Natalie wrote:
> As of this morning Ron Natalie is an instrument rated pilot!! I guess
> all those impromptu extra vacation days due to haze are over :-). This
> is great!
>
> Margy

[Ron Natalie]

kontiki wrote:
> M wrote:
>
>> Now remember, IFR in a light plane can only really safely go in about
>> 20% of the instrument weather mother nature can throw at you.
>
> Where do you get that fact? Except for icing and altitudes requiring OX
> there isn't anything particularly more limiting about light planes over
> heavy planes.
>

I have oxygen. I don't however have a turbocharger so I'm really
practically low side of the reg-required oxygen altitudes. Margy
and I believe in liberal use of O2 (especially now that we have
the system in the plane).

[Dan Luke]

"Margy Natalie" wrote:

> As of this morning Ron Natalie is an instrument rated pilot!!

Attaboy, Ron!

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[Ron Natalie]

Margy Natalie wrote:
> As of this morning Ron Natalie is an instrument rated pilot!! I guess
> all those impromptu extra vacation days due to haze are over :-). This
> is great!
>
Ok, for those of you that have asked. Here are the details. As Margy
said we had a Knights of the Vine Black Tie wine tasting dinner the
night before the ride so I conked out when I got back from our
celebratory lunch.

Most of you know I've been flying for 25+ years and hanging out here
and in Oshkosh. Since we've bought the Navion I've racked up hundreds
of hours of cross-country time. I've read extensively on just about
every aspect of aviation and hung out in aviation forums since the
old CompuServe AVSIG and this group was "net.aviation." I have been
through the instrument ground school (formally) and then also did the
King course. I've taken and let lapse the instrument written in the
past. I've started instrument training a couple of times before but
never proceeded much over basic aircraft control before time issues
got in the way.

Well finally ENOUGH. I called up Professional Instrument Courses and
enrolled in one of the 10-day courses. I then got out my copy of the
Gleim software and started refreshing for the written. PIC sent me a
list of things to make sure I had (FAR/AIM, Plates, etc...) in advance.
They also sent me a copy of Peter Dogan's book which I already had but
it was revised over the one I had to be in the "GPS era."

About one week out the instructor, Phil Maywald, calls and we discuss
our initial arrangments. The sticking point is that my plane is an
hour away from my house and that's a bit much to drive to switch between
their simulator and the plane. One option is to move the plane up to
Dulles (near my house) and Margy makes a deal with the FBO to do that.
However, we decide we'll just do the first day in my hangar at Culpeper
and will meet there Friday morning at 8AM. He also asks if I have the
GNS480 simulator available on a PC and I said I did have it on my
laptop and he said we'd use that as well.

T-2: Wednesday I head over to Manassas Aviation and take my written, 93%.

Day 1, Friday morning, I get to Culpeper early with a table in my truck
and set it up in the hangar before going over to the FBO to meet Phil.
We start by going over the course workbook/syllabus. There are eight
or so units. Each night I'll read one and do the exercises and then
we'll go over them the next day. We then uncrate the simulator, an
old ATC 610. This thing is sort of a historic piece but it works fine
for what we are going to use it for. The first order of business is
to learn that the "Primary/Supporting" business is not the PIC way.
Instead we learn Command and Performance. This makes a lot of sense.
We also work through power and attitude settings for several phases
of flight (Climb, Enroute, Enroute Descent, Approach Level, Approach
Descent) and fill out a little "cheat card." After practicing this
for a few minutes we head over to lunch. After lunch, we pull the
plane out and after some initial hood work (turns to headings etc)
we work out the same numbers for my airplane. The cheat card is now
stuck in my side wall. I'm wrung out after only about 2 hours of
flying so we call it an evening.

Day 2: No flying scheduled today all ground school/simulator work.
Phil brings the simulator over to my house. We pretty much work
through the basic instrument approach stuff, procedure turns, on
the simulator. We also do the same thing "mashing buttons," as
Phil likes to say, on the GNS480 simulator. I'm quite impressed
how well Phil knows the 480.

Day 3: More ground school. Do holds and DME arcs on the simulator
and the 480. Then fly some full approaches of various sorts on
both devices. Phil at this point says I'm perhaps the only
student he has had that he thought he was holding back because
most of the ground school "book work" I had wired already. I told
him that his pacing seemed fine to me and that I was getting new
info interspersed with stuff I knew already. Still we end up a
day ahead of schedule.

