I'm working on my instrument rating, and I'm probably a fairly low time pilot compared to most of you guys. I really enjoy the academic aspects of instrument flight and planning, though I'm not sure I would ever boldly use my priviledges given that flying for me is just a hobby.

I've read many anecdotal bush flying books about the likes of Jack Jefford, Andy Anderson, and Mort Mason(right?) and those guys were full of stories of flying through snowstorms and bad viz, but they were pros and getting paid for it.

My questions is, for those of you who are instrument rated, how do you make use of it? Do you file IFR to slip through congested airspace easier? Do you fly in actual IMC often? Why?

Z

I've had my instrument rating for 3 years now (and my private pilot license for 4.5 years). I usually use the instrument rating when I need to get down to Seattle and the weather is marginal between here and there. It's usually just the enroute portion that is IMC due to the frequent convergence zone that sits around Everett.

I did take one trip in my 180 in Sept 2003 from Orcas Island to San Jose that was 6.8 hours total with about half in actual IMC including an ILS approach to minimums at Medford, OR. That was an interesting experience.

I think my biggest challenge is staying proficient at instrument flying. Even though I've been legally current, I've continued to schedule an instrument proficiency check with my instructor every six month and make sure to get some time under the hood once and a while when I have not had actual IMC recently.

I am convinced that the instrument rating has made me a safer pilot, especially in crowded airspace when ATC is talking a mile a minute or when the ability to get a clearance to climb through a cloud layer makes the difference between scud running underneath or having a smooth flight on top.

-Doug
N234F (KORS)

I have had my instrument rating for about 3 years. I got it mostly so I would not be so limited by low conditions when going on trips. I got marooned in Duluth Mn one time and had to rent a car for the 700 mile trip back home. Had I been instrument rated and current I could have been home in no time. Now to bare my soul to everyone. I spend two nights in Rockford Illinois a couple of weeks ago because of way to low a cloud deck. I have not been IFR current for two and a half years. I have very little free time and with the business's I am involved in have problems in planning ahead. When I do have time, I go fly around the farm or take off for Canada because that is more fun. I am selling my half of one business in a month and pledge to get current and stay that way. I am telling this story on myself because I'll bet that I am not the only one that has been in this same predicamant. An instrument rating is a great thing, but is work to keep it up. Steve Riggins

Hmmm, interesting topic. I am also working on my IFR rating and with each lesson I increasingly wonder just how useful it will be. I have a super cub (VFR only) and a Stinson (marginal IFR), and started with the notion I should get it after having been stranded someplace for 3 days during a week-long trip. The more I get into it, the more I question how useful this rating is unless you have a plane that has de-icing equipment and not prone to carb ice. I'm beginning to think that it is really a useless rating otherwise. Especially for flying in mountainous regions, unless you have a turbine. Am I wrong?

Christina,
You are wrong! The instrument rating is very useful, even in marginaly equiped planes. It is true that there will be many times that it won't help, but many more that it will. I fly a cub and a C 180, the 180 is basic IFR and I use it ocationaly. It seems that most of the time that I file IFR, it turns out that I could have done it VFR, but I wouldn't have gone without knowing for sure. When I'm out flying around VFR in crappy weather, I always have a back door, or backup plan in case things go to pot. The rating allowes me to do things I wouldn't otherwise do because I use it as my way out. Even in the cub if you have the skill you can keep the oilly side down for long enough to figure things out. And don't think you will be able to do that without the rating your blood preasure will be so high you won't be able to think clearly. The most tired I have ever been was after my first actual IFR trip by myself, I could hardly walk.

Ron

The instrument rating is the best rating you can aquire even if you never fly in the soup. After 20 plus years with the rating, it becomes second nature to use the system. Don't give up on it.

