Question to the IFR Pilots Out There

31.5 hours total instrument training time
11.0 hours simutlator (1983, before computers)
2.8 hours actual
38 approaches (simulator and flight)

Cecil,

I had 8 when I got my ticket. My DE said don't even think of going out
alone until you have about 15 or 20. I think that's sound advise for "hard"
IMC. But I flew IFR alone a few times with 1000 to 1500' ceilings and 5
miles visibility. It wasn't too hard, but my plane has an autopilot with
altitude hold and the Garmin 295 was programmed with the route and that made
for better situational awareness.

Kobra





"Cecil E. Chapman" wrote in message
.. .
For those of you who have your instrument ticket, how many hours of actual
IMC did you have when you got your ticket.

At approx 40 hours of instrument time I have a 'whopping' .9 hours of
ACTUAL
IMC... I sincerely hope I'm going to get to see a lot more before I get
my
instrument ticket - which I'm guessing should be around April or May at
the
latest.

--
--
Good Flights!

Cecil E. Chapman, Jr.
PP-ASEL

"We who fly do so for the love of flying.
We are alive in the air with this miracle
that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"

- Cecil Day Lewis-

Check out my personal flying adventures: www.bayareapilot.com

"Kobra" wrote in message ...

I had 8 when I got my ticket. My DE said don't even think of going out
alone until you have about 15 or 20. I think that's sound advise for "hard"
IMC.

Any particular reason for that advice?

Myself, I think the number in the logbook is just a number.

What really matters is how current and proficient you are that day.

But I flew IFR alone a few times with 1000 to 1500' ceilings and 5
miles visibility.

Well, FWIW, I started flying actual IMC with my husband as PIC when
I was about 20 hrs along working on my IR (for the first time). We
discussed it with my then-CFI, he thought it was a good idea provided
we didn't do "hard" IMC (ie low approaches). (I'm not recommending
this, BTW, just telling a story).

So then when it was my leg, and the forecast for our destination
wasn't too dismal (say, 1000 ft to 1500 ft ceilings) I'd fly.

During that time I think I shot about 10 approaches, 6
to minimums.

There have been other situations where my husband was flying with
forcasts of 1500 ft ceilings, only to watch the runway disappear
under us on the GPS moving map(400-500 ft mins) with never a glimpse
of ground. We shot the nearest ILS (70 miles away) and saw the
approach lights at 300 ft.

On my checkride, the DE asked what were my opinions on personal
minimums. I told her the truth: I'd prefer to set out with a
forecast of 1000, 1500 ft or so, but if I didn't feel current
and proficient enough to shoot an ILS down to minimums we weren't
going because that's just what's happened a number of times.

I also told her it's not an FAA thing, but I always want to know
where's the nearest stable VMC, and do we have fuel to get there
at maximum range? if the answer is "no" I start thinking "emergency"
because that's what we're one failure away from.

FWIW,
Sydney

My DE said don't even think of going out
alone until you have about 15 or 20. I think that's sound advise for
"hard"
IMC.

Any particular reason for that advice?


Snowbird,

Not sure how he came up with that number, but let's face it, one should have
*some* hours in actual conditions before venturing out alone in the clouds
and soup. I'm sure it varies person to person, but I think we all can
agree that 0 hours in actual IMC is not a good time to start out solo. How
about one...two...three...? Who knows? But someone, somewhere even if it's
yourself has to set a minimum number as a reference and it should be based
on experience and history.

In my examiner's opinion and experience he feels that 10 hours is the
minimum needed experience in actual IMC for an average pilot to become
familiar and comfortable enough with instrument conditions to venture out
alone.

I think it depends on the weather conditions as we both talked about. 1000
to 1500' ceilings with 4 or 5 miles visibility is a comfortable starting
point with minimal experience.

