Instrument rating??

I had always planned on getting my instrument rating- within the next
year, probably. But last weekend I had a chat with someone who really
got me thinking about it.

This guy is a friend of a friend and is a retired 20,000 hour ATP.
Retired in the 80s flying 707s and I forget what else. Instructed in
Cubs for years. (Guy has nine count 'em nine engine failures in Cubs!
Two inside 20 minutes once!)

So, this is what he told me: unless I'm going to be flying 3 times/week
at least, getting my instrument ticket is a waste and possibly dangerous
as well. He thinks I'll be more likely to end up dead with it than
without it. (Logic being, obviously, that the ticket will give me such
a sense of security that I won't be afraid of hard IMC even when I'm not
current enough to handle it.)

Thoughts on this??

I had always planned on getting my instrument rating- within the next
year, probably. But last weekend I had a chat with someone who really
got me thinking about it.

This guy is a friend of a friend and is a retired 20,000 hour ATP.
Retired in the 80s flying 707s and I forget what else. Instructed in
Cubs for years. (Guy has nine count 'em nine engine failures in Cubs!
Two inside 20 minutes once!)

So, this is what he told me: unless I'm going to be flying 3 times/week
at least, getting my instrument ticket is a waste and possibly dangerous
as well. He thinks I'll be more likely to end up dead with it than
without it. (Logic being, obviously, that the ticket will give me such
a sense of security that I won't be afraid of hard IMC even when I'm not
current enough to handle it.)

Thoughts on this??

Tell your ATP friend of a friend to go jump in a lake, or have him join on
here and I'll tell him myself. One of the best things you can do for your
own safety and satisfaction is to get an instrument rating. You can fly
hard, medium, or light IMC depending on your own risk levels, equipment, and
conditions. People who are instrument rated can decide what they think
they're ready for just like a private pilot can.

So, this is what he told me: unless I'm going to be flying 3 times/week
at least, getting my instrument ticket is a waste and possibly dangerous
as well. He thinks I'll be more likely to end up dead with it than
without it.

This kind of BS just plain ****es me off. You do not become more likely to
kill yourself with an instrument rating and not flying 3 times a week. This
statement is a perfect example of why hours do not necessarily mean
competence in aviation.

"George" wrote in message news:i1w0c.19779

This kind of BS just plain ****es me off. You do not become more likely
to
kill yourself with an instrument rating and not flying 3 times a week.
This
statement is a perfect example of why hours do not necessarily mean
competence in aviation.


methinks thou doth protest too much......

John,

This
statement is a perfect example of why hours do not necessarily mean
competence in aviation.


methinks thou doth protest too much......


Methinks he s dead-on right - in both posts.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Even if you never fly honest IMC, only VFR, the improvement in
your flying abilities (precision, accuracy, dealing with ATC, etc)
will be well-worth the rating.

On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 22:29:20 -0700, Blanche wrote:

Even if you never fly honest IMC, only VFR, the improvement in your
flying abilities (precision, accuracy, dealing with ATC, etc) will be
well-worth the rating.

I got my PPL January last year. I immediately started to do XC hamburger
runs and also hooked up with a CFII. Our arrangement was that I should
continue to rack up XC PIC time. He started me off in March with a weekly
sim lesson in the school's Frasca; we did about 10 of those. He told me
that when I got to 35 hrs XC PIC, we would start flying. Well, I managed
to time the 35 hr mark with the end of the sim lessons. My first time
flying with him was a 2.7 hr XC with 2.2 of actual IMC. Anyways, I ended
up with my rating just before Christmas.

I was able to get my rating with just over the minimum required hours.
But, I learned to have much more respect for those clouds; I learned a
whole lot about airplane performance and how to fly more precisely; and it
helped my radio work. I don't intend to get anywhere near freezing levels
or convective weather (I've done that VFR and that is a story for another
day). I also learned how fast one can get rusty. But, I feel that with
enough practice, I should be able to use the rating to get up and down
through some tame stratus on some marginal days when I would've elected to
stay on the ground. It also allows me to use our club aircraft for
200nm trips and for night trips. It also helps a little in dealing with
the DC ADIZ (adds some options for flight following, getting in and out).

I consider the training to be money well spent. If you can afford it, it
is kind of like going to college after high school. It opens different
doors.

--
Rick/JYO
PP-ASEL-IA
remove 'nospam' to reply

"Paul Folbrecht" wrote in message
ink.net...
I had always planned on getting my instrument rating- within the next
year, probably. But last weekend I had a chat with someone who really
got me thinking about it.

This guy is a friend of a friend and is a retired 20,000 hour ATP.
Retired in the 80s flying 707s and I forget what else. Instructed in
Cubs for years. (Guy has nine count 'em nine engine failures in Cubs!
Two inside 20 minutes once!)

So, this is what he told me: unless I'm going to be flying 3 times/week
at least, getting my instrument ticket is a waste and possibly dangerous
as well. He thinks I'll be more likely to end up dead with it than
without it. (Logic being, obviously, that the ticket will give me such
a sense of security that I won't be afraid of hard IMC even when I'm not
current enough to handle it.)

This is like arguing that you shouldn't wear a parachute, cause
if you do you'll take extreme chances and kill yourself.

My personal belief is that training and/or education (and travel) is never
truly wasted, even if you never use it again.

If you're the kind of guy who thinks the rating is a magic key to
IFR, and you don't need to be current to use it, you'll probably
kill yourself somehow else, even if you don't get the rating. Good
airmanship means good sense. If you have a reasonable quota of
airmanship/good-sense you'll know when to use it, and when not,
and if you don't you're in the wrong avocation anyway.

Ron McKinnon wrote:

If you're the kind of guy who thinks the rating is a magic key to
IFR, and you don't need to be current to use it, you'll probably
kill yourself somehow else, even if you don't get the rating.

It appears that Paul's ATP friend is assuming that Paul is "the kind of guy
who thinks the rating is a magic key to IFR, and you don't need to be
current to use it". He's either a poor friend (assuming he's wrong) or a
good friend (assuming he's right).

So, Paul, just how accurate is your ATP friend's opinion of you laugh?

- Andrew

Read my post again and you'll see that I said "friend of a friend".
And, actually, he's more of the father of a friend of a friend. I
talked to him for 20 minutes in a bar and may never see him again in my
life.

Andrew Gideon wrote:

Ron McKinnon wrote:


If you're the kind of guy who thinks the rating is a magic key to
IFR, and you don't need to be current to use it, you'll probably
kill yourself somehow else, even if you don't get the rating.


It appears that Paul's ATP friend is assuming that Paul is "the kind of guy
who thinks the rating is a magic key to IFR, and you don't need to be
current to use it". He's either a poor friend (assuming he's wrong) or a
good friend (assuming he's right).

So, Paul, just how accurate is your ATP friend's opinion of you laugh?

- Andrew