Who has an instrument rating?

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:_jx1c.37230$PR3.737688@attbi_s03...
Read up on it. An instrument rating is pretty useless for most of
Alaskan
flying.

Why's that?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"



Lack of NavAids?

Jay Beckman

Actually the percentage of pilots who hold instrument ratings is much higher
(Close to half), these numbers are private pilots only. The issue in AK is
that there is a lot of IMC that is not flyable without known icing and often
the MEA is in the flight levels, Then there is the issue of having an
approach to your favorite fishing spot! Pilots in AK get around this by
flying VFR whatever the weather and the accident statistics bear this out.

Mike
MU-2

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:7uv1c.470542$na.1113633@attbi_s04...
One thing I find remarkable is that "sunny" Florida and California each
have a higher percentage of instrument flyers than "rainy" Oregon and
Washington.

It's really interesting that Alaska, with arguably the worst weather, has
one of the lowest percentages of instrument ratings.

Of course, I've also heard that they have a lot of "pilots" flying around
who don't appear on any FAA database!
;-)

Overall, this chart seems to match what I've read, which is that around
21%
of pilots have their Instrument Rating -- and a far lower percentage is
actually instrument current.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

No ILS approaches to gravel bars.

Mike
MU-2


"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:_jx1c.37230$PR3.737688@attbi_s03...
Read up on it. An instrument rating is pretty useless for most of
Alaskan
flying.

Why's that?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

In article , C J Campbell wrote:

There is no such thing as a "private" or "commercial" instrument rating.

That's what I thought, but the database has separate identifiers for
private, commercial, flight instructor, and various foreign ratings.
I counted only the ones marked private.

The listing was based on the pilot's home address. Not the location the
license was issued.

--
-------------------------------
Travis
"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...


No Such User wrote:

One thing I find remarkable is that "sunny" Florida and California
each
have a higher percentage of instrument flyers than "rainy" Oregon and
Washington.

Dunno about California, but Florida has a lot of retirees. Bet many of
those
guys'n gals with instrument tickets got the rating before moving there.
In
fact, I know a few who got the rating to allow them to come back to New
Jersey
for the summer whenever they want.

Actually it is because of the number of flight schools located in Florida
and California. People from all over the world go there to become airline
pilots. They all get instrument ratings.

IA in Alaska has limited usefulness. Few instrument approaches. Few Navaids.
Lots of bush planes that would be limited by ice in clouds for a good
portion of the year.

Florida, on the other hand, lots of flyable IMC. Never been to Florida yet
without excercising my IA.

--
-------------------------------
Travis
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:7uv1c.470542$na.1113633@attbi_s04...
One thing I find remarkable is that "sunny" Florida and California each
have a higher percentage of instrument flyers than "rainy" Oregon and
Washington.

It's really interesting that Alaska, with arguably the worst weather, has
one of the lowest percentages of instrument ratings.

Of course, I've also heard that they have a lot of "pilots" flying around
who don't appear on any FAA database!
;-)

Overall, this chart seems to match what I've read, which is that around
21%
of pilots have their Instrument Rating -- and a far lower percentage is
actually instrument current.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Well jeez, there are private parts, unless you are certain female
entertainers where upon they become commercial parts...
Why not the same for instrument ratings?

denny

"C J Campbell" There is no such thing as a "private" or "commercial"
instrument rating.

Dennis O'Connor wrote:

Well jeez, there are private parts, unless you are certain female
entertainers where upon they become commercial parts...
Why not the same for instrument ratings?

But if you have a private instrument rating, it wouldn't be in a public database,
would it? :-)

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.

"Jay Honeck" wrote
Read up on it. An instrument rating is pretty useless for most of Alaskan
flying.

Why's that?

Primarily because most IMC in Alaska happens in subfreezing
temperatures. Basically, if you don't have at least turbos, boots,
and hot props you might as well just stay VFR. The same is true North
of the Mason-Dixon line for half the year.

Michael

California and Florida both have lots of shoreline, and therefore lots
of fog and low clouds. Plenty of IMC and not as much ice in the lower
altitudes as colder just-as-wet areas, like Michigan.

I live on the coast in northern California. I plan to get an instrument
rating simply for proficiency, but it will come in handy on those days
when the ceiling is 400 feet but you can see sunshine looking straight
up, because the layer is only 100 feet thick. It is particularly
pernicious in the summertime.


One thing I find remarkable is that "sunny" Florida and
California each have a higher percentage of instrument
flyers than "rainy" Oregon and Washington.