Matt Whiting wrote in news:s96Uh.3933$Oc.194163
@news1.epix.net:

Judah wrote:

IFR pilots can more easily be lured into making riskier flights.

I adamantly disagree. In obtaining my instrument rating I learned MUCH
more about weather and weather analysis than I knew prior as a VFR only
pilot. And I am much less inclined to fly VFR in marginal weather or
IFR in weather than either I or my airplane aren't fit to fly.

I had far more weather close calls as a VFR only pilot than as an IFR
pilot. I actually can remember only one close call since getting my IFR
rating and that was an icing encounter lee of Lake Erie. And that was a
flight forecast to be VFR all the way and which I could have just as
easily encountered on a VFR flight and would have been much less capable
of dealing with.

I agree that the instrument rating is an asset for understanding and
dealing with weather situations.

But pilots who fly to "get somewhere" as opposed to just for training or
for fun are more likely to suffer from mild cases of "get-there-itis" and
make a bad decision. Someone who is just going up for fun will be much less
inclined to choose between beating out a front vs. driving. And someone who
is doing training may never even leave the local area and be able to have a
much better handle on the weather than one might get from a briefing.

My perception is that more IFR flights are trying to "get somewhere" than
for training or fun, and that more VFR flights are for training and fun
than for the purpose of transportation to a specific destination.