IMC currency

[Shamow]

Oh no, I hear you groan - not another IMC post!! Afraid so. If it's any consolation I've already done a search through this forum but can't quite find what I'm looking for.

After reading through numerous posts about the IMC it seems people fall into 2 camps - those that say the IMC is a 'get out of jail free' card and those that say it can be fully utilised, as long as your IMC skills are current. I'm not looking to start a debate on those 2 points as they have been extensively debated before.

What I would like to know is how much can you expect to pay to join a group with an aircraft that is capable of flying IMC safely (by safely, I mean it has instruments that are up to the task and well maintained)? What are the running costs compared to a SEP that is only used for VFR flight? To provide figures presume a 1/4 or 1/5 share in the aircraft. How may hours per month of IMC flight/practice would you feel are needed to keep this qualification current (I realise this probably depends on the person)?

While I haven't even started my PPL (yet!!) I'd be interested to know how much more money I would need to budget for to keep this qualification current if it were something I attained post-ppl.

cheers

[Chilli Monster]

How long is a piece of string?

To take your questions bit by bit.

I have a share in an aircraft that is single engined IFR capable - cost was £10K. I know of another for sale that is £12K. Both 1/5 shares. Running costs whether it's IFR capable or not are the same - the avionics don't contribute to the cost of fuel and servicing in the big scale of things (Except when they go wrong - but that's not often).

How many hours - how good a pilot are you? That you don't know yet because you don't have a PPL. I would suggest that you learn to walk before running. I've just done my 3rd IMC renewal with no problem, but probably 1/3 of my flying requires the use of IMC skills (as opposed to actual flying in IMC, though there's quite a bit of that too).

My suggestion would be get your PPL first and forget about IMC at the moment. Once you've got the first part sit down with someone who has an IMC and uses it (there are many who don't) and discuss with them what it needs, in relation to your (by then newly learned) skills.

[bookworm]

I agree with Chilli. A suitably equipped aircraft for regular IFR flying is likely to be in the £50,000 to £80,000 band.

But perhaps more important is the attitude of the group members -- if you have 4 or 5 colleagues that only want to use the aircraft VFR, it's unlikely that they'll want to spend money on the maintenance and upgrades that you really need for your IFR.

[Shamow]

Chilli - not trying to run before I can walk. Just trying to understand more about the scene etc.

Bookworm - you've kind of answered my question with my own question. What are the kind of maintenance/upgrade costs of trying to maintain an aircraft for IFR? They must make a difference otherwise everyone would be happy to share these costs.

[Chilli Monster]

OK - to put it simpler for you, as well as pointing out where human nature may come into it.

Off you go looking for an aircraft, you find one where it's not IFR equipped and none of the group members have an IMC

WALK AWAY

To bring that aircraft up to the equipment that you want to be looking at will cost approx £15-20K. They're not going to want to pay that out if they're not going to use it - are they?

So - you find one which is IFR equipped and most of the members have IMC's - it's a goer. Why?, because people pay for what they use, whereas you won't get people to pay for what they don't. (The human nature part).

What in the preceeding posts by myself and bookworm is so difficult to understand?

[Keef]

CM and bookworm have it spot on, as usual. There are plenty of IFR-equipped aircraft in groups around the UK - I'm in a group of 6 on an "airways" Arrow at Southend, and we aren't the only IFR group there.

If you're looking to join a group once you have your PPL, I'd suggest do the night rating and IMC rating before you look for a group. An IFR group aircraft is likely also to be a "complex" type (not always, but many are) and the insurers and group members might not be too keen on a low-hours PPL with no added ratings. Not impossible, but might not be easy, depending on where you are.

Ours is a group of six, and you'd need £10k and £100 a month to join, then £65 an hour to fly. Plus occasional "top-ups" to the funds when FM-immune or Mode S or whatever brings an unexpected bill.

[drauk]

Shamow, first off, personally I wouldn't let "learn to walk before you can run" put you off. Nothing wrong with aspiring to something.

