How do you use your IMC?

[Cricket23]

The thread about how many hours people take to get the IMC licence got me wondering about how people go about using theirs.

For instance:

1) Do you never use it and now it's lapsed?

2) Only use it to get home in bad weather?

3) Use it regularly, and in doing so extend your flyability due to the weather constraints in the UK?

4) Use it if you really have to but get sweaty palms from the experience?

5) Other, I guess...

The reason why I'm asking is that I'm thinking about doing my IMC this coming year and would be interested in how people practically use the new skill once they've got it.

Merry Christmas to all.

C23

[dont overfil]

I've only done 40 hours this year but about 5 were in IMC. Two approaches for real. I'm comfortable in IMC providing there's no ice and no CBs. My 20 year average is 10% actual IMC. I almost always plan IFR whatever the forecast. If possible on any longish trip I like to be VMC on top.
If it was not for my IMC rating very few long trips would work and the low level navigation which would then be necessary would be a pain.

DO.

[Pace]

Its not a case of get an IMC and off you go. Like with most things in aviation as in the initial PPL its a licence to start learning.

The IMC rating was constructed as a get you out of trouble thing not a mini IR. Yes experienced IMC pilots do use it as a mini IR and are safe doing so because of that experience not the rating.

So do beware of getting the IMCR and then thinking you can set off in most weather because you will not be trained to the standard to do so and will not have the experience to do so.

We had a long thread on the subject and while used as it was designed to be used the IMCR does enhance safety do not confuse it with a full instrument rating.

Pace

[Cricket23]

Thanks Pace. I did a quick search but couldn't find the thread. Are you able to lay your mouse on it please?

Regards,

C23

[IO540]

I used my IMCR a lot, and it was priceless not only for utility flying value but also for safety and finally for the experience for the FAA IR which I did 4 years later.

The IMC rating was constructed as a get you out of trouble thing

Oh please :) If you get an IR and don't use it you will be just as crap after 6 months as if you get the IMCR and don't use it.

[stickandrudderman]

Have it but have hardly used it. I like to know it's there though.
Just coming up for my second renewal and have still never flown an approach on my own! I view it as a little extra training now and then which can't do me any harm.

[dont overfil]

It's a good idea to fly with another IMC rated pilot as two crew until you get a bit experience. As IO540 says you must stay in practise in real IMC.
DO.

[Fuji Abound]

Oh please If you get an IR and don't use it you will be just as crap after 6 months as if you get the IMCR and don't use it.

Exactly.

Why is it you can almost always spot the commercial pilots and those with an IR from those who are not, or without, when the issue of the IMC raises its head?

Its just like us lot with a CAA IR who think we are a cut above the FAA lot - what a load of b*lls.

When you first get your IMCr you are a good 50% towards having the same skills sets as an IR holder. It up to you whether you develop those skill sets.

[Pace]

Fuji

I do not agree that an experienced IR pilot goes rusty if not used for six months and becomes a danger.

IR flying is a bit like riding a bike or taking up skiing. When you first start the pilot will feel completely lost, very unatural and will struggle in hooking up all the elements of IR flying.

Then it clicks and becomes second nature. The pilot no longer even thinks about it and the process becomes as natural as flying VFR.

leave it six months and it will take maybe half an hour to get back in the groove. A bit like not skiing for 9 months to an experienced skier.
As he hits the slopes again it does not take long to get back into it.

The level of training and tolerances required for the IMCR no way approach the IR. It was designed as a get out of trouble minimal training rating.
If over time and experience the IMCR pilot builds his skills then yes it can be used as a mini IR.

Pace

[WorkingHard]

Are we talking about the ability to fly by sole reference to instruments or are we talking about about flying IFR? A pilot who is well versed and well trained to fly on instruments is surely just as good at doing that if he has an IMCR or an IR. There are many pilots who may have no desire for an IR who nevertheless are very good at at IMC flying. Please do not look down on those who do not aspire to an IR and also do not assume the IR make for a better IMC pilot. I have met the odd IR pilot who just simply could not cope with flying IMC outside his/her own world of controlled airspace, radar vectors and STAR procedures etc. any more than I could cope with some of that without further training.

