I can understand the reluctance to equip for IFR, along with the reluctance to get the IR ticket. But I have found too many times in which not having my IR and not having IFR equipment in the airplane would have been mightily inconvenient at best and disastrous at worst.

I don't mean "hard IFR", which I think is pretty foolish in just about any light GA single. By "hard IFR", I mean playing with potential ice, very low ceilings just barely above DH/DA or MDA, etc. But light to moderate IFR is doable in just about any light single, with the proper certification and the proper equipment. And it's very easy.

Being on an IFR flight plan is so much easier for cross country flying. You don't have to worry about being cleared through this or that airspace, or dodging any airspace, or whether you heard "cleared into Class Bravo". You don't have to dodge airport traffic areas. You get constant traffic call-outs. You don't have to look for sucker holes in order to get down from on top. You get handed off to each ATC facility along the way. With every hand off, you get the next frequency and the latest altimeter setting.

And if a cloud or two gets in the way, you can go through or around, your choice. If there's an overcast when you're ready to go, your IFR clearance allows you to climb up through it. If there's an undercast as you come to your destination, you are given an approach clearance to go down through it.

I suppose I could go on and on, but to me, my IR has proven to be invaluable. Many longer trips would have been either impossible or would have taken much more time, except for my IR. I have had so many occasions in which unforecast IFR weather would have gotten in the way, except for my IR. While I have flown much better equipped airplanes than mine, my little P172D is IFR equipped (and kept current) and I'm IFR current.

That is not that expensive to do. I spend about $250 every couple of years for the pitot/static/transponder check, about $200 every 6 months for an IPC (instructor fee) plus the cost of running my airplane for a couple of hours. I spend about $440/year on Garmin updates and $175/year for Foreflight.

My little airplane is not the best traveling airplane, but it's what I travel in. 115 knots is its normal cruise, and it hauls 3 people including me at best (4 for a safe hour with minimal fuel). In contrast, you have a 180 which is a decent traveler, easily capable of filling the seats with 4 adults and their baggage, and still have enough usable weight left to really go somewhere at 130-135 knots. With the proper instrumentation and an IR, that next trip to the Bahamas will be a lot easier than the last one was.

Cary

Cary wrote:....I don't mean "hard IFR", which I think is pretty foolish in just about any light GA single. By "hard IFR", I mean playing with potential ice, very low ceilings just barely above DH/DA or MDA, etc. But light to moderate IFR is doable in just about any light single, with the proper certification and the proper equipment. And it's very easy .......

To me, saying you fly "light IFR only" is like saying you can swim as long as you stay in the shallow end of the pool. IMHO if you're gonna fly IFR, you need to be ready for whatever ATC might throw at you. "Uh, center, unable- I don't wanna go in the clouds" or similar ain't gonna cut it. if you have a legit "unable", icing for example, fine, but otherwise IMHO if you're gonna talk the talk, better be ready to walk the walk. That's what cracks me up about C150's or similar which are advertised a "IFR equipped"-- they might have all the radio gear you need for training, but IMHO they have the potential for really screwing up the IFR system-- if ATC tells you to climb to 10,000 or whatever, I think they want you to be able to do it at something better than 100 or 200 fpm.

To fly IFR, I would want my airplane equipped with an IFR GPS, preferably approach approved, or at least a VOR with glideslope. Since my 180 only has a com radio & mode c txp, I'd be looking at quite a bill just for avionics-- plus the time & money for enough training to not just pass the check ride, but be capable of flying real-life IFR in "hard" aka actual IMC. I'm not interested in doing either.

hotrod180 wrote:

Cary wrote:....I don't mean "hard IFR", which I think is pretty foolish in just about any light GA single. By "hard IFR", I mean playing with potential ice, very low ceilings just barely above DH/DA or MDA, etc. But light to moderate IFR is doable in just about any light single, with the proper certification and the proper equipment. And it's very easy .......

To me, saying you fly "light IFR only" is like saying you can swim as long as you stay in the shallow end of the pool. IMHO if you're gonna fly IFR, you need to be ready for whatever ATC might throw at you. "Uh, center, unable- I don't wanna go in the clouds" or similar ain't gonna cut it. if you have a legit "unable", icing for example, fine, but otherwise IMHO if you're gonna talk the talk, better be ready to walk the walk.

