Aero's or IMC

[MikeeB]

Hi,

Subject to finance, I'm hopefully going to have the funds to do either one of the below later this year.

a) Learn some Aero's
b) Do my IMC

As a very low hours PPL (~60) I'd be interested to hear people's views on this and if this is the "correct" thing to do.

Chances are I'll do the Aero's anyway (as that was the catalyst in making me learn to fly anyway) but I've heard some people say that it's too early, and I should get more hours under my belt so to speak, before doing so.

Others say that I should do my IMC as it may save my bacon one day, or allow me to fly in conditions that would normally prevent me from doing so.

I can see the attraction of doing the IMC, and it is something that I have every intention of doing, but my immediate goal is to learn some basic aero's and enter a beginners class in Autumn.

Be specfically interested in views from people who have done aero's at low hours and those who teach them?

Cheers

--
Mikee

[Evo]

Speaking as a low-hours PPL who has done a bit of both, i'd do the aeros. Great fun, great for your confidence and great for your stick and rudder skills.

The IMC is alright, but it's not really very exciting. An IMC and some occasional practice will give you a few options that aren't there for the plain-vanilla PPL, but really using the rating to go places in cr@ppy weather takes a lot more time and money than the 15-hour it takes to get through the test - and if you've got the kit, the money and a desire to really get places whatever the wx a FAA IR makes more sense for not much more money.

[foxmoth]

Personally I would agree and go for the Aeros, as Evo says it does a lot for both your handling skills AND your sense of where you are in the air ("good situational awareness" for those who are into buzzwords), both of which will actually help you when you finally do go on to the IMC. As far as saving your bacon goes I reckon the Aeros come out tops there as well as you are more likely to then be aware, if you get into handling difficulties, how to sort it out.
Also of course Aeros ARE more fun!! :ok: :D

[Fly Stimulator]

It seems to me that the IMC is mainly about utility whereas aeros are mainly about fun. There's a crossover of course; popping out of cloud on an approach to see a runway in front of you is quite fun, and knowing how to recover an aircraft from a very unusual attitude could certainly be useful, but I think it's a fair distinction.

Really it depends on what you fly for. If you fly in order to get to places then an IMC is a useful tool in the UK since without one you'll spend more time on the ground, or worse, scud-running. If you fly mainly for fun and are happy to do something else on grotty days then aeros are probably a good way to extend your flying and keep your interest up.

Your plan to do some aeros now and an IMC later sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

[DB6]

Well I got my IMC rating in 1991 and in 13 years of private flying thereafter never used it once; didn't fly in crap weather.
Aerobatics on the other hand are the best thing you can do in an aeroplane outside the armed services (blasting things may be more fun). There is no comparison - do the aeros. Only then will you learn true mastery of your mount, young Skywalker :} .

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Mmmmm. Lets see.

Head down, check which way that needle is pointing - and that one, and the other, and that horizon thingy. And the other. Keep doing it. Do it again. Scan. But hey, we're flying, so lets look out at that view; grey. Clag. More grey. ****, that doesn't feel right! What's happening! back to that scan! Phew! All OK now. Head down (keep it down), check which way that needle is pointing - and that one, and the other, and that horizon thingy. And the other. Keep doing it. Do it again. Scan. Do not look outside. There's no view anyway. Except maybe some lights and a runway at destination. Could be Birmingham or Brisbane - looks the same. Enjoy!

Or

Whooo Hooo! Pull up, look outside, your feet are the rudder, your hands the ailerons and elevator. Feel that 'G', feel the airflow in your hands and feet, feel the buffet of marginalally attached airflow, pitch foward a tiny tiny tad to re-attach it, look outside, see land and sky change places, sky instead of Lancashire, then as the Ribble valley appears again (in the canopy top), rotate the earth with a nudge of the stick (what's up and down and airspeed anyway? - all that matters here is angle of attack and energy). But don't look in (much) - look outside. Lots. And smile!! Lots! Enjoy!

Your call.