Running an IMC capable plane is not by definition significantly more expensive in the short/medium term if the avionics that are already in it are new or at least in good condition. But when something goes wrong it can be costly to put right and fitting fresh FM immune avionics is expensive. The point that was made by ChilliMonster is very valid, so don't ignore it just because it was made somewhat condescendingly: if other group owners of the plane have no need for such equipment they may well be reluctant to spend the money required. Even VFR pilots might like a working transponder and a VOR, but they probably don't care about a second VOR, a second comm radio, an ADF, glidescope, second altimeter (for airways use), etc.

The best way of staying current is to fly in a group of IMC holders who want an IMC capable plane, but with at least one other IMC/IR holders who actually uses it regularly. Then you can (a) learn from them and (b) help one another stay current.

The prices quoted previously seem reasonable and meet with my own experience. Planes for sale at around 30-35K may have all the equipment but it will likely be old and may require attention - new kit can cost several thousand pounds to supply and install. In a 50k-100k plane you might expect more and newer avionics. Monthly fees 50-100, hourly 50-100.

[S-Works]

Equipping an IR/IMC aircraft from the ground up is quite expensive. I bought an aircraft I liked and then spent the next year and half bringing it upto IFR standards. It was a progressive thing with mode C then Garmin audio panel then the second nav/com then ADF and so on. The most expensive part was getting the kit FM immuned. You only need one of the nav/coms to be FM immune but I bit the bullet and had both done on the basis that the reason for 2 radios was to guard against failure and sods law would say the only FM immune would fail!

Other things like swapping all the instruments out for backlit was slower as I waited for them to fail first! Lots of other "minor" things like the fuel computer and connecting the handheld into the intercom all added to the time and cost but have been worth. There is nothing in my aircraft now that is placarded out of use or innacurate!

What I have now is a fully functional digital IFR equipped public transport aircraft that is a great ATPL hours builder for me.

Putting good kit in will help to ensure that it lasts, I have done nearly 300 hours in mine with only a couple of minor problems.

It also does not need to be new kit there is a guy down in the South East who sells kit from wrecked aircraft at a fair price. You get it checked by an avionics shop and away you go. This was where al lot of mine came from without problem.

[Shamow]

Thanks to EVERYONE that took the time to reply.

Chilli - I didn't say you didn't answer my question. I was answering your question regarding why I would be asking (see, clear as mud).

I now have a clearer picture of what is involved if you want to fly IMC on a regular basis - exactly what I was after.

cheers

[IO540]

Shamow

it seems people fall into 2 camps - those that say the IMC is a 'get out of jail free' card and those that say it can be fully utilised, as long as your IMC skills are current

The answer, I think, is that BOTH above are correct. In other words, if you get the IMCR and don't practice it, it won't be much good. But if you practice, then there is no reason why you cannot use it to the full privileges which it gives you.

There is another issue which I may have mentioned previously (I've been away for a few days and haven't had time to read through everything on here): the type of instructor you get for the IMCR matters a lot. Try to find one who flies "for real", one with an IR. They will probably teach you the stuff a lot better than someone who never himself goes beyond the stuff he is teaching.

Regarding costs of planes, you may be lucky at your local airfield as regards groups, or unlucky. I was unlucky so had to buy one! But I did see one plane, IFR equipped, going for £8k for an 1/8 share (which probably reflected its value correctly, compared to what else I've seen). The monthly payment was about £80. On top of that there was an hourly payment for airborne time, about £60/hour including fuel. This made it quite competitive. Fortunately I discovered that the DME was not working and the group had no plans to fix it. Six of them were VFR-only pilots who had no need for it and the other two (IMC rated pilots who routinely flew the local instrument procedure which involves DME, using a GPS as an unauthorised DME substitute...) were selling their shares as a result!! This is what you've got to watch for when looking for an IFR plane. It can be easy enough to find one, only to be trapped in it when some piece of avionics fails and the "VFR-only" pilots refuse to agree to pay for fixing it.

Don't let anyone tell to to not look ahead while still doing your PPL. Some 90-95% of new PPL holders chuck their PPL away almost immediately. The way you are going, you probably won't be one of them - that's a good thing! I was the same, and it displeased most instructors. Most of them don't really like students like that; with the massive dropout rate, they aren't used to it for starters.

