Instrument Flying

[Cloudwatcher]

I did instrument flying yesterday, exercise 19 I believe. What I would like to know though is why under the JAA syllabus only 1 hour is required on this subject and yet under the old CAA rules 4 hours were required (or so I have been told.). .Surely with the weather in the UK being as unpredictable as it is more time should be spent on this potentially life saving subject.. .Incidentally my school continues to provide a minimum of 4 hours, and I must admit I find that rather comforting as Im sure I will better prepared than some if I found myself in a situation where cloud was unavoidable.. .I wonder what the rest of you think?. .Cheers. .Cloudwatcher

[GJB]

who knows, is my honest answer!

but, the more practise and experience you have of simulated instrument flying the better.

i've just finished the IMC, during which my instructor took me into IMC conditions.

Sitting without the foggles on and no external visual clues as to where we were was quite an eery expreience. Why not suggest to an instructor that you experience this?

[Evo7]

I did Ex.19 last saturday, and at the end of it my instructor took me into cloud (not hard!) and made me do a 180 degree turn out of IMC "for real". Much more useful IMHO than just doing turns, climbs etc. in clear sky with foggles on.

Then, for "fun", he made me track a VOR to the airfield and then fly the circuit still with foggles on. I only started looking out the window again at 500 feet on short final (and did a cr@ppy landing!). Brilliant fun, but hard - even with plentiful assistance. Definitely going for the IMC after the PPL <img src="smile.gif" border="0">

[long final]

Seems very strange. I for one, was told many times that a PPL was more likely to meet an early grave through inadvertent IMC flying than anything else.

Four hours may possibly be and hour of so more than most would need, but I would think that it was a much better ruling than this.

Also agree with the real IMC flying - luckily my instructor did a great deal of IMC training in cloud - I wouldn't have wanted to do it all on foggles then set off alone one day into the muck <img src="eek.gif" border="0">

LF

[RVR800]

It's because under the JAA PPLs are discouraged. .from IFR flying....

Under JAR the IR has been hijacked as a rating for professional pilots only

The IR is more difficult, more expensive,. .and more timeconsuming than it was and. .the JAA do not support the IMC rating. .at all.

To their credit the CAA have sustained the. .IMC rating which exists in the UK because. .the IR is not available to many.

If the IMC rating didn't exist. .there would be more CFIT & Stall/Spin/VNE incidents in adverse Wx

The number of UK PPL IR issues has dropped to . .single figures under JAR and airways flying in the UK is often done using FAA rules using FAA registered kit by many business people.

[ 24 January 2002: Message edited by: RVR800 ]</p>

[GJB]

I still think that the IMC is an excellent course PROVIDED it is not treated as an IR, or used to fly continuously in IMC conditions.

Suppose you want to take-off and climb above some low level scud, track some beacons,then decend through cloud and follow a published procedure to land. It can make the difference between cancelling a trip, taking a risk by going low level, or having to divert. I am much happier flying on top of the crap, at a safe altitude, and having sufficient low stress time en-route to think about my descent, approach and alternatives.

It's all about good preparation before you encounter IMC conditions.

I would fully reccomend the IMC course to any PPL holder, looking for a fresh challenge and who wants to increase their flexibility as a pilot.