Disagree. Maybe where you live this is the case, but in other areas where weather is more consistent and predictable with favorable terrain, "light IFR" is doable.

hotrod180 wrote: what cracks me up about C150's or similar which are advertised a "IFR equipped"-- they might have all the radio gear you need for training, but IMHO they have the potential for really screwing up the IFR system-- if ATC tells you to climb to 10,000 or whatever, I think they want you to be able to do it at something better than 100 or 200 fpm.

"Unable to climb One Zero Thousand" Again, in certain areas this would be a totally unreasonable clearance and one would probably never run into a situation where a climb to 10,000ft would be necessary. Somebody commuting from the central valley of California, to the Bay Area of CA during the summer, would be perfectly able to complete an IFR flight in a properly equipped Cessna 150 without issue...no ATC is going to send a Cessna 150 into Boeing country....and a smart IFR pilot would know that when filing their flight plan.

hotrod180 wrote: To fly IFR, I would want my airplane equipped with an IFR GPS, preferably approach approved, or at least a VOR with glideslope. Since my 180 only has a com radio & mode c txp, I'd be looking at quite a bill just for avionics-- plus the time & money for enough training to not just pass the check ride, but be capable of flying real-life IFR in "hard" aka actual IMC. I'm not interested in doing either.

Good for you for knowing your limitations! Instrument flight is not something to be taken lightly, but also not rocket surgery....Intimate knowledge of weather and surroundings is key to success.

I'd be interested in knowing how many others here are non-instrument-rated pilots...and how many here are instrument-rated but choose not to fly IFR, at least in their personal airplanes. I know some people who fly IFR quite a bit, but also know a lot of others who have an instrument ticket but do not fly IFR-- including a few airline guys who are very capable GA pilots but stick to Boeings for their IFR work.

I am an instrument rated pilot. My personal plane is not currently set up for IFR flight. When it is, I will fly IFR in it.

hotrod180 wrote:I'd be interested in knowing how many others here are non-instrument-rated pilots...and how many here are instrument-rated but choose not to fly IFR, at least in their personal airplanes. I know some people who fly IFR quite a bit, but also know a lot of others who have an instrument ticket but do not fly IFR-- including a few airline guys who are very capable GA pilots but stick to Boeings for their IFR work.

I made a decision to reduce the cost/maintenance/downtime of flying. My present goal: Buy a simple design, simple engine, simple panel and stay VFR.

Sometimes I really miss being able to file IFR in my Scout. In fact I have been thinking about an IFR upgrade. But, time, money and maintenance to stay current are issues that preclude it.

VFR is fine with me, never in a hurry. I also love taking pictures and looking for cool places. And my GoPro is VFR only

8GCBC wrote:..... time, money and maintenance to stay current are issues that preclude it......

Ditto.
I have seen plenty of people who think their stick and rudder skills are current when they are not, generally when they prove themselves wrong it is just embarrassing. But finding out the hard way that you are not IFR current and proficient could be disastrous.

hotrod180 wrote:

8GCBC wrote:..... time, money and maintenance to stay current are issues that preclude it......

Ditto.
I have seen plenty of people who think their stick and rudder skills are current when they are not, generally when they prove themselves wrong it is just embarrassing. But finding out the hard way that you are not IFR current and proficient could be disastrous.

Takes a hell of a lot of money and time to fly IFR at the level I prefer. I used to shoot approaches and file almost weekly even then, it took a lot of preflighting and practice for me. If I can keep flying on a personal budget, I need to be careful on where I allocate resources (time and dinero). No biggie, I truly love being low/slow and seeing things that are missed during a restrictive IFR flight. Longest I have been delayed in (6) years with the Scout was (3) days, never bothered me a bit (except the prices of motels are increasing every year).

I know other pilots that believe they can fly perfect IFR anytime with little training and lame ass maintenance which is screwed up.

8GCBC wrote:....I know other pilots that believe they can fly perfect IFR anytime with little training and lame ass maintenance which is screwed up.

Yup-- "got the ticket 10 years ago and haven't flown IFR since, but I have the ticket so I'm good to go".....
A catastrophe waiting to happen IMHO.

Out of 100~150 flight hours a year in my 170 I end up with about 6~8 hours of IFR, and by IFR I mean it'd be impossible to fly without being on the gauges 100% of the time. Some of that would actually be legal VFR...night over desolate, unlit terrain with no moon, and smoke where there's enough legal visibility but zero horizon. My wife and I are both instrument rated and we take turns flying the clocks and looking for traffic. The rest of it is soupy en-route class G with a VFR airstrip at the end.