Day 4: Back to the airport. At this point he feels we probably
will not need the simulator anymore (although he has it with him
we do not unpack it from the crate). We head off towards Louisa
and do some basic airwork and start flying approaches. My head
is swimming, not so much with the aircraft handling, but just in
the shear load of figuring out what is going on. Phil prompts
me with hints. We come back for lunch and go out in the
afternoon for some more practice. Phil asks where I want to go
on my XC and I say Statesville, NC (since that is going to be a
regular flight for Margy and me). He says to plan a flight for
homework using the Airways going down to the ILS IAF there and
then do Direct to ROA and then back to CJR.

Day 5: More approaches. Things are getting more straight forward
for me now. Partial panel work both on approaches and unusual
attitudes. Steep turns (not my forte). Afterwards we go over
my XC planning.

Day 6: IFR cross country. Call for the weather and file the plan in
Phil's name. Fire up and deal with the balky GCO to get our clearance.
The controller really needs to learn how to say something every few
seconds if he's going to stop talking because the GCO seems to hang up
every time he stops talking for more than about 10 seconds. After
two calls we get our ammended clearance (the first four or five fixes
are completely different from what was filed). I key these in to the
480 (I have to tell you the 480 is distinctly set up for this unlike
the other Garmin units). Again the GCO proves balky so being severe
clear, we launch VFR planning to hold at our first fix until we can
get the IFR clearance over the radio. Potomac answers soon enough
and gives us a new routing. Oddly, it's exactly the one I originally
filed. I don't understand the ATC computers.

Now on the way down to SVH I've got the thing on autopilot. They
let us go direct to the IAF for the approach and with more button
mashing I send the autopilot there. Phil doesn't tell me otherwise
so on the procedure turn inbound I couple up the autopilot and let
it capture the LOC and the GS. Phil tells me to take the goggles
off and hover over the red button until he tells me to. We let
it fly well over the threshold before I punch the button and land.
We have lunch and then fly over to ROA. Phil says that it was
nice and smooth at SVH with the autopilot, but now it's time to
hand fly it (and it's gusty). After several approaches there
we head over to Culpeper expecting to fly the GPS B approach which
ATC has no knolwedge of. We just cancel IFR and fly it ourselves.


Day 7: IFR finish up. Fly DME arcs, partial panel stuff, more
steep turns. My Checkride is scheduled for Sunday morning at
Shenandoah so we head over there to do approaches and do all
three they have (including flying the ILS as a LOC only).
When we stop for lunch we run into the examiner. He asks
what I have for avionics (GPS, no ADF) and says fine we'll
do the ILS, LOC, and GPS approaches all there and the GPS
is the one we'll do partial panel. I ask if he wants me to
plan a flight in advance and he says to do one to Norfolk.
I ask his weight for the W&B. After lunch more approaches
and steep turns. My performance is not as good as the morning.
Phil says in general I've been fading in the afternoon. He
had contemplated moving my Checkride to Saturday but the
examiner is not available before 1PM, so we'll just leave it
Sunday morning.

Day 8: Simulated IFR checkride day. We do the flying part
first. Go over to SHD. Take off, fly the departure procedure
(which involves holding at the compass locator). Fly all the
approaches, do partial panel work and steep turns. All fine,
head back to CJR. Perhaps I can do this. We spend the
afternoon working on the application, and cranking through
a simulated oral. Phil signs me off for my checkride. After
putting the plane away I noticed the nose gear looks a little
soft and I had put my gauge to it and it was low. I make a
note to pump it up later. When I get back after the oral,
the thing is flatter than a pancake. Fortunately Kevin Woodside
is still there and finds the valve core is bad (evidentally my
putting the guage to it was the last straw) and we fix that.

Day 9: Day off.. I head over to CJR for the prupose of:
1. making sure the tire is still round, 2. clean off the
faces of the GPS and MX20. Several days of pointing
at things and button mashing has left it pretty smudged
up. Bright sun on the smudges makes it hard to read.
Phil had told me not to do any studying the night before
but to read a book he gives me: Forsyth's The Shepard
(it's short). On the fly leaves all Phil's former
students have left a short note and signed it. I do the
same.