Instument flying? I have been rated for 20 years and as red baron says it helps keeping you rightside up in a pickle. As for practical christina has some points,without known icing it is not a ticket to fly in any weather conditions. I am also about 70 miles from the nearest approach so i would still have to rent the car. Depending on the pilot this rating can get you out of trouble or into very deep trouble.Remember there are rocks in them there clouds,and if u have time to spare Go By Air!!!

The intrument rating is very important for many reasons, but there is one that applies directly to us back country pilots and most might never realize it until it's too late:

Consider flying into a tight box canyon strip. On departure or even a go around (I have experienced both) you may be confronted with terrain that rises way above your field of view in the windscreen. This is one of the sneakiest most disorienting illusions that can bite you! I fly IFR for a living, and have never quite experienced an illusion like I did going around & departing Hidden Splendor, UT to the south (toward the high rocks) and departing Milford Sound (New Zealand) to the east.

At Hidden Splendor you can fly into the narrow canyon and easily outclimb the terrain (the river goes down stream that direction) or you can execute a tight climbing turn to the downwind and avoid the terrain alltogether. The wind was blowing strongly out of the south, so we elected to make the turn to the downwind and avoid the turbulence in the canyon. You must make a diciplined constant airspeed (Vx or even less to keep the turn radius small) climbing turn, just like an instrument pilot, as the rocks go diagonally across your windshield. Yikes! At least the clouds, rain, and snow all make it look like you're going straight ahead when you glance up from the gauges!

Milford Sound (west coast, south island of New Zealand) is a very tricky place. The 135 operators stop operations when the wind exceeds 10 knots from any direction on the ground. The airport sits on the sound (sea level) with vertical canyon walls rising to 8000 feet in every direction. If you depart to the east, the departure end sits just west of the convergence of three of these canyons that meet at 90 degree angles. Mere breezes coming down these three canyons create extemely violent rotors and downdrafts, having smashed many a talented Kiwi pilot into the rocks. This departure mandates the same kind of immediate climbing turn with nothing but (very close) rocks in the windscreen. While we were there, there were pilots in training doing touch and gos and executing this maneuver each time. Fun to watch, and comforting to see it done successfully a few times before we had to try it ourselves. Those rocks are close!

All I can say is , get your instrument rating, even if you never really go in the soup. You will understand the ATC system and why they do what they do. You will learn to talk professionally and concisely on the radio. It will help you "keep the dirty side down" if you ever end up IMC inadvertently. And if you ever end up with nothing but rocks in your field of view, you'll keep her flyin' without letting those rocks come THROUGH the windscreen!

M

Matt,

That is a very interesting take on VFR use of instr flying techniques. I've seen Milford Sound in photos on the web...looks VERY cool. Did you do one of those flying vacations that are offered by Flyinn? I would kill for a trip like that. For anyone not familiar, check this out:

http://www.flyinn.co.nz/

Z

Punkin,
Just about everything you described there is covered in a good mountain flying course (or at least should be)! Would it be better to take a mountain flying course to fly in conditions as you specify, or an IFR course? Do you see my point?

I'm still having a hard time understanding what good an IFR rating would do. I *don't* think that IFR flying is fun! I would never do it unless I had to get someplace rather then being weathered in. And in that case, quite often I don't have the plane for it (due to icing concerns)! And I don't ever have any desire to be an aerial bus driver!

I think that the only reason so far that's been presented that I really buy into is in the case of marginal VFR conditions - what happens if they turn to IFR? However, would such a case make one more likely to fly in such marginal conditions?

BTW, I really appreciate everyone's responses here, they are making me think!

Even if I had an AH in the dash I would still never fly into the clouds. If the weather is that bad, I don't fly. Of corse, I do not fly for a living. What fun would that be....IFR.... I..Follow..Roads, Rivers, Ridges, etc.