[squawking 7700]

Bearing in mind the subject of IMC currency, just how much real
IMC flying do you people above really do?

I like using my IMC rating, whether it's in the clag or above it or
using the skills for radio nav. etc. but there's lots of time and
areas in the country where you can't get a RIS or RAS to make the
the real IMC stuff safe, so just how many bimble about hoping
not to bump into anybody.

In my local area Waddington now knocks of at 5pm at the weekend, so a nice cruise home through the clouds has to be abandoned.

And I know people do, do it, I know the chances of hitting someone/thing are slim but you don't know what you might meet in a cloud (gliders on a good comp. day)

I don't/won't fly in the clag without RIS/RAS by the way.


7700

[S-Works]

7700, A very wise move! I would also agree flying around in cloud with no rader cover is not the safest thing on earth. How many others are there with the same view! Even following the appropraite IFR rules for seperation I doubt it would be very safe.

On the other hand flying on top and using an approved let down can't be beaten, especially when its when of those grey miserable days below and you bask in glorious sunshine above!

I do a lot of IMC flight more so then IR flying, i.e non airways flying. A recent trip to the even more frozen north than I live once again highlights the beauty of IMC. We went with a group to Edinburgh taking the twin, the weather was nice when we set out but the further north we got the typically greyer it got so by the time we were at Teesside the cloud base was a still acceptable 2000ish ft but it was all a bit murky. We chose to fly on top at FL55 in the glorius sunshine letting down into Edinburgh. This type of flying is where the IMC comes into it's own!

It is possible to fly on top a lot in the UK within the priveldges of an IMC and let down at an appropriate airfield. The satisfaction as a pilot of PLANNING an IFR trip and letting down it the other end safely is immense.

On hot hazy summer days when you get those clouds so loved by glider pilots it is nice to get above them into clear smooth air. I also think it is safer as the space above the clouds on days like this is usually a lot less cramped and it is easier to maintain a lookout for other traffic even when on a RIS.

I am definately in the camp of the IMC being high value PROVIDED you stay current on your approaches as well as your gauges and don't get tempted into doing cloud breaks into spaces you hope are empty! Thats what an instrument approach is for!

[2Donkeys]

7700, A very wise move! I would also agree flying around in cloud with no rader cover is not the safest thing on earth. How many others are there with the same view! Even following the appropraite IFR rules for seperation I doubt it would be very safe.


Would anybody care to offer an example of any collision between two flights in IMC outside controlled airspace in the last 20 years... Thought not. And it isn't because everybody is enjoying the extensive radar services available to GA outside controlled airspace either.

Not contradicting... just commenting.


2D

[S-Works]

maybe so, but perhaps it's because people are not daft enough to do it?

I had a close call earlier this year when climbing through cloud when heading north past nottingham with another aircraft doing the same thing heading east. We saw each other at the last moment as the cloud was still quite broken around the base. Made my bum clench a little!!!

It would be interesting to discover how many people will fly in solid cloud without radar cover?

I don't mind flying over it without cover but as I said before don't think it is very wise to fly in it.

[IO540]

bose-x

I agree 200% with all you say about the IMC Rating, it's great.

I saw a survey on some UK GA website a while ago on this; 60% of several hundred IMCR pilots admitted to flying in IMC en-route without an RIS.

I have no problem with doing it if I have to but won't do it within say 10 miles of an airfield with an IAP unless talking to them..

Collisions are very rare, probably because there are so few aircraft flying in actual IMC for long periods. Without an autopilot (which very few pilots have) it is just a way to get quickly knackered - even the most experienced pilots say this. Most people get on top ASAP.

The great thing about being able to fly in IMC is that a lot of the time one is legally VFR (in sight of surface, just about) but practically IMC. In this respect the IMCR is very useful outside the UK too, of course.

[2Donkeys]

See and avoid is a remarkably over-rated talent on the part of most GA-pilots.

Most of us have also had one or more scares in good VMC where we didn't see the other guy until the last minute.

