Instrument rating??

Unbelievably bad advice.

Bob Gardner

"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.)

Thoughts on this??

I think some people get carried away when they talk about the instrument rating and
its usefulness.
That its for flying in nasty thunderstorms, lighting hitting near you, plane
rocking around..the nasty stuff.

I dont fly in freezing rain, thunderstorms or stuff like that, my instrument ticket
comes in handy when I wan t to go somewhere and they have a, say solid overcast at
maybe 1000 ft. well, I dont have to cancel my flight, with the IFR ticket, I can
fly the instrument approach and land safely, or take off with similar conditions,
or fly just below or just above the cloud layer without worrying about cloud
clearence.

there are alot of things the instrument ticket is good for other then the nasty
hard IFR.



"G.R. Patterson III" wrote:

Paul Folbrecht wrote:

Thoughts on this??

I heard the same from a retired 737 pilot. The way he put it was "If you aren't
going to use it all the time, don't get an instrument rating".

George Patterson
A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
you look forward to the trip.

in article , G.R. Patterson III at
wrote on 2/29/04 6:01 PM:



Paul Folbrecht wrote:

Thoughts on this??

I heard the same from a retired 737 pilot. The way he put it was "If you
aren't
going to use it all the time, don't get an instrument rating".


I am about to embark on my own instrument rating, and I'm fairly certain
that I won't be using it three times a week once I get it. I would hate to
think that flying is only for those with the kind of time and money (i.e.,
nearly unlimited supplies of both) that most of us simply don't have.

But everybody's way is the best way, right? Those who fly for a living are
certain that anything less than daily flying resulting in twenty thousand
hours isn't true proficiency. Those who fly two or three times a week are
equally convinced that they are superior in every way to the "weekend
warriors". And so on, right down the chain...

There are a lot of older pilots who would agree with your friend. You run
into them a lot on rec.aviation.ifr and rec.aviation.piloting.

You could use the same logic for learning to fly in the first place: if you
are not going to stay current and fly a lot then it is not worth it and may
even be dangerous. Taken to extreme, the argument can be made that if you
never learn to fly then you will probably never die piloting an airplane.

A lot of the pilots who die (perhaps even most of them) flying VFR into IMC
conditions have instrument ratings. Maybe they were overconfident, rusty, or
some combination of the two.

The answer to that, of course, is to get your instrument rating and stay
current. Don't tackle weather that neither you nor your equipment are
prepared to handle. Use common sense, and getting an instrument rating will
make you a better and safer pilot. If you have no common sense, then it just
gives you one more way to kill yourself.

So, yeah, your friend is full of it.

"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.

SNIP!

Thoughts on this??

I'm maybe half-way through my instrument training...
Before I started, I was a damned good pilot......

Now, I'm a better one.......

Your friend needs to find, yourself excepted, a better crowd to run in.

"Paul Folbrecht" wrote:
Thoughts on this??

Like any load of bulls..., your friend's advice has an ounce of truth in
it. If you get the rating and attempt to use it only once in a great
while, it can get you into trouble. It is possible to remain legally
current but not proficient.

Nevertheless, he's still handing you a load of crap. Three times a week?
Nuts. There is no hard number of hours that every pilot will require in
order to stay competent in the clouds. Be honest with yourself and get
enough time so that you *know* you can trust your skills when you need
them.

I am glad I got the rating: it has added tremendously to the utility and
satisfaction I get from flying.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM
(remove pants to reply by email)

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

"Paul Folbrecht" wrote in message
ink.net...

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!)

What an engine failure has to do with an IR is rather puzzling.


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.)

While ANY skill must be maintained, you're more likely to fly into IMC than
have an engine failure. Then, too, how much more COULD you fly if you could
cast off during IMC rather than waiting for VMC? If you have no IR and don't
maintain your basic flying skills, you're asking for trouble that way as
well.

Last spring I returned to flying after more than a dozen years on the
ground. Even through I had nearly 2000 hours (1976-1991) I took a damn long
time getting back into things (lots of right seat time) before I felt
comfortable and proficient.

The question I'd ask is: What is your current flying profile (business or
just pleasure) and what changes do you anticipate? I'd sure consider taking
the lessons just to have a better sense of handling the aircraft, but will
you really make use of an IR? Would you be willing to expend the time and
money to stay current? Can you're flying profile justifiy the expense?

Thoughts on this??

As John Deakin (32,000 hours) said in one of his articles :

"Over 32,000 hours." Well, yeah, I've watched in fascination over 40
years of professional flying, as that total has grown to a number
that surprises even me, particularly in light of some of the dumb things
I've done. But, consider; 747 time accounts for well over half of
it, and since the 747 is almost exclusively a very long range
aircraft with supplemented or double crews, several thousand of those hours
were spent sleeping in the crew bunk, and more than a few in the
seat, peacefully snoozing on duty (which I encourage on long flights,
preferably one at a time!) Many thousands more were spent in the
cockpit, boring along (and bored) at FL370, on 12 and 14-hour flights,
above most of the weather. More to the point, since there are so few
takeoffs and landings, by the time the other pilots get their share,
I'm lucky to get 2 takeoffs, and 2 landings per month. That's 24 per year,
for 25 years, for about 300, total. Ok, maybe 500, because some of that time
was on short-range flights of nine hours, or less, with a "normal" crew.
Folks, this is not a lot of experience, relative to the total time!

If the guy retired that long ago, it seems he's to the point of life where
he's become very cynical. Number of hours means relatively little.

My 2c... your friend is exaggerating quite a lot, but what he says
isn't completely unfounded either. I would say that to stay safe you
need to do a lot more than the FARs say (one approach every
month on average). Personally I try to get out whenever we have
bad (but not icing or convective) weather for some actual time,
and I do recurrent training with an instructor less often than I'd
like but still every couple of months. I feel comfortable doing
an ILS to minimums or flying through the odd cold front (though
I'm always glad when *that* is over).

So imho an IR is something you have to work harder at keeping
non-rusty than for VFR.

John

"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.)

Thoughts on this??

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