Multi first or MECIR?

[Virtually There]

Just finished my CPL and have tailwheel, retrac, CSU and NVFR, so am now planning the next logical step - FIR, ME or MECIR?

I guess my question is, do I really need a command instrument rating to find work up north - or would twin time suffice until I have more money to put towards the IFR?

From what I gather, most charter and airwork up north is VFR anyway, so why the emphasis on the command instrument rating? And would it not be cheaper (and/or more sensible) to get a multi engine endorsement first (and be adept at flying twins) before tackling the IFR?

Is there any reason why most pilots elect to do their IFR and ME all in one go? Am I missing something?

Thanks in advance.

[ChaseIt]

No point getting a twin endo before heading out into charter as the training school twins are rarely the same as you will see in charter. Unless of course you actively seek a school with a islander or baron, AC50, chieftain etc to do your initial twin endo in...

Having your initial IFR before heading up North could save your bacon and give you that little edge over your competitor when applying for jobs!

What ever you do, don't waste you money on a single engine IFR or doing your rating in some fancy glass cockpit...

Can highly recommend Bob Harris in Innisfail or John Chew (somewhere between Darwin, Cairns and Melbourne) :ok:

Best of luck

[BlatantLiar]

If you're still keen to invest more in this potential career, do an initial multi as there are, albeit decreasing, an amount of companys flying the od 58 exclusively VFR. To me a fresh CPL who does not have a mecir looks more attractive than one who has. It shows that you're a realist, that you haven't naively handed money over to a flying school or done some sausage factory full bells and whistles course. Once you're in the game with a couple of hundred hours under you belt, when you see that further investment in yourself and your chosen career may be worth something then go and do your mecir.

[Centaurus]

My thoughts. First of all take a look at RAAF training. The course is around 210 hours all on a single engine type. The pilots graduate with an instrument rating. It would be inconceivable for the RAAF to send a newly graduate pilot to a squadron without an instrument rating.
There is a logic in undertaking an instrument rating as soon as possible either during or after CPL. Forget VFR hours making you a better instrument pilot. Those hours mean nothing.

Despite fine weather most times up north or other parts of Australia, there will be times where a VFR pilot can be caught out - not necessarily through his own fault. Commercial pressures are real and the temptation as a new VFR charter pilot to cut corners to please your employer will be strong. You might find yourself in cloud or bad visibility or a black really black night where you need instrument flying skills to survive.

The 10 hours of dual instrument flying instruction required for a CPL does not prepare you adequately for the first time you are seriously on instruments (inadvertently or otherwise) without an instructor holding your hand.

Whether or not you can afford a multi-engine instrument rating is for you to consider. But get an instrument rating before you start job hunting and doing it on a single is one way that is affordable. There are flying schools who recommend you combine the initial twin endorsement with a multi-engine instrument rating. That gets expensive as it is all multi-engine dual.

There is nothing to stop you however, to starting the instrument rating course on a single and then change to a twin for the last few hours. Be prepared for grumbles from the flying school if you go down that path. Once you are reasonably competent on cross-country instrument flying in the single as part of the course, switching to a twin to finish off makes good sense and is cost efficient. If the flying school claims it will only do full instrument ratings either on a single or a twin but not a combination then go elsewhere.

Another point worth considering and that is the vital importance of being equally competent at instrument flying on limited panel as on full panel. By limited panel I mean without the main artificial horizon in front of you. That leaves an electrically powered Turn Coordinator and an old fashioned magnetic compass. Vacuum pumps are known to fail. Limited panel is best practiced initially on a synthetic trainer and includes take off and initial climb, unusual attitude recoveries, holding patterns and instrument approaches on limited panel. There are older pilots who were taught spinning on limited panel and recovery. That took considerable instrument flying skill especially if vertigo hit you during the spin.

Even after you have gained your instrument rating ensure you try and give yourself an hour a month in a synthetic trainer on limited panel. It can be a life saver and money well spent. EFIS instrument panels are very reliable but you can be sure that one black night in your career you will experience an event where the normal artificial horizon gives mis-leading information or fails completely. Read the ATSB report about the Piper Aztec that departed Moorabbin with a defective AH and was lucky not to have lost control in cloud

Finally: Once you're in the game with a couple of hundred hours under you belt, when you see that further investment in yourself and your chosen career may be worth something then go and do your mecir.
There you go- another Ppruner suggests a different slant on things. He might be right but it becomes your call.
.