There are many more collisions outside controlled airsapce in VMC than in IMC (where there have been none in 20 years). Too much to be explained purely by the glib assertion that nobody is "daft enough" to do it.

There are plenty of parts of the country where a radar service is not available outside controlled airspace. Does this mean that the non-Instrument Rated GA fleet should ground-itself in those areas when the cloud rolls in.

Big sky small plane, as a theory doesn't work too badly providing that you don't shorten the odds by crossing beacons and squeezing yourself into other obvious honeypots for aircraft. This advice is as valid in VMC as it is in IMC.

Get a radar service where you can - but you won't necessarily die if you are not under one.

2D

[S-Works]

I didn't say you would die if you did not get a service. Just because and accident has not happened does not mean it won't!!

IOS has probably hit the nail on the head here with his comments as to the reasons why!

[2Donkeys]

As the late great Frankie Howerd used to say:

"Oh please yourselves!"


2D

PS: Still waiting for you to PM one of either FD, WCollins or myself with your e-mail address bose-x so that we can arrange a get-together at a mutually agreeable time and place.

[FlyingForFun]

Ok - a question for those of you who do fly in IMC where there is no radar coverage. Do you talk to anyone at all? Are there any extra precautions you can take?

For example, imagine there's a thin layer of stratus you're trying to get on top of. It occurs to me that you could talk to London Information, and ask them if they know of anyone else in the area who's doing the same thing. If there is, you can coordinate with each other, via London Information, so that only one aircraft is in actual IMC in the area at any one time. Maybe.

Would I do this? I doubt it - because I have no way of knowing who else is in the clouds and not talking to the same people as I am. (And of course when descending through the clouds you won't know who is lurking just underneath them, VFR, perfectly legally but invisible to you until a couple of seconds before you potentially hit them.)

I like the big sky theory, but I prefer to have something else to back it up with. Aren't we always taught never to rely on one method of staying safe?

FFF
-----------

[topunicyclist]

Bose-x I agree with you and would not be happy to fly IMC outside controlled airspace without a radar service (although I haven't quite completed my IMC training).

I think the whole matter is an issue of quantifying risk. Of course there is a collision risk if flying IMC outside controlled airspace (as you yourself found out near Nottingham), but how great is that risk? Is it greater / less than the risk I take when I cycle in the city centre, snowboard down a black run etc etc?

I would imagine even scheduled commercial flights regularly fly IMC outside controlled airspace without radar cover (although not certain so someone pls correct me if I am wrong), for example Glasgow - Barra & Benbecula. I would say the risk of collision in this particular example is very small and therefore justifiable. However, flying IMC in the SE outside controlled airspace I would percieve to bit more risky due to the potentially higher volumes of traffic.

[IO540]

FlyingForFun

If flying IFR the last people I would talk to would be London Info; they are mostly used by PPL students and people going abroad (flight plans).

I would talk to the nearest place with a radar, e.g. Exeter, Solent, Thames, Boscombe, Cardiff. Even a "flight information service" from them is worth a lot more than anything I get from london Info (in my view).

Scheduled traffic does fly in VMC and IMC without an RIS, outside CAS, to some places, amazingly, especially when the radar is down.

[2Donkeys]

I think the cure for some of this discussion is to go out and get a little experience.

If you don't have much time in real IMC, or if as in some cases, you are not even rated yet, it can seem daunting to fly around in IMC not talking to anybody. From postings in the recent past, some people find the concept of flying around in VMC without talking to anybody difficult to stomach.

Once you have flown a little in IMC, you will realise that this is a non-problem. For the vast majority of the time, thre will be an ATC facility able to offer some form of limited radar service to you whilst you are in IMC. For the rest of the time, you will fly, and survive remarkably well.

Get a visit in to LTCC or your local radar unit. Some of you will be surprised I suspect by quite how few blobs there are around outside controlled airspace on IMC days. There are not an enormous number around comparatively on VMC days unless you plough the deep furrow between the South of England and Le Touquet on a sunny weekend.

As somebody else wrote earlier. This is about risk assessment. You engage in far riskier activities every day than you do when you fly without a radar service in cloud.