[Pace]

Are we talking about the ability to fly by sole reference to instruments or are we talking about about flying IFR? A pilot who is well versed and well trained to fly on instruments is surely just as good at doing that if he has an IMCR or an IR.

WorkingHard

you quote well trained! How can you be well trained to fly IFR to a minimal standard of the IMCR? The IMCR is a very basic instrument training platform which no way approaches the levels of competancy required for the IR JAA or FAA.
To then quote that a pilot who is only competant to fly IFR in controlled airspace but incompetant out of controlled airspace is rubbish.
Many procedures especially out of the UK are pilot flown and not by radar vectors. In the UK not all IFR flight remains in controlled airspace and maybe partially in and out of controlled airspace.

Pace

[Mikehotel152]

Workinghard,

Hmmmm. If that were true, I think the extra 40 hours of training to get the Instrument Rating, not to mention passing what is regarded as a notoriously difficult skills test, is a complete waste of time and money...

But I'm sure you weren't suggesting that is the case.

MH152

[IO540]

If that were true, I think the extra 40 hours of training to get the Instrument Rating, not to mention passing what is regarded as a notoriously difficult skills test, is a complete waste of time and money...

Which, to a large degreee, is true if we are talking about equipping a pilot for flying in the European enroute system.

But if one is to regard the IR as a mini jet type rating, or perhaps a means of sorting the men from the sheep, then the IR is doing a great job.

The amount of theoretical knowledge and raw instrument flying competence that is actually needed, in any plane that is equipped anywhere near adequate for the job, on top of currency on type and type specific systems knowledge (which isn't taught) is far less than one might think.

[Fuji Abound]

I do not agree that an experienced IR pilot goes rusty if not used for six months and becomes a danger.

I agree.

However, as with any skill it will degrade. When I skied for a season I was much better at the end than I am now. Flying a modern aircraft with good avionics in IMC is not hard, flying the same aircraft partial panel in cr*p weather on one engine is hard. If you are current you should make a good job of it, if you arent current, you will struggle.

The IMC rating involves around half the training of an IR. The tolerances are not as high as an IR. For anyone who has done both it should be quite clear the additional elements involved with an IR that produce a "safer" pilot - the trouble is you will find that most people who hold a view on this subject have not done both and therefore sadly - dont know what they are talking about.

[IO540]

I have done both, Fuji, and I don't think the IR has taught me anything of practical use - except perhaps the lost comms procedure.

European IFR flight is a point to point RNAV exercise where you spend much of your time flying the filed route, with frequent DCTs to (sometimes very) distant waypoints kindly assigned by ATC, with occassional vectors in busy airspace. A SID to depart, a STAR to approach on and an IAP to land on. Anybody who has been actually taught the whole IMCR syllabus, and has approached the subject with personal interest, diligence, and a bit of a brain, can do this stuff.

It will be hard to do in a Cessna 150 with no autopilot and crap instruments, but would one want to do it in something like that? The Eurocontrol routes only start c. FL070, get halfway sensible filed for FL100, and get good filed for FL140.

So the issue is self regulating. The wreckage doesn't find its way into this airspace, in the first place. Yet the IR training is still geared up for people who really want to fly wreckage, IFR. I don't think many do.

[vanHorck]

my longest DCT leg was in Hungary, 206 nm

[IO540]

Same here; I've had a good few 200nm legs.

Flying those stretched my IR training to its limits - I was really grateful for it ;) I also wished I had done the JAA CPL theory; would have sure come in handy.

Happy Xmas :)

[vanHorck]

you too! Too much food though....

[WorkingHard]

Pace and others, I did say the ability to fly the aircraft safely on instruments etc and I also said that without further training I, and no doubt most who have not done an IR course, could not cope with some or many of the IFR procedures. One of the things instrument flying teaches you (well in my case it did) is to recognise your capabilities and plan to avoid those things for which you are not trained nor have the equipment to deal with. The IR is beyond me and my flying does not require it. I recognise full well the skills the IR pilot has that we mere IMCR pilots do not. Selective reading of a post does not change the point I was trying to make. Do an IMCR and learn how to fly on instruments but also learn from the IMCR how to recognise trouble looming and stay clear.