SSD

[S-Works]

Done both, found Instrument more challenging and has capitivated my attention long term by the desire to improve.

Found Aeros boring after the initial thrill was over. And it was even worse sitting and listening in the club to the endless ramblings of the self confessed aero experts who promptly passed out on an outside loop.

How we choose to "master" the aircraft is a personal choice.

Each to ther own.

And haven't we done this subject to death only a couple of weeks ago.

[englishal]

Depends what you want to fly for......I like to go places, so instrument stuff is more important to me, plus I never get to fly an aerobatic aircraft. However in the future, I'd like my own aircraft, suitable for aerobatics and IFR flight :D (If you fly a Back-Course localizer approach inverted, it becomes like a classic localizer :} )

EA

[Sassenach]

Aerobatics will make you a better pilot, improve your co-ordination and confidence, and make you better able to get out of buttock-clenching situations, should they ever arise. And don't worry about being a low-hours pilot: the RAF introduce students to aerobatics relatively early, way before they reach equivalent PPL standard.

IMC is a get-you-out-of-trouble rating only, and doesn't equip you with the skills you need to fly deliberately in cloud. Of course it's a worthwhile thing to do, but I think you would get a lot more out of doing the aeros.

My advice is to do both, but start with the aeros first.

[formationfoto]

Head or Heart?
What type of character are you?
Arguably both can make you a better aviator - IMC will traing you to be a better instrument pilot and fly gently but accurately. Aeros will teach you to fly accurately in a spirited fashion.

If you are going to be using your PPL to get around in the UK then the IMC wins. If you are more inclined towards short trips but excitement aeros win.

The responses you will get here will be driven mostly by the character and style of the posters. Similarly advice from instructors will depend on their personal position. Those heading for an airline career and just through the training mill are more likely to tell you that the IMC is best.

Look and listen to the advice then think hard about what YOU want to do before deciding which training route to follow.

[MikeJeff]

Sassenach,

It's an argument that has raged on here many times, but the IMC is fine for deliberate flight in cloud so long as one is current and well practiced.

As for which to do? why not get the best of both worlds and do IMC Aeros!!!????

[Sassenach]

I'm not sure I agree with you, MikeJeff. The IMC rating was never intended to be a mini-IR. But you're right about this argument being an old one.

I don't think I'd have the guts to try aeros in IMC, although I'll give them a try under the hood. How about night aeros? Clear sky, full moon - wonderful!

[S-Works]

This argument has raged for a long time between aeros and IMC.

IMC is only a "get you out of trouble" rating if that is what you make it. If you practice what you learnt in an IMC equipped aircraft and stay current it is just as good as an IR without the airways flying.

Most affordable GA aircraft around at the moment are not even capable of doing airways flight but are capable of non airways IMC flight. In addittion to my own aircraft which is fully IFR equipped (other threads have pics) I fly a Senneca with a flight director and altitude pre-select autopilot. Very easy to fly in cloud and was done on an IMC.

I went from more than a years IMC flying into IR training and found it easy, the adjustment was filing of IR flight plans and airways flying not how to fly on the guages or do a procedure. The procedures were easy, having done plenty of practice down to published mininma using the IMC.

It is easy for people to do a basic IMC rating and then never fly another approach or even in a cloud between renewals thinking the IMC is there "get you out of trouble" ticket when in fact it is probably there own funeral ticket. IMC requires currency and for a lot of people that provides it's own fun just as hurling around the sky doing aeros provides fun for others.

As I said before each to there own.

[DRJAD]

I agree with both Bose-X's posts on this subject.

Got an IMC, and plan to ensure it stays current and that I stay in practice. Thoroughly enjoyed the training. In fact, it's a stimulus for me to go on and try to gain an IR.

Don't know why, but the prospect of aerobatics doesn't excite me: did spin recoveries as part of the older PPL syllabus and enjoyed that, but have no desire to go into full aerobatic mode. Would rather go places, I think.

So, personal recommendation is to go for IMC.