[Square Bear]

Two things not to leave home without are your ATPL subjects and a CIR.

If you can't afford the ME CIR, at least get one in a single.

Even if your job is VFR, chances are that you might/will get caught out inadvertently in IMC.

Having the confidence from a CIR rating will be invaluable and may very well save your life.

[Aussie Bob]

What Blatant Liar said. Get a job first. How much do you want to invest in a dying industry.

[solowflyer]

At the least do the IREX while you are still in study mode. It is unlikely you will need it in your first few years but if you have it you will be ready to jump up the ladder if an opportunity arises. If you have good paying job now I'd say do it while you can afford to pay for it as trying to save on min pay is hard.

[Flying Bear]

Get an instrument rating of some flavour - maybe not M/E, but at least know (ie be trained) how to fly with less than visual reference.

First job likely to be in the NT - therefore, possibly caught out in weather during the Wet, or potentially more dangerous, wrestling with the haze prevalent over most of the region during the Dry due to the strong subsidence inversion. I recall flying an ILS into ASP close to minima because of this - yet there wasn't a cloud in the sky...

Many pilots have no idea about the challenges of flying in conditions of poor visibility / contrast.

Many GA companies couldn't give a toss whether a junior pilot has an I/R or not, and my point has nothing to do with being employable!

Changing the comment above slightly:

Do you want to possibly die in the industry because you weren't prepared to invest?

[Aussie Bob]

Do you want to possibly die in the industry because you weren't prepared to invest?

Just a wee bit extreme there Bear! Almost an insult to the myriad of professional pilots out there making a living who have never had an instrument rating. On one hand we have stuff like this and on the other we have the dire warnings about mixing VFR and IFR flight together.

[Virtually There]

As usual, this forum has thrown up some insightful and diverse arguments, and I thank everyone for sharing their experience and opinions.

I am under no illusions as to the value of an instrument rating as a potential life-saver, employment prospect and pillar of flying skills.

My real question was how best to go about it, and a couple of posters have already given me food for thought . . .

I'm not a young bloke, and I'm not a fresh 150-hourly CPL. I've been flying privately for seven years and have about 300 hours in mostly faster (160kt) complex singles and tail draggers. I'm realistic about my future flying prospects, but I'm established and can afford to take a cut in salary and change of lifestyle to work my way up.

I like the idea of doing a CIR and ME endorsement separately, instead of bundling them together with the attendant time and cost.

Is there any real disadvantage to doing a SECIR first and then upgrading to a MECIR down the track, once I have more experience on twins? Is there any real difference in the cost of a renewal for each (apart from the difference in aircraft costs), and once you have a SECIR, is it relatively easy to convert to a MECIR?

I'm trying to be practical, as from what I've seen and read, a lot of fresh CPLs get a MECIR and don't use it for some time, but still have to soak up the initial cost and then renew it each year.

It just seems to make more sense to me to get a bit of experience flying twins first before learning how to fly them in the middle of undertaking an instrument rating!

Would it really be any more expensive/disadvantageous to get a twin endorsement and SECIR separately, then combine the two down the track?

Thanks again!

[ChaseIt]

I have to agree with Square Bear.. DEFIANTLY knock off your ATPL exams before you get into flying... The number of pilots I have come across hating life because they have had to put their flying on hold to complete their exams. A little stress now saves a lot of stress later on.

[travelator]

It will be easier to get your CIR after a few years of flying as your skills and knowledge will be more polished. However, it can be almost impossible to get enough time off to travel back somewhere to get the rating done and not having it when the opportunity to move onto twins comes can hold you back. The twin job is almost always very short notice and operators will not wait for you to get your s$&t in one sock.

[Centaurus]

It will be easier to get your CIR after a few years of flying as your skills and knowledge will be more polished

The RAAF have been in the flying training game from time immemorial and an instrument rating before graduation has been the policy. Recommend you keep that in mind.

[BlatantLiar]

If you can't fly through cloud how are we going to win the war?

[travelator]

The guy has already done cpl and wants some advice about qualifications to add looking for civilian work not joining the RAAF. Recommend you keep that in mind.

[hillbillybob]

I have to agree with Square Bear.. DEFIANTLY knock off your ATPL exams before you get into flying... The number of pilots I have come across hating life because they have had to put their flying on hold to complete their exams. A little stress now saves a lot of stress later on.

