Is it worth gaining an IMC?

[JSAG]

Having had my PPL for a year I am about to proceed with an IMC rating. An interesting new learning experience and hopefully of some use when VFR isn't as VFR as you'd like it.

But I've just read a CAA handout about cutting VORs from 46 to 19. The 19 survivors will be - Aberdeen (ADN) Belfast (BEL) Berry Head (BHD) Clacton (CLN) Compton (CPT) Honiley (HON) Isle of Man (IOM) Land’s End (LND) Ottringham (OTR) Pole Hill (POL) Saint Abbs (SAB) Seaford (SFD) Stornoway (STN) Strumble (STU) Sumburgh (SUM) Talla (TLA) Tiree (TIR) Wallasey (WAL) Wick (WIK)

Not OCK, MID, BIG or GWC B in the area I'm likely to need them.

Is it indeed safe to fly IMC if there are not enough VORs to navigate by.
Even if you fly DME radials shouldn't you still have a back up?

I understand that there's more to an IMC rating than nav by VOR but how practical will it's use be.

Cheers
John

[A and C]

I think you have already aswered your own question, the IMC is about much more than tracking a few VOR's

I would hope that your instructor would bring in the use of GPS for IMC navigation and approaches if only to back up use of VOR & ADF.

With the changeable weather in the UK the IMC gives you the option of climbing above the MSA if the visibility makes continuing VFR impractical.

In short the IMC rating makes you a much safer pilot, I recommend it for any PPL holder who intends to go places.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Yes it is.

Cross-country nav is a juggling game of GPS, VOR, DME, ADF. then when nearer to airfields radar and ILS. Plus to a large extent you still use DR en-route in IMC.

The reduction in the number of VORs is a mild nuisance but no more than that. The reality is that most people now will use GPS en-route anyhow, but sensible pilots back it up with periodic cross-checks on other navaids.

I use my IMCR / IR(R) regularly and my only regret is taking so long to get around to doing it - I flew on long trips in marginal VFR for 10 year with a lot of weather diversions. I'm now studying to upgrade to the full IR so that I can use the ability outside of the UK, because it's been so useful within the UK.

G

[piperboy84]

I completed my IFR rating earlier this year, the main take away for me was not learning area navigation or even how to fly approaches, but how to conduct a flight in an orderly and disciplined manner including routine "housekeeping" steps in the cockpit like paperwork management, task flows & timing, logical steps appropriate to the phase of flight,the mental discipline of instrument scan and interpretation, and flying to tighter tolerances.

Haven't done much real world IFR but the training makes VFR much more rewarding.

Commence slings and arrows,,, NOW

[150 Driver]

IMHO a one word answer is needed - Yes.

Did mine about 9 months after PPL and aside from the instrument bit it improved my overall flying so much it was untrue. I was around 100 hours at start of training and struggling with maintaining altitude with any degree of accuracy. IMC training flogged that discipline into me as well as massively professionalising my R/T skills.

As to the instrument flying, the VOR part is only a small part of what is taught. You're learning the ability to fly the plane using only the instruments without visual references, flying on instruments only with some of the instruments malfunctioning, not to mention the ability to let down through cloud and the approaches.

I also find it helpful flying IFR in VMC when doing X country flights. It seems (this may just be an impression though) that when asking for Class D airspace clearance under IFR it is more likely to be given than VFR.

The other thing it has done for me is to open the sky on days when it might have been marginal as to VMC.

Do it, you never know when the skills might save your life.

[Johnm]

For practical IFR flying no-one uses anything other than GPS and DME though the ability to track a VOR is very useful in learning some of the skills needed to fly an ILS.

So go and get your IMCR it'll be some of the most enjoyable flying you ever do and one day it will save your bacon. Before I had a full IR I was caught out by unexpected bad weather in Germany and was able to to divert and fly an approach to land without drama. No-one asked me whether the skills were legal in Germany and if they had my response would have been to make a Mayday call!

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Plus to a large extent you still use DR en-route in IMC.
That's not in my book! - but it works.