You are far more likely to be killed by running a tank dry or losing an instrument and crashing, than you are by a midair in IMC.


2D

[bookworm]

See and avoid is a remarkably over-rated talent on the part of most GA-pilots.

The only scientific research I've seen in this area reinforces the point quite markedly. It was commissioned after the Cerritos accident.

24 GA pilots flew Bonanzas on 45 min flights with an observer/safety-pilot in good VMC. They were briefed that the exercise was about single-pilot cockpit technique and asked from time to time to rate their workload. They were asked to call any traffic seen. A C421 conducted intercepts aiming for zero horizontal separation and 200 to 500 ft vertical separation.

The results: in 64 intercepts, the C421 was seen just 36 times, at an average range of 1 nautical mile.

(J W Andrews, Modeling of Air-to-Air Visual Acquisition, Lincoln Lab Journal Vol 2. no. 3 (1989))

Most of us have also had one or more scares in good VMC where we didn't see the other guy until the last minute.

I wonder how many went completely unseen?

[Keef]

Think that's true, bookworm.

Several times, I've seen another aircraft that's crossed my track (in VMC) relatively close, and given no indication whatever of having seen me (ie if I hadn't altered course, we might have collided).

I'm sure that I've also been the one who didn't see the other aircraft on a few such occasions.

What I have noticed very clearly is that some folks are better than others at spotting traffic. One colleague who flies quite often with me will spot other aircraft long before I do.

[bookworm]

What I have noticed very clearly is that some folks are better than others at spotting traffic. One colleague who flies quite often with me will spot other aircraft long before I do.

Yes, but I do wonder how relevant such data is. Some people are better at seeing movement against a cluttered background, which allows them to spot other aircraft in the vicinity. Unfortunately, those aren't the ones that are going to hit you in an enroute midair. The dangerous ones are the ones with no relative lateral movement, which are altogether harder to see.

[IO540]

It is probably a lot easier for a passenger to spot other planes. That's what I usually find :O

I think the hardest thing to spot would be another plane on a closing track from one side. You've got to be doing an awfully wide scan to see one of those.

TAS/TCAS and compulsory Mode C+ would be nice but all the statistical data shows that one could fly blindfolded (EN-ROUTE) and would still die of old age.

[andrewc]

The interesting thing about flying with TCAS, as I do,
is that the skies are far busier than you ever
thought they were when you were flying without
it's assistance.

You are far more aware of external traffic - in particular
you know where to look for a potential conflict.

-- Andrew

[englishal]

I agree that meeting traffic in IMC in Class G in the UK is unlikely, but the risk is there, and no doubt it'd prove to be terminal.

Out of interest how many of you use a mode C transponder while flying in IMC / IFR? (I do) I'm curious as I'm wondering on the usefullness of these portable "TCAS" units (www.avshop.com). Although they don't tell direction they will tell you differential altitude and range, which are the important things and I'd be happier flying IMC in the UK without a RIS if I had some means of traffic avoidance.

Cheers
EA:D

[bookworm]

The interesting thing about flying with TCAS, as I do,
is that the skies are far busier than you ever
thought they were when you were flying without
it's assistance.

One part of Andrews's paper I didn't describe was a comparison of the 'unalerted' visual acquisition capability with the TCAS equipped equivalent. The results were, as you would expect, vastly better. 57 of 66 targets were acquired, and 5 were not acquired because avoiding action prevented a visual sighting. Moreover, targets were sighted earlier giving the pilots a much better chance to assess the threat and take avoiding action. In the terms of the paper, the probability of sighting per unit time per unit solid angle of target was increased by a factor of about 9.

The problem with the portable collision avoidance units is that they don't give any azimuthal indication (i.e. relative bearing to the target). It's that that is the main contributor to increasing acquisition probability. Simply knowing that something is out there and getting closer doesn't help much unless you know where to look.

[IO540]

englishal & andrewc

I can see that TCAS must be an eye-opener and I also know (simply from flying under an RIS) that there are many more planes around which one never sees (even when told roughly where they are).