Try to nap a little in the afternoon knowing we are
going to dinner later. Check the weather which looks
abysmal.

Day 10: Up at 5:30. The weather doesn't look too bad
other than windy. Head out to the airport. Meet Phil.
Fly over to SHD flying the GPS approach in. We're there
early but a minute or two after 9, the examiner rolls
in. He shows up and we head off over to an office to
do the oral. After checking the application and the fee
we start. The oral pretty much goes as Phil has briefed
it.

"You've got your instrument ticket...what do you need to
go flying IFR today". Go over certificates, currency,
etc... Then talk about the aircraft, show him the
inspections required in the logs. Then talk about
the flight plan. Alternate requirements, what are
alternate minimums, how do I find them, what are the
minimums if we actually go there. Talk about radio
failure rules. Talk about obstacle DP's.

We go over and he asks me to check the weather on the
terminal in the FBO.. I extract answers to the questions
he asks. He then tells me to go show him a preflight
and I get questions on instruments, pitot/static failure
etc. We hop in and fire up. He says we'll fly out
via the departure procedure and do the hold at the OM
as published which is also the IAF for the ILS approach.
We'll go from there and to the ILS as LOC. Do the missed
and go do some airwork on the way to the GPS approach,
go missed from there and turn around and do the ILS.

My entry to the hold isn't wrong but it's real sloppy
as I do not intiially compensate for the 40 knot winds.
I do better on the second outbound leg. He clears
me for the approach. I tell him I'm going to extend
the outbound time and the outbound procedure turn time (both of
which are heading into the wind) because of the wind and
that there will be no problem staying with 10NM. He
approves. Fly the LOC down to the MDA but well before
the MAP he vectors me off to the side of the field
and then tells me to intercept some radial off the
MOL VOR.

He then tells me to continue flying but close my
eyes. He gives me some turns and such with my eyes
closed and then to open up and recover. This is
really spooky but I suppose very realistic spatial
disorientation practice. The last one of these
is quite extended and I'm beginning to get spooked
about what the aircraft might be doing before he
lets me recover. Of course during this time the
stickies have come out and we're partial panel.
He clears me direct to the GPS IAF and approach.
He suggests I can try this with the autopilot and
we do that but it's so gusty that the thing is
S turning all over the place trying to keep up and
he says never mind, hand fly it. I do this
reasonably. GPS makes partial panel approaches
almost a non-event.

On the missed from that approach he gives me vectors
to final on the ILS. This I fly fine down to near
the DH where he tells me to pull off the goggles,
continue to the DH but then climb back up and circle
to the other runway (since we're still got a hefty
tail wind). Land, taxi in. Checkride over.

Phil grabs pictures of me shaking the examiners hand
in front of the plane. We go in and I trade in my
old certificate for a handwritten one that adds
Instrument Airplane to it.

Phil asks if he can fly the Navion back to Culpeper
and of course I have no complaints.

[Jay Honeck]

> On the missed from that approach he gives me vectors
> to final on the ILS. This I fly fine down to near
> the DH where he tells me to pull off the goggles,
> continue to the DH but then climb back up and circle
> to the other runway (since we're still got a hefty
> tail wind). Land, taxi in. Checkride over.

Great story, Ron -- and great job! Congratulations!

Two questions:

1. How much?
2. How in the heck do you get that much time away from work?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Peter R.]

Ron Natalie > wrote:

> Ok, for those of you that have asked. Here are the details.
<snip>

See you on the airways!

--
Peter

[Mark Hansen]

On 09/25/06 04:58, Ron Natalie wrote:
> Margy Natalie wrote:
>> As of this morning Ron Natalie is an instrument rated pilot!! I guess
>> all those impromptu extra vacation days due to haze are over :-). This
>> is great!
>>
> Ok, for those of you that have asked. Here are the details. As Margy
> said we had a Knights of the Vine Black Tie wine tasting dinner the
> night before the ride so I conked out when I got back from our
> celebratory lunch.

[ snip ]

Great story, Ron!
Congratulations on the IR and the new writing on the certificate.

--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

[Michael Houghton]

Howdy!

In article >,
Margy Natalie > wrote:
>As of this morning Ron Natalie is an instrument rated pilot!! I guess
>all those impromptu extra vacation days due to haze are over :-). This
>is great!
>
Well, it's about time! :)

It's been a few years since that cookout at your place where
you mentioned nagging him...