Hey Christina,

I fly IFR for a living and I still wouldn't say instrument flying is "fun" per se. But it is challenging, and it provides a skill set that will keep you and your passengers alive if you find yourself suddenly in poor visibility. I'm not even talking about weather less than VMC. A perfect example is JFK Jr. He had better than 6 miles and no reported ceiling if I remember correctly. If you are really not enjoying your instrument training right now, it is probably because you have "plateaued" in your training and just need to clear that next hurdle. Sometimes it just takes change of scenery; i.e. a new instructor or a new training environment altogether. I have acquired quite a bit of time giving intruction for IRAs (instrument rating-airplane) and have seen the same thing over and over again. Trust me, when you clear the hurdle, instrument training will be much more enjoyable.

As for IRA training vs. a mountain flying course? I think we're talking about apples and oranges. The FAA mandates 40 hours of training for an IRA (35 under FAR141) and that is bare minimum. Most folks who train traditionally (2-3 sorties a week) take 70-80 hours. I have also taught an accelerated "immersion" course curriculum and taken people from start to finish in about 2 weeks. In either case, at the time of the checkride, most people have a good skill set and knowledge base to take a checkride. I say again: Take a checkride. Hard instrument flying is another thing altogether. A conscientious pilot with a normal instinct for survival will still take along another experienced instrument pilot (at the very least) or even a CFII when they go out to start flying in the soup. Okay, the point of this whole paragraph: Those skills cannot be taught in a mountain flying course or by reading a book. A mountain flying course may discuss the use of some of those skills, but you won't learn them there. And as I alluded to previously, the illusion I experienced at Hidden Splendor and Milford Sound was more powerful than any I have seen flying in clouds, snow, and rain. Not to say that a mountain flying course doesn't have its merit! I highly recommend it if you plan on partaking of the back country, regardless of your experience level.

On that note, Zane, We DID go flying with Matt McCaughan at Flyinn! (Some of the pics on the Flyinn website are ours and of us.) I HIGHLY recommend a trip to NZ, and flying with the McCaughans is the only way to do it. Even though it was not "instruction", I would say that Holly and I (my wife is also a pilot for a living) learned more from that 2 week outing than all our previous experience combined. And what fun! We earned our New Zealand private pilot certificate by doing an equivalency test in an afternoon. On the outings, we did all the flying ourselves, but with Matt McCaughan riding along as our guide most of the time. All the folks we met were pure joy to interact and fly with. And don't go half-cocked thinking you don't need a guide pilot. If any of you have experience in Alaska, then you can appreciate what I am talking about. New Zealand's south island is very much the same type of flying. Any good bush pilot would be ecstatic to have a guide along the first time they go into new and unfamiliar territory. Especially with weather that is so much in flux... (cold Antarctic systems mixing with warm South Pacific systems right over a little island in the middle of the ocean with vertical terrain rising from sea level to 12000 feet, canyon afer canyon after canyon... need I say more?) Okay I won't. My fingers are tired.

Matt

PS. "Aerial bus driver"??? I resemble that!

Hi Matt,
Thanks for your input. Interestingly, JFK Jr. got his training and flew out of the very same airport that I am going to for IFR training (different flight school, though). From my understanding, even though the forecasted ceilings were okay, others had warned him not to go that night due to fog concerns. And he was a relatively new private pilot.

Regarding not enjoying my IFR training, no I haven't plateau'd, I'm progressing nicely. I just don't enjoy it. It actually sucks to not be able to do anything unless a controller tells you to. Wayyy too much structure, control, regulation. The only time I can see doing it is when I absolutely have to - I would never "want" to. Do you fly IFR when the weather is nice, even when you don't have to?

I fly for the freedom of it and love basic stick and rudder flying, and nothing affords more enjoyment than flying in the mountains and rural areas. I had a lesson with my other instructor this weekend (another school at another airport for something completely different - not IFR), and he had me practicing T&Ls on a fairly steep one-way strip then on another 400 ft, swampy little strip... a total rush exploring the edges of the flight envelope! That is why I fly, and is totally different than the "doctor's office" experience of going to my IFR lesson.