I'd say this is pretty solid advice especially if you are currently in a position that supports you doing it. There are lots of blokes up here at the moment, some with jobs, some not, but all that haven't done their ATPLs want to do them but are either working too much (a lot are doing 2 jobs) or struggling to find the motivation for other reasons (see you thursday at the Roey) or now they are on less money baulking at the cost.

[CYHeli]

Under Part 61, an IF rating is an IF rating.
There is no single engine vs multi.

BUT you can only fly the multi if you do a test or proficiency check in he multi. (Generally speaking)

So do a single IR and it will be easier to up grade later.
Then do an instructor rating, you will get work later.

[pilotchute]

Getting the MECIR done before you set off is essential. I personally saw 2 guys passed over for upgrade to the 310 because they didn't have MECIR's!

It also helps when you see those ads asking for "3 IFR renewals minimum" as mandatory. Wait too long and you will have 1500 hours with only one renewal.

Some companies will also be very reluctant to let you go for a month so you can go and get your MECIR sorted out. Mainly because you will also be asking for time off for ATPL's, brothers birthdays and god knows what else!!

Last but not least I have seen guys doing their MECIR in Melbourne get offered different jobs whilst doing the course. Guys who come down with 500-1000 hours single time to do MECIR's end up picking up jobs on Metro's, PA31's and the like. Whilst this by is by no means a common, operators don't like their pilots vanishing for too long as the tend not to come back.

[Square Bear]

Having re read the OP original post again the question asked was:

so am now planning the next logical step - FIR, ME or MECIR?

I have been out of GA for some time, and maybe it has changed somewhat but if you can afford it go for the MECIR. OK, you may not get a multi job first off but you will be in the running if the company needs to upgrade someone from a single to a twin.

If you can't afford a MECIR, I still suggest that you have a CIR before you leave. That is what I did, and on the next renewal I turned it into a MECIR. I didn't need the Multi one initially so I saved the cash.

However, my logic for having a rating (besides that the point that it puts you ahead of the guy without one) is that it will give you more confidence in your flying, and if you do enter IFR inadvertently you will do better than someone who has not had the training (with the exception of that that is mandatory in the CPL)

An example that comes to mind happened some years ago, totally unforcasted really bad weather rolled into Horn Island, actually rolled into the whole of the area and it went from good to bad very very fast.

Three or four aircraft in holding pattern over HID, one or two doing a missed and then out of the blue comes a voice from a driver in a fast VFR single who was in cloud, had no idea where he/she was and was asking for help.

Luckily there were many experience guys/gals who helped (one who I still applaud today who took the lead and probably saved that the day). Without that help I am not so sure that the outcome would have been so good.

Of course that is one pilot out of so many that don't get into such a bad situation, but I bet that there are also many untold stories that resemble that one. In fact, I know a few more.

I don't think anyone is trying to disrespect or insult the VFR guys, geez we probably all started there, and I really don't think anyone is trying to say you must get a rating, just that if you can, why not just not do it!

[Virtually There]

Under Part 61, an IF rating is an IF rating.
There is no single engine vs multi.

BUT you can only fly the multi if you do a test or proficiency check in he multi. (Generally speaking)

So do a single IR and it will be easier to up grade later.
Then do an instructor rating, you will get work later
Was just reading Part 61 IR today . . .

Looks like there's some agreement on doing the SEIR first and then upgrading to a multi down the track or at renewal time.

I really appreciate all the advice. Getting the CPL is one thing, but deciding what to do next is an entirely different proposition!

[pilotchute]

I believe the part 61 IFR will work like it does in FAA land.

This is what generally happens in the good old USA.

PPL- (this includes NVFR as you cant hold a PPL without night rating in FAA land) It doesn't say NVFR on the licence, its just a given.

Straight after PPL is IR S/E- I think this is a great idea as the hour building phase generally follows. Exposure to weather other than CAVOK when your progressing up to your CPL test is a blessing in disguise.

After CPL check ride many do a M/E rating. During your M/E checkride you have to shoot a couple of instrument approached one of which includes and engine inop approach. Then presto! Multi engine IR done. No need to waste hours of flight time on NDB's in the USA hence the MECIR works out to be about 40% cheaper there.