So, I was explaining my planned route to the instructor, and was worried that for five miles or so I was outside the DOC of the VORs I was using (I'd actually looked them up in the AIP). But on the other hand I wasn't very worried, because I was sure that one or other of them would cover the gap, so it was really just a worry about whether this route would be acceptable on a test.

"Sure," was the answer, "you just DR from a fix on one navaid until you pick up the next one, there's no danger of accidentally running into controlled airspace round there."

In real life you can just tell the GPS to go "direct to" some VOR well outside the distance you can receive it - you'll pick it up when you get nearer. For which you don't even need a fancy coloured moving map type GPS.

I usually plan and fly GPS, and I usually remember to tune in the VORs DMEs, NDBs as a check or in case both GPSs fail. (A radio that's not tuned into something potentially useful is useless dead weight that you're paying to carry around.)

[phiggsbroadband]

Hi JSAG, I don't think you are wanting to progress into commercial flying, so why would you want to fly in IMC conditions. The thought of spending costly time bashing through clouds at 120 kts doesn't appeal to me at all. Especially as someone might be doing the same thing, but in the opposite direction.


I prefer to fly only in Gin Clear skies where my passengers can get a good few photos as a reminder of their flight. As you can guess theses type of days are a rarity for Cross Country flights. I find the UKGA weather map to be a good indication that you can get more than just a local flight....
UKGA home (http://ukga.com/home/view)


However I did get caught out once by an advancing squall line which was traveling in the opposite direction to which I thought, but I have sufficient Instrument Hours to be able to do a quick 180, for a VFR RTB.
So maybe some IMC training is desirable.

[BackPacker]

I live in the Netherlands but I specifically took a vacation in the UK to do my IMC. Even though I can't legally use it in NL, and even though it's probably going to be a challenge to revalidate it as well. (I still have a few months to sort that out though.)

I mostly did it to enhance my flying skills, and to have a "way out" in case of deteriorating weather. I'd rather fly illegally and live, than legally become a CFIT or LOC-in-IMC statistic. And it was great fun to do anyway.

[Keef]

Do you NEED one? Probably not, if you only plan to fly in gin-clear VMC and can guarantee there will be no sneaky clouds to creep up on you.

Should you do one? Almost certainly YES. It will hone your flying skills to a much sharper level (don't start the IMC till you have enough post-PPL hours to have got comfortable with handling the aeroplane). It may well save your bacon one day when that sneaky cloud catches you.

Many times I've been told "I don't want to fly in cloud: there's nothing to see and the passengers don't enjoy it." Only partly true. I've taken off into a 1000 foot cloudbase many times, flown for 20 minutes or so into bright sunshine, and had a delightful few days away from home with family and aeroplane. We've then returned into 20 minutes of IMC to land back at wet, soggy home.

Yes, there is a risk of banging into another aeroplane in the cloud. However, there hasn't been a collision between two aircraft in IMC outside controlled airspace in the UK since 1943. There are many more serious risks that any aviator undertakes, even in CAVOK. Also, flying in IMC there tends to be less traffic around, you fly above MSA/SSA, and there is almost always an ATC unit who will give you a service.

I find that most objections to the IMCR are from people who failed it, from retired Air Vice Marshals who think it's a "get out of trouble only" rating, or from commercial airlines who resent PPLs intruding into their sky.

In reality, if you use it much you may choose to go on and do the new course to convert to a full IR. I went down the FAA IR route before that option became available, and found that the IMCR plus about 100 hours of "sole reference to instruments" flight using it was a good preparation for the IR.

[Flyingmac]

Even if you decide not to go for the rating, get some time with an instructor in ACTUAL IMC. You can only benefit from it.

[Level Attitude]

In answer to the original question: Yes, ithe IMC / IR(R) s worth doing (for all the reasons previously mentioned).

My concern with losing all these VORs is the PPL Holder.
'VFR On Top' (ie out of sight of the surface) is allowed and it now means GPS is probably the ONLY way of navigating. Redundancy now means have two, or more, GPS on board or, possibly, many more Pan Calls for pilots who are lost.