Hey Christina,

I only fly IFR at work... i.e. when I have to. Our personal airplane isn't even equipped for IFR. I have a VFR GPS-Comm and a transponder, and that's it. I love practicing pure pilotage and checking myself against the GPS! However, I am considering a stand-alone VOR/LOC/GS receiver - just so we can go visit family on the coast without worry of getting skunked by a marine layer overcast, but that is the only "planned" IMC flying I would ever do in our bird. I get enough at work!

Glad to hear you are progressing fine... It just seems that everyone I have met who isn't enjoying their IRA training is frustrated either by their instructor's style or one of those "plateaus" which happen to everybody at one time or another. I certainly don't mean to be condescending at all - but regardless of whether you're a new or experienced VFR pilot - they can both get just as up-side-down (and just as dead) without the training!

In fact - good, experienced stick and rudder pilots rely so much on their kinesthetic senses that they often have a hard time relying on the flight instruments at first. I saw this first-hand when we started training a bunch of fellas from AK who had to earn their IRAs and CASELs (commercial-airplane single engine land) real fast when the FAA started cracking down on the non-135 "guide service" pilots in the late 1990s. It didn't take long for them to fix the problem though, and once they did, they were superb instrument pilots.

Good luck...

Matt

Hi Christina,
An instrument rating brought the whole picture together for me.
I fly around 600 hours a year, about 100 IMC. I do not fly for a living but I do travel to a lot of out of the way places.
Being "in the system" when the weather gets dicey, puts you first with ATC for help (well most of the time).
I fly a C182, a champ, and a husky on floats. I use my instrument skills in every one of them. Intrument flying teaches you to get an altitude, heading, and hold it without waiver. It also teaches you how to make steep turns holding that altitude without wiaver. That alone will keep you out of trouble when trouble lyes ahead and you need a 180. It teaches you to trust your instruments, when to know when they are failing, and how to fly with what you have.

Learning how to use "the system" will allow you go where other people struggle to go. I have landed in almost all class bravo airports in the US.
Not because I had too, but because I could... IFR training helped me over that hurdle. When 911 hit, IFR flights were elidgable long before vfr were.

On the flying positive of IFR, is climbing through a small layer and the sky with endless blue is awaiting with a golden orb of sun... your rating just seperated you from vfr flying...

Descending through a layer, needles crossed on the ILS.. BAM there is your runway.. welcome home....


I hope you continue your pursuit of an IFR rating, I for one have NEVER regreted the training or the rating.



Ki in Fl

I simply feel that you can't learn too much about flying and the ATC system. After my primary training was over, I immediately started in on a mountain flying/emergency maneuvers/aerobatics/tailwheel course. When that was done, I started to get training withdrawals. They say a certificate is a license to learn, so I think it is important to always be doing that. A good pilot is an academic pilot always, reading and studying while not flying, as well as being a hands-on pilot and getting plenty of stick time.

My original question was how and if the instrument rated pilots on this site use their rating, since the applications can vary. I am convinced it is required to make a complete, well rounded pilot, but just curious to see who around here is putting it to good use, and if it's out of necessity or enjoyment.

Z

I've known several people who started training for an instrument rating immediately upon passing their PP checkride. A couple wanted to "fly for a living", so they were into training for their commercial &/or multi license also. Trouble is, none of them were yet comfortable with just flying the airplane! It's hard to shoot a single engine (in a twin) partial panel NDB approach under the hood when manipulating all the airplane's controls is not yet second nature. I've always thought that a person would be better served by waiting a year or so before they start their IFR work, and just getting in a bunch of VFR time flying into different airports & area's. Thenwhen they start IFR work, they don't have to think twice about power settings and which knob is carb heat & which is mixture, etc. One person I know was working on a comm/instrument, yet went to pieces when there was more than 2 other airplanes in the pattern!
I've been flying 10 years, VFR only, I don't feel this has been a handicap but I still think once in a while about working on an instrument rating. The trouble is, in the Pac NW, when you really need the rating (winter) is when it's not really safe in the clouds due to low-down icing conditions. So I'm not too sure how useful it would really be. There'd also be the matter of maintaining the skill level-- legal currency requirements wouldn't be a problem, but real life proficency might be.