I've found some within this group with something we were all trained in
during our private, instrument and commercial training that is dangerous.
And that is the *Macho* personality trait. The "..who needs actual IMC
time? I was prudently trained and confident and if you were too you'd be
out there flying in the soup like me!" or the "...I don't need no stinking
GPS or Autopilot! That sissy-ass $hit is for wimps and losers and if you
were a real pilot like me you'd pull those @#$%ing things right out."

I hope we are all conservative when it comes to flying in IMC and we start
out slow and build our experience, skill and confidence patiently and
safely.

Kobra

Kobra wrote:
My DE said don't even think of going out
alone until you have about 15 or 20. I think that's sound advise for

"hard"

IMC.

Any particular reason for that advice?



Snowbird,

Not sure how he came up with that number, but let's face it, one should have
*some* hours in actual conditions before venturing out alone in the clouds
and soup. I'm sure it varies person to person, but I think we all can
agree that 0 hours in actual IMC is not a good time to start out solo. How
about one...two...three...? Who knows? But someone, somewhere even if it's
yourself has to set a minimum number as a reference and it should be based
on experience and history.

In my examiner's opinion and experience he feels that 10 hours is the
minimum needed experience in actual IMC for an average pilot to become
familiar and comfortable enough with instrument conditions to venture out
alone.

I think it depends on the weather conditions as we both talked about. 1000
to 1500' ceilings with 4 or 5 miles visibility is a comfortable starting
point with minimal experience.

I've found some within this group with something we were all trained in
during our private, instrument and commercial training that is dangerous.
And that is the *Macho* personality trait. The "..who needs actual IMC
time? I was prudently trained and confident and if you were too you'd be
out there flying in the soup like me!" or the "...I don't need no stinking
GPS or Autopilot! That sissy-ass $hit is for wimps and losers and if you
were a real pilot like me you'd pull those @#$%ing things right out."

I hope we are all conservative when it comes to flying in IMC and we start
out slow and build our experience, skill and confidence patiently and
safely.

I don't think having some arbitrary number of hours makes much
difference. I think the more important issue is how you begin to use
your new ticket. I've seen a number of authors of IFR books provide
something like this:

1. Start by taking off from an airport with VMC conditions, climb
through a fairly thin cloud layer to VMC conditions on top and then land
at an airport with VMC.

2. Take off in VMC, fly enroute in a thin layer, land in VMC.

3. Take off in IMC, fly enroute in IMC, but land in VMC.

4. Take off in ICM, fly enroute in IMC, land in "easy" IMC.

5. Repeat 4 gradually working closer to an approach in minimums and
adding in worse weather enroute.


Matt

I've seen a number of authors of IFR books provide
something like this:

1. Start by taking off from an airport with VMC conditions, climb
through a fairly thin cloud layer to VMC conditions on top and then land
at an airport with VMC.

2. Take off in VMC, fly enroute in a thin layer, land in VMC.

3. Take off in IMC, fly enroute in IMC, but land in VMC.

4. Take off in ICM, fly enroute in IMC, land in "easy" IMC.

5. Repeat 4 gradually working closer to an approach in minimums and
adding in worse weather enroute.

Couldn't agree more Matt.

Kobra

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...
I don't think having some arbitrary number of hours makes much
difference. I think the more important issue is how you begin to use
your new ticket. I've seen a number of authors of IFR books provide
something like this:

1. Start by taking off from an airport with VMC conditions, climb
through a fairly thin cloud layer to VMC conditions on top and then land
at an airport with VMC.

2. Take off in VMC, fly enroute in a thin layer, land in VMC.

3. Take off in IMC, fly enroute in IMC, but land in VMC.

4. Take off in ICM, fly enroute in IMC, land in "easy" IMC.

5. Repeat 4 gradually working closer to an approach in minimums and
adding in worse weather enroute.

I don't quite understand the theory behind this advice. I do agree that IMC
is harder than hood flying, because the latter provides peripheral cues as
to changes in attitude. For that reason, I made sure to have adequate dual
practice in IMC before trying it on my own.