[Pace]

WorkingHard

There are pilots who fly hard IFR out of controlled airspace with just an IMCR.

It is their experience gained slowly over years which allows that not the IMCR training itself.
In some ways it is harder for them as they have to be more creative in their flying.
They have to keep away from controlled airspace, often flying solid IMC with poor radar coverage and flying in the greatest turbulence and heaviest weather.
The danger has to be the reason that a pilot gets the IMCR.

If its as an extra safety backup for going places in VFR then its an excellent rating to have.

If its to set off in IMC conditions or known IMC conditions enroute without a lot of experience to back that up then thats asking for trouble.

Many of us have done that and survived and hence gained the experience with a number of frights along the way.

Someone mentioned flying IFR in a C150 and that is a good example why flying with an IMCR coupled with a minimal performance and equipt aircraft brings in extra hazards.

I fly corporate jets which initially climb at 3000 fpm have sytem redundancy and capable autopilots and deicing anti icing systems.

The poor pilot minimally trained in a poor performance aircraft with no deicing anti icing and minimal systems has to be extra careful and self impose limits to the conditions he will fly in.

To not do so increases the risk levels dramatically as shown by a number of recent fatalities published in these threads.

There are many here in the private pilots forum who defend the IMCR because that is all that is available to them. Some go the FAA way as that is a practical IR which is achievable for a working man/woman. Fewer get the JAA IR because they cannot afford the time and expense of following that route. It is the sytem that is wrong not the pilots and that is a sad thing for all of us.

Pace

[Whopity]

The IMC rating was constructed as a get you out of trouble thing not a mini IR.

No it was not. It was designed to reinstate privileges that were once part of a PPL i.e. the right to fly IFR outside controlled airspace. The glider pilots retain that right to the present day!

Pilots who complete the IMC rating are taught to operate safely in IMC and are required to be taught a minimum of two different instrument approaches one of which must be pilot interpreted. To pass the test indicates that they are competent to use the rating fully but only in Class D airspace or below.

What people do with the rating is varied and usually down to cost. Those who use it regularly become very competent and are as good as any pilot with an IR, whilst those who do not use it may well regress. Many use it as a means of improving their skills, with no real desire to fly IMC whilst a few realise that flying IFR is not for them. Either way it is a very good rating that has contributed greatly to GA safety.

If we loose it more people will kill themselves because pilots will continue to fly in marginal conditions but with no training!

[Squeegee Longtail]

The IMCR got me into and out of trouble a few times.

I agree with others, to fly in a poorly equipped, poorly powered aircraft in solid IMC outside controlled airspace, doing your own nav (no GPS in my day), on/off radar service, single pilot, no autopilot is about as high stress as it gets.

If you can fly with the IMCR profficiently, flying with the full IR is a piece of p1ss.

[IO540]

Whopity has put it very well, above.

Pace - you keep falling into the same old trap as so many commentators: fail to separate the legal privileges (the piece of paper you get signed off) from currency on type, aircraft equipment level, etc (which is largely a function of MONEY and TIME devoted to flying and which cannot ever be regulated or legislated as to minima).

[belowradar]

Just a personal observation.....the weather and obstructions will kill you just the same whatever your qualifications, once you are in clouds the skill set needed is the same. The penalty for insufficient knowledge or skill can be extremely unforgiving as many accident reports testify.:\

Get good training, stay proficient and remember that we don't have to fly if it is rubbish weather.