Congratulations Ron!

yours,
Michael


--
Michael and MJ Houghton | Herveus d'Ormonde and Megan O'Donnelly
| White Wolf and the Phoenix narrowwares
Bowie, MD, USA | http://whitewolfandphoenix.com
Proud member of the SCA Internet Whitewash Squad

[Ron Natalie]

Jay Honeck wrote:

> 1. How much?

About $5000.

> 2. How in the heck do you get that much time away from work?
>

I got tons of vacation time laid in.

[Michael[_1_]]

A Lieberma wrote:
> Really, sure hope you are saying the above "tongue in cheek"????

I think what he says is about right - or used to be, anyway, before
things like XM cockpit weather became available. Geography is a factor
as well.

> Since getting my instrument ticket, I have only scrubbed two XC flights
> due to thunderstorms

I think in the last five years I've scrubbed one - an Angel Flight that
would have required me to fly directly into the center of tropical
storm Charlie. I offered to buy my patient an airline ticket, but it
turned out that the airlines weren't flying either. Of course I have a
stormscope and excellent range (if I slow down I can cover 800+ nm).

Before I owned my current airplane, I scrubbed a lot of flights. The
range was not much more than 300 nm, and I had no weather avoidance
capability. The airplane makes a big difference.

Without cockpit weather, IMC in convective conditions is a fool's game
- and if you won't fly IMC, there's not much point in IFR (other than
dealing with the increasingly insane airspace these days). In just the
past few years, cockpit weather went from being something generally
available only in the high end airplanes (never have seen a Skyhawk
with a stormscope, though nothing prevents it) and often of
questionable utility (the older spherics units were very
installation-dependent and often worked poorly), to being the province
of technogeeks willing to carry laptops or PDA's in the cockpit, and
finally to a well-conceived integrated system like the Garmin 396. The
latter has made IMC flying in convective weather accessible to the
average pilot of a low end single, but it is a new thing.

> Where I live, icing is a very rare encounter
> (KMBO - Madison MS) though it does happen, just I have not had to scrub a
> flight due to icing conditions. Can't speak for the northern folks.

I'm based out of Houston, so icing is even rarer for me - but when I
travel up north, it's an issue. I've seen a lot of people taking
chances with it. Personally, if I have the choice of flying low VFR
(say making the entire flight at 800-1200 ft) or going IFR in clouds
with the potential for icing, I'll choose low VFR every time.

Once I made a winter flight from Houston to New York, and it was IFR.
I made it a point to stay below the freezing level, with a way to bail
out if I couldn't stay above MIA and below the ice. Well, I made it -
but while I never doubted my ability escape the ice (I always had an
out) I wasn't sure I would make my destination until I was about 50
miles out. It was a 600+ nm leg. I could have been forced to land
short at any time. And with 300+ hp, I have some ability to deal with
a little ice. In my old 150 hp plane, I wouldn't have tried it.

> Before my instrument ticket, I can't tell you how many XC flights I have
> scrubbed due to benign IMC conditions.

Benign IMC - or just low VFR? These days, I see a lot of VFR pilots
who won't fly XC at 1000 AGL, never mind lower. It's a skill set, to
be sure, and not something to tackle if you don't know how, but I think
in the average Skyhawk-class airplane, it's often the safer, quicker,
more sensible option than filing IFR.

The difference is that you can take a training course in how to fly IFR
at the local flight school (or, better yet, the way Ron did it - with
PIC, which is expensive but worth it because it uses only experienced
instructors) but instruction in flying low VFR is rarely available
(never at the local flight school) and is generally reviled as scud
running.

In my experience, over 80% of the weather that is persistent (lasting
more than a few hours) actual IMC (ceilings consistently below 1000 ft
and/or visibilities consistently below 3 miles - and even some of that
weather can legally be flown VFR, with safety no worse than flying it
IFR in the average light single) is associated with either icing or
thunderstorms. Of course that can vary geographically.

The instrument rating is, more than anything, a tool for making
schedules more consistent. It is not a timesaver. I have well over
100 hours actual IMC, and I still have to say that the total time I
have saved in eliminated delays for weather is less than the time I
spent getting the rating and staying current.

Michael

[Jose[_1_]]

> These days, I see a lot of VFR pilots
> who won't fly XC at 1000 AGL, never mind lower. It's a skill set, to
> be sure, and not something to tackle if you don't know how...