[FlyingForFun]

One thing worth pointing out is that both the IMC and the Aeros need you to be in current practice in order to be safe. And both of them need an aircraft which is suitably equipped in order to stay current. So there is only limited benefit in doing either of these if you don't have a suitable aircraft in which to practice the skill. That might help you make up your mind, one way or the other.

FFF
---------------

[FNG]

MikeeB, I'll try not to reiterate what's been said above, but, as you asked specifically for views from people who tried aeros with low hours, here are mine. Like you, I was motivated to learn to fly at least in part by a desire to fly aerobatics. I chose to learn on an aircraft with some aerobatic capability, and as luck would have it my principal instructor was and is an aeros nut, so there was a fair smattering of aerobatics as we went through the course. As mentioned above, the RAF throws in aeros early in its basic flight training, so there's really no mimimum hours requirement, and no reason why a PPL with circa 60 hours shouldn't try something like the AOPA course, which usually involves about 10 hours of aeros and associated training. I would be disinclined to take seriously the suggestion that you need more hours before you try aerobatics.

PS: I see that you are Yorkshire: I gather than Sherburn offers a really good rate on its Cap 10.

[MikeeB]

Woooo, I post something, then come back two days later, and find this little lot :)

I know the Aero's/IMC thing has been done to the death, and will probably carry on until the end of time....

I was more interested in views on the low hours and doing Aero's rather than a specific IMC-Aero debate, but the two come together because of the choice I might have :)

As for the Cap mentioned by FNG, that was the mount for my 'introductory' flight at Sherburn. After doing 25 minutes of ground/sky/ground/sky/ground/sky (not always in that order) I started feeling crap - but loved what we had just done and thought "I need to learn to do that". Two months later I joined the club.

It's kind of interesting. To go off on a tangent, I'd had numerous flights before at various times in my life but all just a quick 1/2 hour or hour around the local area. Whilst I did enjoy these flights, none motivated me to learn to fly. I was interested in doing so, but didn't have the drive to do it.
Then a neighbour arranges the 'introductory' flight mentioned above and the next thing you know, I've taken up what is probably one of the most expensive hobbies around.

I doubt doing Aero's as an introductory flight is everybodies cup of tea, probably a small minority, but if it worked with me, it would work with others.

Anyway, thanks for the feedback.

[FNG]

As you may already have found out, you won't feel woozy if flying the aeros yourself and, if flying the sort of smooth figures for which the Cap is suited (it's not a headbanger machine), your passengers usually see their bacon buttie once only. I've only felt mildly uncomfortable once whilst aerobatting, and then was not flying, but experiencing a demo of a particularly vigorous sequence by an instructor. Have fun.

[stiknruda]

Didn't do any real aero's until I had 95 hrs. Realised then that I was not flying but merely operating the aeroplane to a prescribed set of numbers - flying was a process.

No more aeros until I had 350 hrs and then it dawned on me that that by "driving" an airframe, I was doing myself a disservice and that my handling skills, although perfectly adequate for operating a Pa31 out of short bush strips, were not as honed as they could be.

I decided to do some more aeros (Smirnoff in RSA) and slowly become hooked. Yes of course I felt uncomfortable initially and yes at times I was a little frightened. However, knowledge dispels fear and with quality instruction, progress to a short simple positive G sequence can be very rapid.

Nowadays I spend a LOT of time upside down!

The IMC route never appealed as I found aeros before it became a geographic possibility, but the idea of infrequently hurtling through grey clouds in a 30 year old single does not fill me with glee.


I think that on this forum, the majority of us fall into two camps, the mini-personal-airline style flyers and the grass root, tailwheel, aerobatic fraternity. Although the latter is the smaller of the two cadres and the one that I naturally gravitate towards, neither is more correct than the other. So in short, I guess I am saying, it is your dosh, do with it whatever gives you greater pleasure, but do aero's first:)



Stik

[slim_slag]

I'd do a taildragger first, then the IMC. This will improve your basic flying skills which you need to do at your early stage.

Then do aeros in a taildragger and you will forget about the other stuff.