PPL students are required to be able to intercept and track a Radial, either to or from a Nav Aid; and to be able to use Nav aids to position fix. GPS is not allowed for this so, with many VORs and NDBs disappearing, how are they supposed to gain their Licence?

[A and C]

Looking at the number of VOR's that have been retained I don't think that any place in the UK will be out of range of less than two of them if you are above the MSA.

Why would GPS result in people getting lost ? In terms of reliability is the ADF better ? ......... I think not !

And finaly why should a navigation equipment failure automatically result in a PAN call ? Simply telling an ATC unit that you have a system failure will result in assistance that will avoid an emergency situation not create one.

[phiggsbroadband]

When I first started my PPL training, I was half expecting the Navigation to involve Chart Tables, Sextants, Rulers, Compasses and Protractors, also a good knowledge of trigonometry.... I felt very disappointed when I was told that a modern GA aircraft did not have much room to enable such Astral Navigation with large Charts...


So with these VORs being reduced in numbers, and the lack of ADF beacons, will we be able to open a Chart sufficiently wide enough for us to plot our position using two or three VORs by triangulation, I suspect not.

[Lukesdad]

Apologies for hijacking the subject, but has anyone any experience of the new en route rating?

[thing]

Yes do it. Having any extra knowledge can only be a good thing. I'm probably a bit odd but I find flying on instruments quite relaxing. Also one of the best and big grin parts of aviation IMO is breaking through a miserable overcast and rain into a brilliant blue sky with a dazzling white carpet of cloud beneath you as far as the eye can see, with rarely any company because the big jets are way above you and most other folk are plodding through the murk beneath you.

But then we all get different things out of flying and I understand folk who aren't interested in that side of things.

[Level Attitude]

Looking at the number of VOR's that have been retained I don't think that any place in the UK will be out of range of less than two of them if you are above the MSA.Why would a PPL student need to know the MSA (which is an IFR term). If you mean they should now plan to fly high enough to always be in range of 2 VORs I am not sure that is practical (cannot go high enough due cloud or, especially in SE UK, controlled airspace).

Why would GPS result in people getting lost ? In terms of reliability is the ADF better ? ......... I think not ! A GPS, per se, should prevent pilots from getting lost. BUT it should not be the sole method of navigation and out of sight of the surface (VFR On Top) the back up system should, to my mind, be a completely different system.

And finaly why should a navigation equipment failure automatically result in a PAN call ?Although the CAA encourages pilots not to faff around if lost and to seek help (Pan Call) earlier, rather than later, there are a lot of pilots who would rather request a 'Practice Pan' or 'Training Fix' from 121.5 than admit they are lost.

This isn't a major problem if in sight of the surface but, I would suggest, 'VFR On Top' with no Nav Aids is a completely different scenario and certainly merits a Pan call - even if only 'temporarily uncertain of position'.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Also one of the best and big grin parts of aviation IMO is breaking through a miserable overcast and rain into a brilliant blue sky with a dazzling white carpet of cloud beneath you as far as the eye can see, with rarely any company because the big jets are way above you and most other folk are plodding through the murk beneath you.
And the other is coming down through the cloud, looking at the ground beneath you, and spotting that you're exactly where you thought you were.

[thing]

Indeed! Or letting down on an instrument approach and seeing the runway lights pop into view right on the nose; that's always satisfying.

[A and C]

I would be negligent if I sent a student pilot on a solo cross country flight if he/she did not know the MSA for the leg being flown, any pilot should know the MSA for the location of the aircraft this situational awareness stops people flying into hills.

Flying VFR into deteriorating conditions is a killer and knowing the MSA is part of the decision process that tells a pilot when to do a 180 turn.

If dual GPS (GTN650/750 typicly) is good enough for flight in MNPS airspace (Oceanic Navigation) then a single GPS should be good enough for a bit of navigation around western Europe if you have VOR & ADF, but you will probably only use the ADF to get the cricket scores. However keeping a good Nav log will enable a good DR position to be kept if the Nav equipment fails.