It's my favorite altitude. However, there are a lot more towers to
dodge nowadays. Twenty years ago there were virtually no cell towers to
worry about.

Jose
--
"Never trust anything that can think for itself, if you can't see where
it keeps its brain." (chapter 10 of book 3 - Harry Potter).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Roger (K8RI)]

On Sun, 24 Sep 2006 21:25:55 -0400, Margy Natalie >
wrote:

>Roger (K8RI) wrote:
>> On Sun, 24 Sep 2006 14:24:07 -0400, Margy Natalie >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>As of this morning Ron Natalie is an instrument rated pilot!! I guess
>>>all those impromptu extra vacation days due to haze are over :-). This
>>>is great!
>>>
>>
>>
>> My congratulations!
>>
>> Now, when is the first solo IMC flight?
>>
>>
>>
>>>Margy
>>
>> Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
>> (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
>> www.rogerhalstead.com
>He almost never gets to fly solo :-). He rarely gets to fly both ways,
>we usually split the trips unless one of us is sick. Now I guess I
>should fly all the time, in case it's IFR on the way back so he gets
>that leg ... Nah, I don't think I can manage to make that even close to
>believable :-).

It sounds like a good argument to me.
The day I picked up the Deb, a final check with FSS predicted only a
small area of isolated *small* cumulus. We did go IFR from here to
Muncie and could have easily done it VFR a bit lower. However on the
way back those little things were growing up *fast* and my first real
flight in the Deb was over an hour actual getting the snot beat out of
me (along with an instructor). So you never know. I think you better
persevere on that line of reasoning. After all it will be true on
occasion and then you can happily say...see... I told you so! <:-))
>
>Margy
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Roger (K8RI)]

On Sun, 24 Sep 2006 21:35:12 -0700, Jack Allison
> wrote:

>And he's not posting about it? What's up with that? :-)

I wonder how much he had to bribe Margy to make it look like he wasn't
bragging? <:-))

>
>Very cool. The instrument rating is quite a challenge.
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Ron Natalie]

Jose wrote:

> It's my favorite altitude. However, there are a lot more towers to
> dodge nowadays. Twenty years ago there were virtually no cell towers to
> worry about.
>
Cell towers rarely top 200', most are much less.

[Jose[_1_]]

> Cell towers rarely top 200', most are much less.

200' is a significant part of what would have been a 500' clearance.

Jose
--
"Never trust anything that can think for itself, if you can't see where
it keeps its brain." (chapter 10 of book 3 - Harry Potter).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Margy Natalie]

Bob Noel wrote:
> In article >,
> Margy Natalie > wrote:
>
>
>> Now I guess I
>>should fly all the time, in case it's IFR on the way back so he gets
>>that leg ... Nah, I don't think I can manage to make that even close to
>>believable :-).
>
>
> You fly first leg - then he flies the return trip under the hood for practice.
>
> <evil grin>
>
That's actually a good idea. That way I can learn more of the
instrument stuff and he keeps current.

Margy

[Margy Natalie]

Bob Noel wrote:
> In article >,
> Emily > wrote:
>
>
>>>> Now I guess I
>>>>should fly all the time, in case it's IFR on the way back so he gets
>>>>that leg ... Nah, I don't think I can manage to make that even close to
>>>>believable :-).
>>>
>>>You fly first leg - then he flies the return trip under the hood for
>>>practice.
>>>
>>><evil grin>
>>>
>>Minus a DG and AI.....
>
>
> ok, take away the GPS too. :-)
>
I bet George wouldn't like that (George is our autopilot).

Margy

[Margy Natalie]

Michael Houghton wrote:
> Howdy!
>
> In article >,
> Margy Natalie > wrote:
>
>>As of this morning Ron Natalie is an instrument rated pilot!! I guess
>>all those impromptu extra vacation days due to haze are over :-). This
>>is great!
>>
>
> Well, it's about time! :)
>
> It's been a few years since that cookout at your place where
> you mentioned nagging him...
>
> Congratulations Ron!
>
> yours,
> Michael
>
>
I keep meaning to have another cookout, but the summer just flew by ...,
Maybe a cook in!