Eric

Eric,

Good points. This is going to sound really geeky, but PC-based flight sims are a great training tool. They can't be logged, but they really help with keeping your head in the game, and keeping your scan accumen sharp. Microsoft Flight Simulator or X-Plane, both are good. I frequently download instr approach plates, print them out, and fly them in FS2004. There's no seat of the pants feedback, but the academics are there and are pretty accurate. Pitch/power relationships are fairly accurate, increasing localizer sensitivity as you get closer to the runway, terrain, traffic, vectoring, it's all there. Once again, not loggable, but invaluable practice I think for keeping one's head in the game.

About a year ago I helped my primary instructor retrieve a 172 Cutlass RG from Camarillo, CA and fly it to Santa Barbara. Heavy marine layer was in effect, 600 ft ceiling, raining lightly. He knew I was interested in instr flying, and had been studying, but I had no hood time since my PPL training a year prior. One thing I had going for me though, is that I geek out routinely on FS2004 and fly approaches and departures from the real plates.

He let me fly left seat, he never touched the controls, he just did the radio work, got the clearances, and gave me direction and feedback, and of course helped me with the retractable gear which I had no experience with (at least not the manual deployment procedure.)

We entered IMC about 40 sec after rotating, and it was creepy. I had never flown in actual instrument conditions in a real aircraft. It was frightenly calm but very real. We immediately got on with Point Mugu Approach and were vectored on course to SBA. At about 3,500 we popped out on top to a beautiful sunset, and saw the FUJI blimp flying IFR down the coast! We actually did not go to Santa Barbara, but Santa Ynez, where I flew the GPS-B approach on the Garmin GNS430.

It was a really cool experience, and one that confirmed the value of instrument flying skills, but also that having had no official instrument training other than the stuff you get in the the Private training, the flight sim stuff I had been doing allowed me to pull it off. Being a geek has its advantages.

Z

I just found this site! Great job, great theme, great thread...

I'm just about to go back stateside and wrap up my IR, so this is a particularly pertinent thread for me. But first, let me concur with everything punkin170b says about Milford Sound. Probably THE most memorable flight I've had in years. We were doing some soaring at Omarama and I took their C172 across the Alps and into Milford on the perfectest of perfect days. They don't happen too often at Milford where moss grows a foot thick on anthing that stops moving. It rains so much, the first 30 feet of water in the fijord is fresh instead of salty. I posted a bunch of pix from that flight in the gallery if you want to see.

Christina:
I feel your pain. I fly for fun and thumping through convective turbulence without an outside horizon doesn't line up with my idea of fun. So why do I want to finish the IRA? Well, IMHO, anything that gets you to spend 40 hrs flying the plane while figuring things out will make you a better pilot. "Working within the system" seems like a rather hollow goal on this forum where just the opposite seems to be true and "Know your enemy" might be more appropriate. No, I plan to call my rating the SRA (Stratus Rating Airplane) since that is mostly where I see the value initially. Low clouds and fog are easy to find along the West coast with 100 mile viz just a couple of thousand (vertical) feet away. The "system" can get you on your way. It's just another tool to hang on your belt. Granted, it's a bit more complex than a hammer, so you'd better know how to use it before you smash your thumb with it.

If you want a great seat-of-the-pants piloting experience, try some soaring. The emphasis is completely on the view out the window and part of the qualification (here anyway) is completing a flight without reference to ANY instrumentation except eyes ears nose and throat - no ASI, no alt, no nothing! It's amazing how well you can judge airspeed by wind noise.