I don't shoot approaches, don't file, don't talk to center. I'm just keeping wings level and maintaining a heading and altitude. I trust my instruments and I trust my judgement. I don't shoot practice approaches because it's almost unheard of for me to fly to an airport with an approach, or even to fly over country where I could maintain IFR altitudes without icing up. I got my rating to fly commercial and it was worth it for that, but frankly it was a waste of time and money otherwise. Ya, it makes you a better pilot, but not in proportion to the effort and expense if you don't regularly use it.

If I had reason to fly places where IFR flying would be useful I'd happily fly IFR in my 170 and its one com radio, two nav radio's and a hand held GPS. Thousands of pilots have flown thousands of hard IFR hours with less than that.

I don't have an IFR set up, although I think it would keep me alive if I ever inadvertently went IMC. I do have my instrument rating but I didn't feel the need for equipping the 170 for IFR flight. I wanted a nice light weight VFR panel for the type of flying I do. Most of you have seen pictures of it already but I thought I'd add it to this thread for anybody looking for ideas. I'm running foreflight on an IPad mini and iPhone 6+ linked to a Stratus 2s. I also have a Garmin 496. My favorite part about the Stratus so far is the traffic, it's alerted me to the presence of several aircraft that are near me that I may not have seen otherwise. of course the ADS-B weather and AHRS attitude are nice to have also. Here's a picture heading back from Half Moon Bay today.

I've been thinking of pulling out my vacuum horizon & DG (and vacuum pump, etc) and replacing them with a Dynon D2 for that emergency just-in-case situation. The D2 has several GPS-derived features (groundspeed, track, altitude, vert speed) which I already have in my Garmin 196 and don't really need or want to duplicate. I contacted Dynon and asked if they had any plans to produce a simplier cheaper attitude-only version of the D2, but unfortunately no dice.

hotrod180 wrote:I've been thinking of pulling out my vacuum horizon & DG (and vacuum pump, etc) and replacing them with a Dynon D2 for that emergency just-in-case situation. The D2 has several GPS-derived features (groundspeed, track, altitude, vert speed) which I already have in my Garmin 196 and don't really need or want to duplicate. I contacted Dynon and asked if they had any plans to produce a simplier cheaper attitude-only version of the D2, but unfortunately no dice.

I guess we're just going to have to agree to disagree. But I think you're fooling yourself if you think the Dynon D2 would let you pull the rabbit out of the hat "for that emergency just-in-case situation." There is a huge difference between what is necessary to successfully fly in IMC and what is taught in the 3 hours required of private applicants. I have told this story before, but it bears retelling. I had a student who was frankly a good stick and a fast learner, but whose judgment was questionable. He had made the comment that he did not see what the big deal was with IFR flight—and based on his performance under the hood, I could see why he thought that. I could not put him into any unusual attitude in a 172 that he was not able to immediately recover from, safely and quickly. But as he was to find out, that is not enough.

We had scheduled his long dual cross country to Jackson, WY, because he wanted to go there. That is a lot longer than necessary, but he was paying the bill, and he wanted to do it. His wife came along. If the weather had cooperated, it would have been a fun excursion. But as we flew northwest of Riverton, WY, it was obvious that the route could not be flown VFR. As the visibility got less and less, I waited for him to turn around, and he finally did. He asked if we could just file IFR and go that way, but I explained that the MEA was 14,000’, and that it was not possible to get any 172 that high with 3 aboard. I took control, told him to figure out a course to Casper, and we would go there for lunch.

While at Casper, I filed IFR to return to Laramie, hoping that we would hit the IMC which was moving east, which had stopped us from flying to Jackson. After we crossed over Casper Mountain, that is exactly what happened. At first it was some scattered, then in and out broken, then relatively solid.

Pretty soon, the airplane was in a left bank and descending. I tapped him on the shoulder, pointed to the AI, and he immediately righted the airplane. Anticipating further excursions, I called Center to tell them we would need a block altitude and that we would be leaving the centerline every so often. My student could not hear me, because we had no headsets or intercom.

Within minutes, we were again in a turning descent to the left. Again I called it to his attention, and he immediately corrected it. But I decided not to correct him the next time until it got pretty far off. Only minutes later, it happened. The airplane gradually banked to almost 60 degrees, very nose down. By the time I said anything, we had nearly reversed course and had lost several hundred feet, the beginning of a death spiral.

This time he was clearly rattled. He corrected everything and climbed back, but he asked, “How did that happen? What am I doing wrong?” I told him that I could see that he was looking out the side corner of the windshield, and he must stop doing that—concentrate on the instruments. He did just that for the next 15-20 minutes, and finally he said that it was too much for him—could I take over? The cabin was relatively cool, but he was sweating profusely.