Margy

[Margy Natalie]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>>On the missed from that approach he gives me vectors
>>to final on the ILS. This I fly fine down to near
>>the DH where he tells me to pull off the goggles,
>>continue to the DH but then climb back up and circle
>>to the other runway (since we're still got a hefty
>>tail wind). Land, taxi in. Checkride over.
>
>
> Great story, Ron -- and great job! Congratulations!
>
> Two questions:
>
> 1. How much?
> 2. How in the heck do you get that much time away from work?

How do you get all of OSH away from work? You MAKE the time. I'm glad
he did. So Jay, if RON can do it you must be next. Damned, I have to
find something new to pick on Ron for ;-)

Margy
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
Margy Natalie > wrote:

> > ok, take away the GPS too. :-)
> >
> I bet George wouldn't like that (George is our autopilot).

It's hardly useful practice to fly under the hood with the a/p on. sheesh.



:-)

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[Margy Natalie]

Bob Noel wrote:
> In article >,
> Margy Natalie > wrote:
>
>
>>>ok, take away the GPS too. :-)
>>>
>>
>>I bet George wouldn't like that (George is our autopilot).
>
>
> It's hardly useful practice to fly under the hood with the a/p on. sheesh.
>
>
>
> :-)
>
I know, I wasn't thinking of both at the same time.

Margy

[Jay Honeck]

> How do you get all of OSH away from work? You MAKE the time.

True, but OSH isn't optional. Not after 24 years.

And our absence routinely pushes our small staff to the breaking point,
and occasionally beyond. (We lost our night manager this year, after
OSH '06. Being gone 8 days was apparently too much for him...)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jack Allison[_1_]]

Congratulations Ron! Nice writeup. Sounds like a very intense 10 days.


--
Jack Allison
PP-ASEL-Instrument Airplane

"To become a Jedi knight, you must master a single force. To become
a private pilot you must strive to master four of them"
- Rod Machado

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

[Jack Allison[_1_]]

Well, yeah but think of the fun you could have saying things like "Gee
Ron, it only took me 12 (13, whatever...but less than 25) years of
flying before I got my instrument rating. :-)


--
Jack Allison
PP-ASEL-Instrument Airplane

"To become a Jedi knight, you must master a single force. To become
a private pilot you must strive to master four of them"
- Rod Machado

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

[Jay Beckman]

Congrats Ron,

Great write up.

Enjoy the new privaledges...

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ

[B A R R Y[_1_]]

Ron Natalie wrote:
>
> Cell towers rarely top 200', most are much less.

And most new ones seem to be shorter than typical old ones, as "cells"
get smaller and smaller.

[Dan Luke]

"Bob Noel" wrote:

>
>> > ok, take away the GPS too. :-)
>> >
>> I bet George wouldn't like that (George is our autopilot).
>
> It's hardly useful practice to fly under the hood with the a/p on.
> sheesh.

Ok, why?

I use the AP when flying IAPs for real; why shouldn't I practice with it?

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[B A R R Y[_1_]]

Dan Luke wrote:
> "Bob Noel" wrote:
>
>>>>
>>> I bet George wouldn't like that (George is our autopilot).
>> It's hardly useful practice to fly under the hood with the a/p on.
>> sheesh.
>
> Ok, why?
>
> I use the AP when flying IAPs for real; why shouldn't I practice with it?


I'd like to hear the answer, as well.

[Ron Natalie]

Bob Noel wrote:
> In article >,
> Margy Natalie > wrote:
>
>>> ok, take away the GPS too. :-)
>>>
>> I bet George wouldn't like that (George is our autopilot).
>
> It's hardly useful practice to fly under the hood with the a/p on. sheesh.
>
>
>
I thought the suggestion of doing my partial panel approach on the
checkride with the autopilot was cheating too, but the examiner
suggested it.

[Ron Natalie]

Roger (K8RI) wrote:

> Yah, but that means you could brag that you were able to get the
> rating in about half the time it took him.<:-))
>
>
Not only can she probably do it in fewer years, but I suspect with
a little practice on the 480 in advance, she could probably do it
in fewer instructor days. While I had a reasonable amount of
button mashing experience with the 480 for VFR purposes and I had
managed to get it in approach mode for the one certification
flight test, I really didn't have much experience with it.