[spikeair]

back to the original question. Its (4) for me. I generally plan my flights as IFR and regularly fly in IMC, although typically its not for more than 20-25 minutes or so. It will also usually include an instrument approach , most of the time that is an ILS but sometimes has been a LLZ/DME SRA or on one occasion a PAR. I Regularly practise instrument approaches even in VMC and really enjoy this aspect of flying.
For me , I want to make instrument flying a regular event so that when I do encounter IMC conditions, its not a white knuckle ride and becomes a standard part of the flying.
I do strongly believe that you have to keep in practice for this. I'd hate to fly for several months or more even , and then have to flying an instrument approach in anger, thats when youre workload is going to be the highest and when you are likely to make a mistake.
If you have to keep in practice, whats wrong with flying IFR as a general rule?
You rating gives you those priviliges so I don't see anthing wrong with excercising them?

[IO540]

If you have to keep in practice, whats wrong with flying IFR as a general rule?That's an excellent idea.

Perhaps the 2nd best piece of advice I ever got from an instructor (1st best was to fly an accurate trimmed speed on final) was to always plan every flight as IFR, and if the conditions are VFR then you get a view outside as a bonus.

If I was an instructor, that is how I would always teach somebody to fly. Plan every flight so it can be executed without seeing the ground enroute initially, and plan every flight so it can be executed without seeing the ground at all eventually. This means using a GPS, backed up by navaids, and the altitude planned according to the MSA.

None of this implies flying an IMC, because you can scrap the flight if the conditions are IMC. But a VFR flight executed in this way is going to be low-workload, very straightforward, and very safe.

[spikeair]

that sounds bang on to me and a sensible approach (excuse the pun!)

[stuartforrest]

I use my IMC rating to extend the use of my Bonanza. I regularly climb through cloud and do approaches (not to very low minimums in most cases) to airfields and have done a variety of approaches including one I had never practised into Inverness on a pretty low cloud base day (DME Arc).

I think it is essential if you are going to fly any amount of IMC to have a properly equipped autopilot and I would not fly IMC without one. The Bonanza has an autopilot that will fly in heading, Nav and approach mode. I like to fly IMC with the autopilot turned on because it does the work for you and you can monitor everything properly but I do occasionally fly without to keep my hand in.

I would love to do an IR but the time it would take stops me.

[Cricket23]

Thanks folks, some interesting replies and opinions here. Assuming that you know the icing conditions (in the clouds) then is it better(?) easier(?) to punch through the clouds and enjoy the sunshine on top, or to continue in marginal viz in the murk beneath the clouds?

Hope you all had a good Christmas.

C23.

[IO540]

Assuming that you know the icing conditions (in the clouds) then is it better(?) easier(?) to punch through the clouds and enjoy the sunshine on top, or to continue in marginal viz in the murk beneath the clouds?

Unfortunately that question is a bit moot in most cases because of UK's airspace structure forcing you low down - unless you have the full IR and then can file a Eurocontrol IFR flight plan in which case you get an essentially unlimited airspace to play in, plus the guaranteed enroute clearance.

Otherwise, I would always climb to VMC on top. This gives you generally unlimited visibility so you aren't going to fly into anything nasty, it gives you trivial avoidance options if there is something nasty ahead (CBs etc), and the main 'problem' is that you have to get back down somehow at the other end and you don't want to descend through 10,000ft of freezing layers for example - definitely not if the 0C level is below the MSA (because the ice may never melt and you will be landing with all that you have collected on the way down). The other problem is that the cloud tops could keep rising and eventually reach your operating ceiling (or, if you have the IMCR, they could rise to the base of CAS which in the UK is likely to be Class A). But a decent look at the weather data should address these things.

The opposite strategy (flying below the cloud) is often practically safer because you cannot get shafted by the cloud tops rising up into CAS into which you don't get a clearance. And if the terrain rises to meet the cloudbase, you can always turn back (can't you? ;) ). Of course this strategy kills many people every year (scud running) but it really shouldn't.

However, in weather like the s. UK has today (freezing down to ground level, especially in the mornings) there isn't much flying one can do safely at all, and that is just the price one must accept for not flying a much more expensive and capable plane. I would want to stay in VMC the whole time, or perhaps climb/descend through some thin cloud.

It was funny yesterday pm. +4C on the ground, falling to +2C at 2000ft, then rising to +6C at 4000ft. That was fine for flying, even in IMC.