Telling an ATC unit that you have had a total navigation radio failure as soon as it happends should not require a PAN call, you should know your position due to the DR position from the Nav log you are keeping and ATC should get you on Radar quickly, as long as you are above the MSA you are not in danger and an aircraft under radar vectors (without radio nav equipment) is not in a situation that requires any sort of emergency status.

A pilot who fails to keep a nav log and fails to know the en-route MSA however is an emergency flying somewere to happen !

[A and C]

I hope I did not give the impression that flying IMC by use of VOR & ADF cross cuts was the best way to go, it is not GPS is !

However I do tune the VOR & DME to a convenient station and use the VOR page on the GPS to check that the GPS & VOR position agree, the radial read out on a King VOR makes this check very easy to do.

In effect this is what most airliners are doing GPS is the primary en-route navigation source but the FMC looks at continuously looks at five DME stations to back up the GPS position.

But the bottom line is that you still must retain the skils to revert to VOR/DME/ADF navigation should the GPS fail.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

I can't believe what I'm reading. It sounds like a significant number of people are navigating about the UK using VORs, presumably taking cross cuts from other VORs or NDBs to work out where they are.
Well, DME, usually.


Depends on which aircraft I rent. If it's one with a big coloured moving map I use the GPS. If it's one whose GPS has a tiny monochrome text screen I'm most unlikely to bother to programme a route into it if there are some conveniently located VORs, as the NAV radio kit is that much easier to use.


And it helps to plan round conveniently located VORs anyway, as a backup.

[thing]

I always have the GPS on unless it's a local bimble but I can't see why if you have the other gear on board that you shouldn't have it tuned in and set up. I usually have every bit of nav kit on the a/c switched on. Bit daft not to if you have it; plus there's still some satisfaction to be had from NDB navving. It's a bit like driving around using an Austin 7. Not very modern but satisfying in it's own way, like getting a sextant out on a yacht.

Disclaimer: I will however praise the Lord when they finally get shut of NDB approaches.

[piperboy84]

I fly with the garmin 496 which seems to have every bell, whistle and feature accessible thru a logical user friendly interface that makes navigating a doddle. I've also flown other aircraft with the old IFR certified Garmin 300/430 and King KLN and no matter how hard i try i just cant get the use out of them without pissing around for ages with the buttons and pages which makes me not bother using them. I suppose the manufacturers strip all the gadgets out to get the IFR certification. Anyone here used the new GTN 650/750 units they look like they combine the utility of an IFR box with the ease of use and features that the VFR units have.

[A and C]

Its a pity that no one had the time to teach you a little about the King KLN series of GPS units because they have some very nice features and bring the navigation workload down when properly set up.

But it is not surprising a lot of years back I stepped aboad a BAe146 doing my line training on the type and set about putting the route into the KLN90 when the line trainer said " its the only aircraft in the fleet with the King, its far to complicated so dont bother with it"
At the time all the other aircraft had the truly dreadful Trimble fitted.
After two hours in the air I had the line trainer, trained on the King and its features like the easy direct-to in the flight plan page and the waypoint ETA on the same page, his attitude to the KLN was transformed once he had seen the way it worked.

I will be able to comment on the next generation of GPS units (GTN650) when I get the electric spagetti in the aircraft sorted out but I feel that only 5% of the functions of most GPS units are ever used because of lack of training and the rush to get into the air.
Part of the rush to get into the air is because the engine (and may be the hobbs) is running before the GPS can be started, with this in mind the GTN instalation on my aircraft will have the ability to run ONLY the GTN direct from the battery.
That way you can get the thing set up with the flight plan without the whole electrical system burning battery power or the engine running, once the flight plan is in the box you can shut it down and fire up the whole aircraft and use the crossfill function to program the second GTN650.