[[email protected]]

: > Congrats!
: >
: > Now remember, IFR in a light plane can only really safely go in about
: > 20% of the instrument weather mother nature can throw at you.
: >
: > However, an instrument rated pilot can go in about 40% of the VFR
: > weather that would have been too risky for a VFR-only pilot to attempt,
: > due to the the risk of weather closing in being too great.
: >
: > Therefore paradoxically, by getting an instrument rating you will find
: > yourself flying a lot more VFR than you had before :-)

: Uh, ok. That's not the case for me, nor most of the pilots I know.

I can say that it *is* the case for me. Being in Virginia with most
cross-country flights to the north or northwest, actually flying IFR in a
non-high-performance piston-pounder is often less safe than VFR. Between the
convective activity in the summer, and the icing in the 6000' MEA's over West
Virginia, *filing* is often a fool's game. Flying 1500' AGL VFR is safer than getting
stuck in VMC on top of an icing layer IMO.

I don't know if I quite agree with your 20% of instrument weather number or
40% of the VFR weather. I'd probably double those numbers so long as you stay
current. Of course... there are some that say that flying IMC in a single is unsafe
at any speed.

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA *
* Electrical Engineering *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

[M[_1_]]

My number are just a swag. However my point is, an instrument rating
in a light plane does a lot more to give you *options* flying VFR than
to give you the ability to fly real, hard-core IFR.

A lot of IFR flights people done in light planes, if they really look
back and think about it, can be done VFR. However a VFR pilot
shouldn't really attempt those flights because there're great chances
of running out of options. An instrument pilot can however fly in
really crummy VFR weather while still have options. When icing
condition, TS, or terrain forcing MEA to be be well over 10k like what
we have out west, flying VFR while keeping the options of getting a
clearance is often the safest way of doing it.

Not to mention the fuel and time savings in flying VFR in many cases.

> I don't know if I quite agree with your 20% of instrument weather number or
> 40% of the VFR weather. I'd probably double those numbers so long as you stay
> current. Of course... there are some that say that flying IMC in a single is unsafe
> at any speed.
>

[Ron Natalie]

M wrote:
> An instrument pilot can however fly in
> really crummy VFR weather while still have options.

This is precisely the reason for me getting the rating. I can't
tell you the number of times we have stopped a flight where weather
was fine at our destination but deteriorating visibility or cloud
layers made VFR flight (especially accross the Appalachians) unsafe
in our opinion.

[Robert A. Barker]

"Margy Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
> As of this morning Ron Natalie is an instrument rated pilot!! I guess all
> those impromptu extra vacation days due to haze are over :-). This is
> great!
>
> Margy

My heartiest congrats to Ron for a job well done!!!!!

Bob Barker N8749S

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
B A R R Y > wrote:

> >>> I bet George wouldn't like that (George is our autopilot).
> >> It's hardly useful practice to fly under the hood with the a/p on.
> >> sheesh.
> >
> > Ok, why?
> >
> > I use the AP when flying IAPs for real; why shouldn't I practice with it?
>
> I'd like to hear the answer, as well.

well, I meant it as an evil way to torture someone under the hood.
Of course we should train as we fly and fly as we train. And of
course we don't only practice under the hood with the a/p on
(assuming we are discussing small aircraft where hand-flying
would be considered normal)

Is that clearer?

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
Ron Natalie > wrote:

> >>> ok, take away the GPS too. :-)
> >>>
> >> I bet George wouldn't like that (George is our autopilot).
> >
> > It's hardly useful practice to fly under the hood with the a/p on. sheesh.
> >
> >
> I thought the suggestion of doing my partial panel approach on the
> checkride with the autopilot was cheating too, but the examiner
> suggested it.

On the checkride, the examiner can suggest just about anything,
if you know what I mean. ;-)

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[Margy Natalie]

Jack Allison wrote:
> Well, yeah but think of the fun you could have saying things like "Gee
> Ron, it only took me 12 (13, whatever...but less than 25) years of
> flying before I got my instrument rating. :-)
>
>
Well, if truth be told, I got my masters, he got the intrument rating,
he bought the "Stupid Boat", I've got my eye on a low, slow, open, amphib.

Margy

[B A R R Y[_1_]]

Bob Noel wrote:
>
> Is that clearer?
>

Thanks!

I'm an instrument student who thought he might be missing something. <G>

[Jim Burns[_1_]]

Thanks!
And a big congrats! Nice job.
Jim