low hour Instrument rated pilots [Archive]

puff

25th Sep 2002, 10:55

Grog, some people have no wish or desire to instruct, there are already way to many instructers out there that have no real desire to do it but use their students as a way to build hours...does an instructer who really doesn't want to instruct produce a quality student?

I don't think anyone admits that you will get an IFR job with low hours, however I think the discipline of IFR flying at an early stage increases your flying skills and decision making ability, and at least gives you some skills to get you thru a sticky situation if you do get caught in cloud one day.

If you get it out of the way at an early stage it's available for if/when you get upgraded to twins, and in the mean time you have a few renewals under your belt for half the jobs that require 3-5 as part of getting a job.

It certainly may not help you get a job, but I can't see it as being a bad thing...

Paul Alfred

25th Sep 2002, 11:11

Good topic GG.

( I didnt read the post by 'puff' so this one sounds a little similar. that thred got through just before mine - oh well!)

I currently have 300 hours and I've booked in to do my CIR in November.

I was speaking to a company owner yesterday who recommended doing an Instructor Rating, but to be honest, I dont think I would be very good at it. Its a bit late to find this out after you have spent the money.

I already have about 70 hours 210 time so I'm looking to go the next step. Plus, I do a lot of casual night flying so the CIR will be very handy - unfortunately, the night flying is in a C182 - there is nothing at all wrong with the plane, its just the single engine that worries me.

It my pay you to get some more flying up in the high performance singles and then only do the CIR if your ready, and your going to use it! A lot of companies with low time pilots dont look for IFR experience, but it can be an advantage and get you out of some difficult flying conditions if you so happen to get in that situation.

I understand its frustrating, believe me I do.

Get some high performance hours up - Ask yourself if you want to be an instructor - if not, then do the CIR but make sure you use it!
With the CIR and some 206/210 experience, your in a pretty good position to start looking for some low time work.

I hope my opinion may help.

Cheers

PA

email me if you want to discuss further [email protected]

:)

Hey GG, I just read your other post on Instructors wages and you said your getting $72 hour - does this mean your already instructing??

Just wondering........your doing a bloody good job for someone who only has 150-200 hours!

PA

marshall

25th Sep 2002, 13:24

however I think the discipline of IFR flying at an early stage increases your flying skills and decision making ability, and at least gives you some skills to get you thru a sticky situation if you do get caught in cloud one day.

I thought that was the purpose of having a CIR? :p :p :p

It certainly may not help you get a job, but I can't see it as being a bad thing...

Only that you can't use it until you have 500 hours! :D :D :D

some people have no wish or desire to instruct, there are already way to many instructors out there that have no real desire to do it but use their students as a way to build hours...does an instructor who really doesn't want to instruct produce a quality student?

To many? Hardly! :eek:

And what is the big deal if the "instructor" is trying to build hours? They can't teach to a competent standard because you imply "their heart is not in it".

I am sick of reading this and similar posts and people complaining:

"My instructor is going for QF, he doesn't even want to teach me"

Could not think of anything further from the truth. Sure you have your occasional "cowboy" (even throughout my training) but why should that be the benchmark for the whole industry?

So the question I pose for all you anti-instructors out there:

Why is it that you hate them? What have they done to **** you off?

Answer that and perhaps you may silence that twisted, selfish and angry voice in your fruitcake head!

After all, we are in the same industry!

Charlie Foxtrot India

25th Sep 2002, 14:59

I'd recommend going out for a few hundred hours and learning how to fly visually first.

As has been mentioned, chances are slim that you will get a multi IFR job with only a handful of hours. In the early days you are more likely to be doing single engine stuff, and there is no single engine pax carrying IFR.

Most people I know who have done the IFR early on have found it an expensive burden to keep current, even with the barest minimum required for currency, nd feel disollusioned that they wre talked into parting with all that money.

As for the sticky situation, well good luck in having no pax on board, an IFR aeroplane, all your current jepps handy and being current in whatever approach may be required. Cos otherwise you are no safer than a CPL with the minimum ten hours.

And instructor ratings should only be undertaken by those who want to teach people to fly.

Of course the big shiny flying schools who want your money would disagree!:cool:

I Fly

25th Sep 2002, 22:06

It's a bit like flight planning. Figure out where you want to be in a few years time and then work out how to get there. If YOU think instructing is not your cup of tee, YOU are probably right. So what else can you do. A CIR is a good next step. At least your first employer will not have to pay for it. Or, if a job comes up, you are ready. However, before you do the CIR make sure you can maintain plenty of recency. Otherwise you will not live long enough to see the fruits of your labour. Best of luck end enjoy the journey.

geisha girl

26th Sep 2002, 01:28

My own experience tells me I would not have been ready with only 200-300 hrs to undertake a multi-engine instrument rating.
I had around 1000hrs before I started my rating. When I recieved my CPL 15 years ago I think there was a lot less CPL,S with instrument rating. Having looked at quite a few resumes lately it seems that low time CPL,S all have rating. The only I advice I would give is, get out there and get some practical experience in flying an aeroplane all by yourself first.