On the other hand, once basic attitude flying in IMC becomes comfortable, it
doesn't strike me that flying an approach to minimums in IMC is then any
harder than doing it under the hood. And since doing it reliably under the
hood is a required part of instrument training, I don't really see why
pilots shouldn't fly single-pilot IMC to minimums soon after flying
single-pilot IMC at all.

But I readily admit there could be good reasons that don't occur to me. If
so, I'd like to hear them.

--Gary

Matt

If the DE thinks you can't fly IMC, then why the hell would he/she give you
a rating? The practical test is supposed to check to see if you can go fly
it. The personal minima stuff is scary to me. If you can't go out and fly
to minimums, then something is wrong.

I know that is not a popular way of thinking and supposedly "unsafe" or
whatever is the politically correct term, but if you can't fly to the
standards expected, why get the rating?

The DE can't put on the certificate that the holder is only allowed to do
vector approaches or 1000' ceilings...

I just don't get it.




"Kobra" wrote in message
...

My DE said don't even think of going out
alone until you have about 15 or 20. I think that's sound advise for
"hard"
IMC.

Any particular reason for that advice?


Snowbird,

Not sure how he came up with that number, but let's face it, one should
have
*some* hours in actual conditions before venturing out alone in the clouds
and soup. I'm sure it varies person to person, but I think we all can
agree that 0 hours in actual IMC is not a good time to start out solo.
How
about one...two...three...? Who knows? But someone, somewhere even if
it's
yourself has to set a minimum number as a reference and it should be based
on experience and history.

In my examiner's opinion and experience he feels that 10 hours is the
minimum needed experience in actual IMC for an average pilot to become
familiar and comfortable enough with instrument conditions to venture out
alone.

I think it depends on the weather conditions as we both talked about.
1000
to 1500' ceilings with 4 or 5 miles visibility is a comfortable starting
point with minimal experience.

I've found some within this group with something we were all trained in
during our private, instrument and commercial training that is dangerous.
And that is the *Macho* personality trait. The "..who needs actual IMC
time? I was prudently trained and confident and if you were too you'd be
out there flying in the soup like me!" or the "...I don't need no
stinking
GPS or Autopilot! That sissy-ass $hit is for wimps and losers and if you
were a real pilot like me you'd pull those @#$%ing things right out."

I hope we are all conservative when it comes to flying in IMC and we start
out slow and build our experience, skill and confidence patiently and
safely.

Kobra

Tim J wrote:
If the DE thinks you can't fly IMC, then why the hell would he/she give you
a rating? The practical test is supposed to check to see if you can go fly
it. The personal minima stuff is scary to me. If you can't go out and fly
to minimums, then something is wrong.

Sorry, but no test can cover every eventuality. And there is a lot of
difference between being minimally competent (basically a freshly minted
instrument pilot) and being a confident, proficient, expert instrument
pilot. I didn't kill myself on my first real instrument flight alone,
but I was very nervous, wandered off course and altitude several times
during the first 30 minutes of the flight (mainly while trying to copy a
full route amendment and get the GPS reprogrammed - thanks NY Center!).
I never felt in danger of losing control, but I sure wasn't smooth,
calm and confident. A year later, I could simultaneously maintain
altitude within 20', talk with ATC, reprogram the GPS and carry on a
conversation with a passenger - and this was in a non A/P Skylane. It
really isn't any different than the difference between a 16 year-old
with a brand new driver's license and a person who has driven for 20
years. You simply get better and more capable with practice and after
having experienced many hours or years of various adverse situations.


I know that is not a popular way of thinking and supposedly "unsafe" or
whatever is the politically correct term, but if you can't fly to the
standards expected, why get the rating?

The standards are minimums. Look at them again ... they allow amazingly
wide tolerances on altitudes, headings, ILS needle deflection, etc. A
proficient instrument pilot will fly much tighter than the PTS standard
requires.