The other reason these units dont get used properly very much is the very short sectors that most of UK GA flys and the work to get a short flight to the isle of whight is not worth the button pushing, when you launch out of Oxfordshire bound for the north of Spain non stop the flight & fuel planning takes on much more importance.

[piperboy84]

I hear what your saying A and C, my panel mounted 496 has an internal battery that's good for at least a few hours, it detects aircraft power and switches accordingly which allows me plenty time pre engine start to get the route all set up. If I was in a rental with the meter running I probably won't bother.

Regarding the KLN, when I was taking my instrument checkride earlier this year I was required to do one GPS approach, strangely this was only the second time throughout my entire IFR training that I would be using the KLN for an approach, or at all for that matter
I sat down and read the manual cover to cover a few times and somehow managed to load the approach for the checkride. After passing, I had a few fun vfr flights where I tried to use it again and just could not get the hang of it.

[Johnm]

We have a GTN 650 and it's great. If it gives you clue, Gloucester to Leicester via DTY a few seconds to input and then fly on the autopilot in NAV mode. Switch to heading and OBS to join the circuit at destination.

I even have to time to program the AERA and IPad as well :-)

[PH-UKU]

Definitely do the IMC. As others say, it will improve your flying skills and also give you more confidence in your abilities. And practice it. Do practice ILS/VOR/SRA approaches on your way home in VMC, and as others also suggest, crosscheck between VORs/GPSs/DMEs as that too will improve your understanding and SA (situational awareness).

Personally, I am concerned about the removal of so many VORs. So many people are saying just use the GPS. OK, how many of these are legal GPS fits? I'm a traditionalist, with a chart, and for legality I can use VORs but I also have a Lowrance Airmap2000 with dash mounted aerial (not IFR approved fit), and a yoke-mounted iPad2 with its own built in GPS (&using Skydemon).This setup gives excellent SA and (if I so choose) the challenge of practising multiple inputs.

The big question. How reliable is the GPS? All things being equal, the Airmap to be honest is about 95% reliable, drops out quite a lot when heading north, and also when some 'harmonic' frequencies are selected on the COM1. The iPad2 however is about 99.9% reliable. Dropped out once on a 40hr 3500nm round Europe trip (near a military base).

But.... And it is a big but ....

How often do military exercises from Spadeadam and all points north employ jamming? How often do you see NOTAMs telling you that GPS info may suffer interference due to jamming or military exercises? Frequently. Will this jamming be stopped to cater for the loss of VOR/IFR navaids? (Rhetorical question)

I am seriously thinking about getting an approved GPS fit, but even the simplest options are not cheap. (If anyone has any recent experience or suggestions then I am all ears). It would appear that these options are along the Garmin430/530 - KingKLN94 - or GarminGTN650/750.

The first is effectively 12-15yr old technology and would probably come in at around £10k fully fitted. The second I know not. And the third, would appear to be around £10-12k just for the kit, never mind the fitting and approval paperwork!!

Any ideas?

[A and C]

The King KLN units are very good and as a control head for other graphic displays they still are an opinion, but the support from King is almost non existent. IMO King have lost the plot with GA and I would not trust them to support even there latest products, since they became part of Honnywell the management has failed understand the importance that using GA as a development tool for airline equipment and so have virtually abandoned any research. At one time you could count on King to support a product for about twenty years after it went out of production, following the support I have received on my KLN unit I would not trust them as even the newest products are likely to have the support withdrawn at the whim of some out of touch honnywell accountant.

This is why my totaly Bendix/ King equipped aircraft is in dock to have all but the DME & ADF removed and replaced with Garmin equipment ( audio by PS Engineering ).

The only game in town is now the Garmin GTN650/750 series the older Garmin units are going out of production, I don't expect Garmin to withdraw product support for some time on the 340/540 but what seems like a bargain now by buying the last of the 340/540 units will look like a very expencive mistake in twenty years when the product support ends and the GTN 650/750's are still being supported.

It is with some regret that I have dumped most of my king equipment as it was reliable and easy to use but I have lost any trust in King to support their products.