[Flying Bear]

G'Day Aussie Bob - my intention was not to disrespect VFR pilots, certainly I have advocated on other forums that VFR done right is no less safe than IFR. I have a good friend (who was a mentor to me in my earlier career) who has never held an IR and he certainly has had a long and successful flying career. My company operates VFR for the majority of its work, however all the M/E pilots are IFR qualified and current - the idea being that the use of that rating is a "tool in the toolbox" for when it is required. The majority of days in the north of this continent do not require an IFR flight plan...

Upon re-read of my post, I can see how it may appear "extreme"... Not my intent, however the other Bear (Square Bear) more accurately sums up my thoughts on the matter - if you can, you should... There is no better insurance than training and "upskilling", especially when one lacks in experience. A hallmark of the commensurately professional VFR pilot is the refined judgement to know what can (and cannot) be worked with. Although the same is true of an IFR pilot (the MECIR does not make one invincible!), the additional skill set offered by dedicated / comprehensive instrument flight training will go some way to mitigating the lack of judgement that is a weakness often found in the low time pilot - which is the context of this thread.

[Virtually There]

I believe the part 61 IFR will work like it does in FAA land.

This is what generally happens in the good old USA.

PPL- (this includes NVFR as you cant hold a PPL without night rating in FAA land) It doesn't say NVFR on the licence, its just a given.

Straight after PPL is IR S/E- I think this is a great idea as the hour building phase generally follows. Exposure to weather other than CAVOK when your progressing up to your CPL test is a blessing in disguise.

After CPL check ride many do a M/E rating. During your M/E checkride you have to shoot a couple of instrument approached one of which includes and engine inop approach. Then presto! Multi engine IR done. No need to waste hours of flight time on NDB's in the USA hence the MECIR works out to be about 40% cheaper there
Better late than never, I guess, but it does make you wonder why everything is so complicated (bureaucratic) and expensive in Australia. I know there are economies of scale in the US, but the cost of everything - especially any administrative fees associated with CASA - is pretty outrageous here. It's like you get milked every step of the way from student license to CPL and beyond.

I hope that goes some way to explaining why I'm asking all these questions and not blindly rushing to hand over any more money than I need to. Not saying I'm not prepared to do the hard yards, but if I can spread things out over a sensible time frame, it would certainly help. Having said that, it looks like I now need to put some more money aside for an instrument rating. From a flying skills and safety point of view - at the very least - it seems to make sense.

[DaVeAU]

Hi Virtually There,
I just bumped to this thread - basically I'm in the same shoe as you were two years ago. Do you have any update on the direction you choose?

I'm thinking about getting the IR - just passed the IREX exam, but wondering if I should get the IR rating (IR or MECIR, that's also a question) or I should try to find a VFR charter job first.

So if you could share your experiences, that would be a great help to figure out what my next step should be :)

Cheers,
Dave

[Judd]

I'm thinking about getting the IR - just passed the IREX exam, but wondering if I should get the IR rating (IR or MECIR, that's also a question) or I should try to find a VFR charter job first.


You cannot call yourself a professional pilot unless you are qualified to fly in cloud as well as in sunny weather. Strongly recommend you obtain an instrument rating (single or multi depending on finances) before you venture out looking for your first job. It will surely save your skin one day (or night) and that of your passengers:ok:

[DaVeAU]

You cannot call yourself a professional pilot unless you are qualified to fly in cloud as well as in sunny weather. Strongly recommend you obtain an instrument rating (single or multi depending on finances) before you venture out looking for your first job. It will surely save your skin one day (or night) and that of your passengers:ok:
I totally agree, but at the end it comes down to financials - and that's the hard part. I'd like to get the IR as soon as possible, but the question here is that before/or after getting employed.

If I'd have unlimited funding I'd start the course tomorrow - regardless the employment as I see IR as a very important skill to have.
On the other hand if I'm not flying commercially I can remain a 'nice weather pilot' without the commercial pressures.

So it's really an egg or chicken question for me now :)

[Clare Prop]

My advice is to wait until you have clocked up about 500-1000 hours and then tackle it. You are very unlikely to get an IFR job in an IFR equipped aircraft straight out of flying school and could just end up with an expensive burden to keep current.

What Judd has said sounds like a sales pitch. Of course flying schools are going to want you to keep forking out your coins on more and more courses. The old "you're not a professional pilot unless..." :rolleyes nonsense is actually rather insulting to the any of us who fly professionally VFR and make good decisions so we don't end up having to "save our skin" because the airline life and all the bling might not appeal to all of us.

