Is an IFR flight more or less work?

[Mxsmanic]

I think someone here said that you really need a copilot when you fly
IFR. If so, what duties does the copilot have? I'd think that IFR
would be no more work than VFR, especially since ATC is helping with
directions and there is often some degree of automation (autopilot or
something). So, what's the story in real life? Is it really more
work to fly IFR, or more work to fly VFR? I'm thinking that VFR you
must spend a lot of time reading charts and looking for landmarks.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Tony]

Many of us who are rated for instrument flight are likely to tell you
real life flying under instrument flight rules is easier than VFRr.
This is especially true in controlled airspace during the approach and
landing phases of flight in congested airspace. In my view, if the
conditions are soft IFR so that the VFR guys are on the ground, very
much easier.

I fly SEL with no co pilot in a Mooney 201 and find the workload very
manageable. It's worth mentioning when I lived in New England about a
quarter of my time was spent in IMC, and after hunderds of hours in the
clouds and on the gauges, so flying by reference to instruments feels
quite natural. Lower time pilots may feel differently.

You might try getting into a real cockpit, much of what you've read
here will become obvious then.

On Oct 29, 3:01 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> I think someone here said that you really need a copilot when you fly
> IFR. If so, what duties does the copilot have? I'd think that IFR
> would be no more work than VFR, especially since ATC is helping with
> directions and there is often some degree of automation (autopilot or
> something). So, what's the story in real life? Is it really more
> work to fly IFR, or more work to fly VFR? I'm thinking that VFR you
> must spend a lot of time reading charts and looking for landmarks.
>
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Matt Whiting]

Tony wrote:

> Many of us who are rated for instrument flight are likely to tell you
> real life flying under instrument flight rules is easier than VFRr.
> This is especially true in controlled airspace during the approach and
> landing phases of flight in congested airspace. In my view, if the
> conditions are soft IFR so that the VFR guys are on the ground, very
> much easier.
>
> I fly SEL with no co pilot in a Mooney 201 and find the workload very
> manageable. It's worth mentioning when I lived in New England about a
> quarter of my time was spent in IMC, and after hunderds of hours in the
> clouds and on the gauges, so flying by reference to instruments feels
> quite natural. Lower time pilots may feel differently.

I agree. I file IFR for virtually every flight these days. One, it is
easier in many cases than VFR. Opening and closing VFR flight plans
requires talking to someone else ... twice. I usually request flight
following when VFR, but sometimes I'm not able to get it in the
northeast. Two, filing all of the time keeps me proficient in copying
clearances and generally using the system.


Matt

[Andrew Sarangan[_1_]]

Mxsmanic wrote:
> I think someone here said that you really need a copilot when you fly
> IFR. If so, what duties does the copilot have? I'd think that IFR
> would be no more work than VFR, especially since ATC is helping with
> directions and there is often some degree of automation (autopilot or
> something). So, what's the story in real life? Is it really more
> work to fly IFR, or more work to fly VFR? I'm thinking that VFR you
> must spend a lot of time reading charts and looking for landmarks.
>
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.


Since you are comparing IFR to VFR, I am assuming that conditions are
VMC. If weather is not part of the equation, the answer depends on the
complexity of the airspace you are flying. In complex airspaces, IFR is
simpler than VFR because you don't have to worry about staying out of
anyone's airspace. In less busy areas, VFR is simpler because you don't
have to follow ATC assigned routes, or even talk to anyone.

However, flying in IMC is more demanding than flying in VMC. When you
throw weather into the mixture (icing, imbedded thunderstorm), then
things get a lot more difficult than VMC. That's when having a co-pilot
is an asset.

Also note that VMC does not necessarily mean VFR. The vast majority of
IFR flights take place in VMC.

[[email protected]]

On Oct 29, 4:58 pm, "Andrew Sarangan" > wrote:
> Mxsmanic wrote:
> > I think someone here said that you really need a copilot when you fly
> > IFR. If so, what duties does the copilot have? I'd think that IFR
> > would be no more work than VFR, especially since ATC is helping with
> > directions and there is often some degree of automation (autopilot or
> > something). So, what's the story in real life? Is it really more
> > work to fly IFR, or more work to fly VFR? I'm thinking that VFR you
> > must spend a lot of time reading charts and looking for landmarks.
>
> > --
> > Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.Since you are comparing IFR to VFR, I am assuming that conditions are
> VMC. If weather is not part of the equation, the answer depends on the
> complexity of the airspace you are flying. In complex airspaces, IFR is
> simpler than VFR because you don't have to worry about staying out of
> anyone's airspace. In less busy areas, VFR is simpler because you don't
> have to follow ATC assigned routes, or even talk to anyone.
>
> However, flying in IMC is more demanding than flying in VMC. When you
> throw weather into the mixture (icing, imbedded thunderstorm), then
> things get a lot more difficult than VMC. That's when having a co-pilot
> is an asset.
>
> Also note that VMC does not necessarily mean VFR. The vast majority of
> IFR flights take place in VMC.
Hello,
first time poster here.
I think it is worth noting that the Mooney 201 and other newer aircraft
usually have two axis autopilots with altitude hold. When other pilots
say " a second pilot is needed", they may be referring to single pilot
IFR without an autopilot, or out there in the sticks without radar
coverage making leg calculations, mandatory reports over fixes with
estimates for the next, all on the old whiz wheel.
I fly single pilot IFR in a C310 sans autopilot, and I welcome the
company when I can get it.:-)

[Mxsmanic]

Tony writes:

> You might try getting into a real cockpit, much of what you've read
> here will become obvious then.

I think it will become clearer with experience, be it in a real
cockpit or in a simulator.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Mxsmanic]

Andrew Sarangan writes:

> Since you are comparing IFR to VFR, I am assuming that conditions are
> VMC.

Not necessarily, although I see your point. I was thinking mainly in
terms of the cockpit workload for IFR vs. VFR.

I actually find IFR easier than VFR in a simulator, but there are some
key differences between simulation and reality that might keep this
from being fully representative. It's hard to "turn" one's head in a
sim, since the view is mostly out the front of the aircraft, and the
landmarks on the ground below may be less (or sometimes more) clear
than in real life. Whatever the case may be, I find that looking at
instruments seems to require less work than looking out the window,
worrying about other traffic, and so on. A flight in IMC (without any
icing or really rough weather), where the only traffic is IFR, makes
me worry somewhat less about hitting someone.

> Also note that VMC does not necessarily mean VFR. The vast majority of
> IFR flights take place in VMC.

Once the autopilot or FMC is set up, it seems like it would be mostly
relaxing and sightseeing out the window.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[gatt]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...

>I think someone here said that you really need a copilot when you fly IFR.
>If so, what duties does the copilot have?


There are many things a second pilot can do to help, starting with:

1) monitoring and transcribing ATC calls and clearances
2) verifying radio frequencies
3) timing approaches as a means of secondary navigation
4) assisting with checklists; particularly in complex or performance
aircraft.
5) providing a second pair of eyes on the panel and outside the airplane.

> I actually find IFR easier than VFR in a simulator,

It is; your attention is generally only focused on the lower half of your
monitor; you don't need to look over the nose, etc as long as you can keep
the needle centered and stay oriented.

-c