The HUGE problem is the number of people who fly without a transponder, or with it switched off, accidentally or deliberately. This is immediately apparent when getting an RIS. Many that one does spot are far from being bits of old junk.

I would not spend any money on a box which does not tell the direction in which to look. Most of the alarms one will not be able to act on at all.

So I could spend about £25k on kit which would help by perhaps only 30%. The other 70% won't show up.

[2Donkeys]

I am with IO540 on this

I too fly with TCAS, and in the controlled airspace environment of airways flying it is perfect. In principle, everybody has a transponder, and TCAS provides both situational awareness clues as well as a degree of protection if used correctly.

Outside controlled airspace, there are too many non-squawking aircraft, Mode A targets and other bits and pieces floating around for it to be as effective. I switch to TA-only mode under those circumstances so that at least I get some clues as to where traffic might be visually acquired. More than that is deeply unreliable.

The TPAS units I have seen advertised look like a monumental waste of money. I played with one in a friends aircraft, and apart from inducing panic that an aircraft might be close, it did little to help.

My experience was that it had big difficulties spotting the difference between traffic at the same level half a mile ahead, and traffic over the top of us 2000+ feet above.

2D

[Flyin'Dutch']

Interestingly I did a trip to Holland earlier this year and flew a few days around there. It is now mandatory for all traffic above 1200ft to have Mode C. That is all traffic apart from gliders.

So even with the TCAS in the Cirrus it remains paramount to keep a good lookout.

It is very illustrating to go and fly in a TCAS equipped machine and find out how much traffic you miss even when you do your best to keep a good lookout. Even when the TCAS points out to you where the others are it takes some good looking to see it against some backgrounds.

FD

[englishal]

I did wonder about the usefulness of these TPAS units. Sounds like a good idea, but as pointed out, no azimuth info will probably just create unnescessary worry......so I'll save my money.

Cheers
EA:D

[FlyingForFun]

For anyone who hasn't noticed, I've started a related thread in the Questions forum (http://www.pprune.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=106319) to find out what our commercial friends do when flying through uncontrolled airspace in IMC without any radar coverage.

The initial responses seem to be along the lines thatQuadrantals protect you against collisionI have previously said that I won't fly in IMC without any radar coverage. But if it's acceptable in the commercial world (even without TCAS in the case of at least one poster, although that was before TCAS was common on commercial aircraft) then I could be pursuaded to change my mind. I haven't been pursuaded yet, but I could be.

FFF
---------------

[Flyin'Dutch']

TCAS is a help but not a panacea.

Before being exposed to it I was playing with the idea of getting one of these handheld TPAS units.

Would not bother now as:

1. In the open FIR (where you are least likely to have a meaningful service) most bogeys will not have a TXPDR so they are not going to show up anyway.

2. Without azimuth and bearing information you will just get worried sick, swivelling your head in any direction to find it, potentially interrupting a 'good can' and detracting from conflicting traffic in your path.

When not able to get a RIS/RAS in the open FIR it still pays to talk to a meaningful station as most sensible people will do the same.

FD

PS: Relying on quadrantals for protection is the same as trusting the 'big sky theory'

[IO540]

Relying on quadrantals for protection is the same as trusting the 'big sky theory'

I must be missing something obvious here, but surely the quad/semi rules do nothing at all apart from reducing the speed at which traffic on a recip or roughly-recip track is likely to meet each other.

The collision speed would still be high enough to destroy both planes, in most cases.

Is there another reason for this system?

In IMC it might help with procedural separation but that requires radar assistance to start with, or control of departure times and speed.

[Flyin'Dutch']

IO wrote:
I must be missing something obvious here,
Well if everybody would stick to them and nobody had to climb to the 'opposing' traffics altitude/levels it would provide additional separation.

Alas non of the above assumptions are facts of real life aviating so it is nothing more than an aid to separation.

Maybe invented by the people that claim: 'Every little helps'

FD

[IO540]

Well if everybody would stick to them and nobody had to climb to the 'opposing' traffics altitude/levels it would provide additional separation.

Only by dispersing traffic, by taking more advantage of vertical spacing. So the benefit is only statistical. There is no increase in separation.