"and can vouch for being scared fartless on several occasions" (Croqueteer)
It would be interesting to know the circumstances.
In my opinion the average newly qualified IMC holder is poorly equipped to fly a hard IFR sector. The average newly qualified IR holder should be better equipped. In my view this is because most IMC training is based on the premise that the rating will be used to “get the holder out of trouble” whereas it is assumed an IR holder is likely to want to operate hard IFR. I have been particularly careful to use the word “average”. There are IMC instructors who approach the training like an IR.
That said, there are IMC holders who go on to use the rating in earnest. The “trick” is to realise your limitations in the early days so that you gradually increase your expertise hopefully with some more training on the way. I believe that if you take this course you will be as capable as the aircraft at flying any IFR sector.
I agree with IO540 that given the afore the critical component then becomes your assessment of the capability of your aircraft and the level of risk you are prepared to accept.
I recently started a thread about the minimum cloud base you would be prepared to accept flying in IMC. I can recall a flight from Leicester down south which was solid IMC pretty much all the way in a club Warrior. The aircraft had no autopilot, I hadn’t flown that particular aircraft before other than the trip up in good VMC, and the equipment only met the minimum legal requirements for IFR flight. I don’t want to recall the cloud base en route. In fact I was very current both in terms of flying very regularly and on instruments and despite hand flying single pilot operations (there was no one else with me to help!) the whole flight was pleasant and a complete non event.
In reality the problem was the aircraft had no reserve capacity. Had things started to go wrong there could have been a serious problem and now I would consider that flight in that aircraft was an unacceptable level of risk for me. Another person’s assessment of course might well be different.
The reason I come to that conclusion is this.
Cloud base. As the other thread suggests the chances of a successful forced landing with a low cloud base aren’t good. How low is a matter for each individual but I reckon 1,000 feet is about my limit. Of course on a SEP the assumption could be made that the chances of the donkey quitting on any aircraft are pretty remote and I would accept that again is a matter of personal decision. It may well be over cautious but I wouldn’t be happy flying an aircraft in challenging IMC unless I knew a bit about the service history of the engine and whilst the statistics I am sure don’t support this argument I would feel more comfortable in an aircraft that I knew had a reasonably low hours engine that was serviced and maintained by a reputable organisation.
Equipment level. However current you are the real problems start when systems start to go wrong and the workload accelerates. Of course you should be able to fly the approach with a failed AI but it is still a real emergency. So on your picking list you might well like a second AI, one electric one vacuum maybe, an injected engine so you aren’t worrying about carb. ice the whole time is not a bad idea, a really reliable radio kit rather than maybe just a good box 1 and the often slightly dodgy box 2, so when box 1 fails you have got a decent backup, for my money two GPS receivers etc.
Yes, of course, we would all like two engines (or maybe 5 would be better), weather radar, de-ice, cat 3 capability, etc., but I reckon IO540 has got it spot on, it all boils down to having an aircraft that is reasonably equipped for the mission which in my opinion whilst the typical IFR club trainer might meet the minimum legal requirements it will have little left in reserve if anything goes wrong, and is therefore not an adequate tool for the job – it is best kept for foguled training!