As an employer of VFR pilots, having an IR on your resume would make no difference to your application. Giving the impression that you might be the type to make decisions that would necessitate "saving your skin" however, would make a negative impression.

[snoop doggy dog]

Get your MECIR ASAP.

You start building renewals and as others have alluded, a good skill set that will come in handy :)

[Judd]

What Judd has said sounds like a sales pitch


Sorry to disappoint you but believe me, nothing could be further from the truth. All my own flying training was fortunately in the RAAF where instrument flying started right from ab-initio days until graduation at 210 hours with a full instrument rating. Much of that was on limited panel because of the unreliability of artificial horizons in those days.

No sales pitch there, just a heartfelt thanks to those instructors who, with great patience, taught me to fly on instruments when I was just 19.

[olm8tyrone]

As usual its a RAAF'ie neglecting to take into consideration commercial realities.

[Virtually There]

Well DaVeAU, I got the multi, and got a job, and haven't needed an instrument rating at all, as we only fly VFR. I fly regular ferry flights at night in remote areas, which is good IF practice, and will be getting my IR at some point (when I have a break from work!).

I didn't plan it that way, but passed my IREX and then got messed around by a flight school when I went to do my MECIR and only had enough time to complete my multi before starting work - so in the end, didn't have a choice.

In my opinion, yes it will make you a more complete pilot, and yes it will be advantageous to have a few renewals when it comes time to move up to RPT. If you can afford to do it, do it.

But it is hard to do renewals remotely, and if you can't afford to do it right now, or - like me - circumstance conspires against you, it's not the end of the world.

I spoke to a CFI of a school that specialises in IR training not long ago and his own opinion was most new CPLs were better off trying to land that first job up north and get a bit of real-world flying under their belts before getting a MECIR. In his words: "No-one's going to give you a job flying twins and most of the flying up north is VFR. You need to go out and scare yourself a couple of times, get some hours under your belt and then come back and see me - then you'll really appreciate what an instrument rating is for!"

Many of his students have 800+ hours before they tackle their MECIR, which is about when they're looking to step up to twins.

I will say I've seen a few pilots up here with IR's who never use them and let them lapse - that's just the reality.

[glenb]

Centaurus, I'm going to disagree with you for the only time in my life. I promise.

I own a Flying School, we do a lot of Instrument Ratings. Firstly I don't believe for one minute that any Flying School would have a policy for pushing Students into a twin for an Instrument Rating for commercial gain. If so, market forces would have driven them out of this tough market. The margins are probably identical to that of a single engine aircraft. There is no Financial gain in doing it. The 50 percent reduction in twin hours for a saving of probably less than $2000, against the additional assymetric exposure, the more confident entrance to the flight test, the probable safety benefit, the cost of retraining and retesting in event of a fail, the fact that you may be thrown into the deep end on your first job and be potentially drawing on every bit of twin exposure you can recall, etc etc etc. Every pilot has to make their own decision. Its probably an additional 2% of the cost of your pilot training. Work an extra 3 weeks. Save. Make it work. Like I say to my kids. "Just because its my opinion, doesn't mean its the correct opinion"

Centaurus, I sincerely promise I will never have a differing view to you again.

[glenb]

I hear the argument "the instructor is just trying to get his twin hours up", for doing it all in a twin. Well if my Instructor steps up and gets a good rep as a twin ifr instructor and gets lots of requests and more requests lead to more twin hours, and he throws himself into his well motivated students, well that's even more value for my $2000, in my opinion.

[outlandishoutlanding]

The flying school that I wanted to do my CIR at, doesn't have any IFR rated singles - and I think that occasionally flying twins (and not doing asymmetrics all the time etc) is a good way to get yourself killed.

[DaVeAU]

Thank you all the advice! ;) Looks like it's not a black-and-white decision - I think the best for me now to shop around the schools and potential employers to see what can I achieve (as a reality check), and that would make easier to decide. (VFR job first or MECIR).