I flew us past Medicine Bow, and as it cleared up enough, he took over and flew us on to Laramie. He had learned a powerful lesson, one that I could not have taught him without the experience in actual IMC. Maintaining control, without proper training, is nearly impossible.

Every VFR pilot should also look at this video, 178 Seconds To Live; http://www.aopa.org/AOPA-Live?watch=%7B ... 74403E0%7D It is as realistic as any I’ve seen. Watch it on a big screen, if you have that ability. If it does not scare you, it should. Some may quibble with the total time before the end, but no one can quibble with the facts, that continued flight from VMC into IMC by unqualified, unprepared pilots is a killer.

Cary

And let me add, again.... If you're not proficient at true partial panel, you're one failure away from being dead in IMC when that failure does happen.

You need to be fat, dumb, and happy with nothing but needle-ball-airspeed. Though I've done needle-ball-portable GPS a few times with vac/electrical/mechanical failures, which is a whole lot nicer than trying to aviate IMC with a whiskey compass and a wristwatch.

Gump

Cary wrote: I guess we're just going to have to agree to disagree. But I think you're fooling yourself if you think the Dynon D2 would let you pull the rabbit out of the hat "for that emergency just-in-case situation." There is a huge difference between what is necessary to successfully fly in IMC and what is taught in the 3 hours required of private applicants.....

That's the funny thing-- we do agree on this. I have no illusions about being able to operate on the gauges for any length of time and remain upright and alive. The first BFR after the JFK Jr crash, I told my instructor I wanted to do some under-the-hood work. It was my second BFR, the first one was a tailwheel checkout so no hood time. It had been four years since I got my private ticket, and I discovered that flying on the gauges was a lot harder than I recalled.

That's why I went ahead & pulled the gyros & vacuum system from my last two airplanes, I had no illusions about being competent to fly on the gauges so why have them? Caught some flack online about it though. So here I am with the C180, wanting to install an (electronic) artificial horizon, and it seems like I'm catching flack for that now.

That's why I went ahead & pulled the gyros & vacuum system from my last two airplanes, I had no illusions about being competent to fly on the gauges so why have them? Caught some flack online about it though. So here I am with the C180, wanting to install an (electronic) artificial horizon, and it seems like I'm catching flack for that now.

I absolutely mean you no flack at all, but "shit or get off the pot" is what my diplomatic father would say about it.

I don't question your judgement, but people are people and we all tend to make the same mistakes. There is a very real risk that a pilot with attitude instruments will take a greater chance than the same pilot without any attitude instruments. If that Dynon in your panel takes the edge off of your fear, then it's worse than an empty hole. Since you're unable to fly on instruments I don't see any reason to spend money on them, especially ones that aren't certified for IFR flight. It looks like all risk and no gain to me.

If you want to be able to fly on instruments then by all means install them and get 20 or 30 hours of hood time from an CFII. You'll be flying to IFR standards without having to endure (and pay for) the rest of the BS inherent with the ticket. But in order to do that you need something more than a cigar-lighter AH.

Of course maybe that Dynon in your panel would get you interested enough in instrument flying that it spring boards you to the next level, and that would be a good thing. But that's the only upside I can see to having it in your current situation.

Again, no flack intended so forgive me if I sound preachy...I don't mean to. Just sharing thoughts.

Hammer wrote:.... There is a very real risk that a pilot with attitude instruments will take a greater chance than the same pilot without any attitude instruments. If that Dynon in your panel takes the edge off of your fear, then it's worse than an empty hole. ....

I agree....I've made the same statement many times to VFR-only pilots I know who have gyros but said they would never remove them because "what if I went in the clouds?" Thanks for reminding me.

Hammer wrote:
Here you go...it's only money.

Is this the panel in your C170, Hammer?

hotrod180 wrote:

Hammer wrote:
Here you go...it's only money.

Is this the panel in your C170, Hammer?

Haha...I'd say "I wish", but I don't. It's a friend's 180. That panel cost significantly more than my airplane, and the subscription to keep the database current costs about as much per month as I spend on flying.

I forget the numbers, but he did loose a bit of weight going from steam gages to glass. All the crap in the windshield is a bit of a joke for the picture.

robw56 wrote:

Although they're not all this nice, I've seen some non-gyro panels posted in this and other threads, and in real life, on C170's Cubs etc. I have only rarely seen a C180 panel without a vacuum horizon & DG. Any 180 drivers on board here running without them?