The DE can't put on the certificate that the holder is only allowed to do
vector approaches or 1000' ceilings...

I just don't get it.

That's unfortunate ... that you don't get it, I mean.


Matt

"Kobra" wrote in message ...

Not sure how he came up with that number, but let's face it, one should have
*some* hours in actual conditions before venturing out alone in the clouds
and soup.

Well, IMO single pilot IFR is always tough. It's certainly never a
bad idea to ask someone competent to go with you (another IR pilot
or a CFI).

I think probably how much experience is needed depends on the
individual, and how comfortable they are. I know I started flying
in clouds as a passenger, with my husband, and the first few flights
I durn near took the arm rest off the rented plane. At some point
when I started my own IR, that went away, but I can't say exactly
when. Then sometime afterward I remember a flight where I was
in solid clouds for about an hour and it was a knife-fight for
the whole time because I felt dizzy and like I was tumbling backwards
the whole time. It was pretty bumpy, and I must have had some water
in my inner ear from a week of swimming in the Bahamas or something.

I guess I'd have to agree that it's prudent to have someone more
experienced along if you've never seen the inside of a cloud at
all, just in case. And if there's something about it that makes
you uncomfortable, then I would agree it's good to fly with someone
else until you work through it.

I do know people that have never had any discomfort at all about
clouds, though. They are natural instrument pilots where I'm very
much a visual pilot and instrument flying does not come easy to me
but took a lot of remedial CFI beating. So I wouldn't project my
feelings onto someone else.

Also for me at least, instrument skills are a real 'use it or lose
it' phenomenon. So it's currency and proficiency (in the real, not
the FAA sense) which most concern me.

In my examiner's opinion and experience he feels that 10 hours is the
minimum needed experience in actual IMC for an average pilot to become
familiar and comfortable enough with instrument conditions to venture out
alone.

I guess my point is that I don't feel any arbitrary number has
any real meaning.

I feel there are three factors:
1) how comfortable or uncomfortable you personally feel flying
in clouds, once you've tried it
2) how current and proficient you are
3) what kind of IMC you're facing

Maybe you have 30 hrs flying in IMC, but you haven't shot an
approach in a month and you find that for you, about 10 days
is the "magic number" you need to stay sharp. Does it make
sense for you to go? Maybe --- if your destination has a
good forecast and there's pretty ironclad VFR within range
as a backup plan.

OTOH if you have two hours in IMC, but they were yesterday
shooting ILS down to 300 and 1 with no problems, I think you're
in pretty good shape for a carefully-planned trip in the clouds.
What I mean by carefully planned is, I think it makes most sense
to have higher standards for fuel reserve and for having really
good wx w/in comfortable range at first.

I know when DH was a newly minted instrument pilot, we flew
some trips that were perfectly legal and scare the socks off me
now to think about. Stuff where the nearest VFR was two states
away. God looks after fools sometimes.

Just my opinion of course.

I think it depends on the weather conditions as we both talked about. 1000
to 1500' ceilings with 4 or 5 miles visibility is a comfortable starting
point with minimal experience.

Well, just remember IME you can have that forecast when you set out,
but the weather doesn't read the forecast. Be prepared to fly what
you find.

or the "...I don't need no stinking
GPS or Autopilot! That sissy-ass $hit is for wimps and losers and if you
were a real pilot like me you'd pull those @#$%ing things right out."

ROTFLMAO!

I hope we are all conservative when it comes to flying in IMC and we start
out slow and build our experience, skill and confidence patiently and
safely.

Absolutely! I think my point is, I'd bank more on currency and
proficiency than on some absolute number. 10 hrs in actual a year
ago might not do you as much good as 1 hr last week, KWIM?

It sounds to me like you have a sensible approach to easing into
it, finding IMC enroute to a VFR destination at first and so
forth.

Good luck,
Sydney