[OZ-G10]

You cannot call yourself a professional pilot unless you are qualified to fly in cloud as well as in sunny weather. Strongly recommend you obtain an instrument rating (single or multi depending on finances) before you venture out looking for your first job. It will surely save your skin one day (or night) and that of your passengers:ok:
I think making a blanket statement that your not a professional pilot unless you have an instrument rating is having a narrow view of commercial operations.
I and many of my colleagues are either not current or don't have Instrument Ratings but all have been forging successful careers in our chosen fields of Aerial Agriculture and Aerial Firefighting. We all consider ourselves professional pilots.
An instrument rating, white shirt and some gold bars doesn't automatically make you a professional.

[Centaurus]

"No-one's going to give you a job flying twins and most of the flying up north is VFR. You need to go out and scare yourself a couple of times, get some hours under your belt and then come back and see me - then you'll really appreciate what an instrument rating is for!"


"You need to go out and scare yourself a few times" If you are talking about running short of fuel or getting lost (temporarily uncertain of your position in the never-never), then that is bound to happen sooner or later to most VFR only CPL's as they gain experience.

But if you are alluding to a VFR CPL inadvertently penetrating IMC whether low cloud and/or blinding rain necessitating going on to instruments, then it's a bit late to be thinking about getting an instrument rating. :ok:

[Centaurus]

Centaurus, I'm going to disagree with you for the only time in my life. I promise.


Glenb. I fully agree with all the points made in your 31 May post. I must say I have been out of the general aviation instructing game for many years and that inevitably leads to failure to keep up with current thinking when it comes to offering "advice" in response to some Pprune readers queries. We are all the product of our original training and things were different in my days. Please feel free to disagree with my comments as much as you like. Nothing as refreshing as diversity of professional opinion.

[Virtually There]

They weren't my words, of course, but I believe he was alluding to those times you may encounter poor visibility or inclement weather that starts to close in on you, or blocks/diverts you for many miles. As a low-hour VFR pilot, it can be testing and unnerving. But I'd posit most such pilots who get themselves in trouble do so through sheer inexperience, as opposed to being cavalier.

[Centaurus]

But I'd posit most such pilots who get themselves in trouble do so through sheer inexperience, as opposed to being cavalier.

There is no doubt about it. You are right. During my own flying training on Wirraways at Uranquinty NSW I got lost on my first solo cross-country flight of two hours. Heavy rain storms en route and the more I flew around them the worse was my map reading. Saw a railway line and followed it at 200 feet hoping it would lead me to a railway station with a name on its platform.

It did and the name was Harden and it wasn't on my map. Sod's Law said the name on my map was wrong. Turned out the name had been changed but not on the map we had been given. I don't know how but I finally got back to base just as a flare path was being laid out for my late arrival.

Reported to the CFI straight away and told him about flying down the railway line at 200 feet to get a pin-point. All was forgiven (we should not have been sent out in view of poor weather). However the CFI told me I would have been scrubbed if I had not admitted to low flying as he already had a report from some character on the ground who reported my low flying.

[Captain Nomad]

Great story Centaurus. Take note kiddies, honesty is always the best policy. Something else we seem to be losing in this day and age where nobody wants to take responsibility for anything anymore... :(

[pithblot]

Lots of interesting viewpoints here.

A further problem with launching into your first flying job without proper instrument flying skills - and a plan to maintain them- is that you may unknowingly become an expert at performance flying. It's a common habit that many of us have, easy to develop in VMC and a trap in the Dry. Performance flying is when you move the controls until the performance settles 'just right'.

To fly IFR well you will have to replace performance flying with proper
Instrument Attitude flying and it can be very difficult to unlearn bad habits.
This is particularly true when the pressure is on - say in a nightmare Sim check - when we fall back on what we first learned. If your habit is performance flying then you will fall back to pushing and shoving the controls. If your habit is proper Instrument Attitude flying then you will do this when ****s are trumps, and that at least gets you to first base.

I know of pilots who discovered the scourge of performance flying on the pre employment Sim check and it didn't go well for them.

[Centaurus]

I know of pilots who discovered the scourge of performance flying on the pre employment Sim check and it didn't go well for them.

Apologies for sounding so dumb but what exactly is "Performance" flying as against flying an aeroplane normally? I had never heard of the term before. Is it something recently invented and how did it affect the bloke going for a simulator assessment? Why is it a `scourge`?:eek:

[Another Number]

what exactly is "Performance" flying
It's skipping to the "performance" without worrying about that annoying power+attitude...

Or, if I understand it correctly, its reacting directly to the guages rather than setting up, monitoring, adjusting, etc. ...