JULIET WHISKEY

26th Sep 2002, 02:39

Thats when he isnt answering your phone for ****** all
Grogmonster....

Grogmonster

26th Sep 2002, 03:25

JULIET WHISKEY. I would reply to your comment if it made any sense or was in context. Why don't you come out from behind mummy's skirt and say what you really mean? I believe you've got all the spare time in world now so don't hold back.:D

RAJAM

26th Sep 2002, 05:31

I can see the advantages to doing the ME CIR early.
The requirements for airlines can be met quite quickly after you become employed fulltime in the industry however the shortfall often seems to be the 3 renewals.
Most dont seem to use it for the first year after CPL at anyone elses expense than their own, 2nd year they may start to use it, 3rd year they will use it and then walah!! 3 requirements met.
The other advantage is that if you know of what can really be expected out there for fresh CPL's is that there is at least one company that could be named who does expect you to fly IFR regardless of if you hold the rating or not...should we talk about the advantages now? yes I know the pilots should refuse to do this but ask yourself the same question..have you ever done anything that you know was against rules and regs to keep that first job?? :rolleyes:
Perhaps the guys/girls just want to be comforted to know that if they get themselves in a situation they can get themselves out again.Someone meantioned that years ago they hardly ever seen a low hour CPL holder with an MECIR, perhaps this has been generated by Flight Sim programs, the interest has been encouraged,I think we should do the same,we are all in an industry that cares about one another's saftey,and if those low hour pilots can gain a little more confidence/capabilities in doing the MECIR early then they should not be judged. lets judge the ***** who put them at risk without it, they are more of a hazard than the damn cloud and thunderies!:)

geisha girl

26th Sep 2002, 11:10

One of two things are happening here, people are posting when they are pi...d or just plain stupid. Listen and try to learn fools.

*Lancer*

26th Sep 2002, 12:56

Most flying schools probably include the CIR as part of the standard training programme because they're aiming to produce a pilot that meets the standard airline requirements, rather than what may prove most practical in the GA world.

So what? I found that my CIR at 200 hours was invaluable, not because it necessarily opened up any jobs, but it made me more situationally aware, disciplined, accurate, and considerate in decision making. I would be genuinely suprised if the vast majority of new CIRated pilots and their instructors did not observe that change either.

How is that a disadvantage to employers in flying an aircraft as a professional??

Lancer

PLovett

26th Sep 2002, 23:18

Lancer

You are spot on. Couldn't agree with you more.

Geisha Girl
I have one suggestion. If you intend to get a CIR with low hours, I suggest doing ICUS on IFR operations immediately after gaining the rating.

I did about 25 hours ICUS after getting my rating and the experience reinforced the learning so that I have been able to re-new my rating without having to do too much extra flying and without too many problems, even though I am not using the rating at present.

If you intend getting a CIR, its frustrating but well worth while and you get a great sense of achievment. Good luck. :)

Mainframe

27th Sep 2002, 11:18

PUFF, Paul Alfred, RAJAM et al, sorry guys, I've been bush for a week, but this subject is a hot one with me.

(1) You are not going to be able to use a M/E CIR with passengers until you have 1,000 Hrs.

(2) You should accumulate at least 500 Hrs before you even think about it !

(3) The flying schools don't care, they want your borrowed money, NOW !

Why am I so concerned about this ?

Quite simply, a little knowledge is very dangerous, a CIR might get you out of a tricky situation, but it is more likely to get you into it instead.

I know of a few low hour fresh CIR holders who used it to get into trouble ( deliberately breaking the Visual Flight Rules and going into IMC in a single, with no real experience behind them and guess what ? They usually spiral dive into the ground at high speed. ATSB records have numerous instances to research, better still, call an ATSB investigator and verify what I have seen.

Save your money, build your hours, then go back and get polished, it's a good time for relearning and polishing at 500 Hrs.

I cringe and despair every time a low hour pilot kills himself (sorry, usually only a male thing, it's ego related). I am angry when someone's ego results in the deaths of innocents who trusted the ability and training of the pilot who could not make the command decisions to avoid IMC during VFR flight.

If you decide to gain a CIR, please decide which set of rules you can safely operate to. DO NOT MIX VFR and IMC, it is usually fatal. Do not allow Ego to make decisions. Follow the flight rules you are legally operating to and don't break them or combine them.

I have 30 years of experience to fall back on, and yet I still find myself challenged by the conditions that nature sometimes tests me with. Tropical Equatorial thunderstorms embedded in IMC are not the place to test your new skills in a single pilot IFR situation.

Single pilot IFR is a very serious business and demands a high level of training, not just in I/F skills, but in workload minimisation and management skills. Most schools do not teach this aspect and yet it significantly enhances your survival prospects.

CFI

Right on. Agree with you. However, what we say does not suit what fresh CPL's want to hear, EGO, IMPATIENCE, the importance of being Macho are closer to their hearts than the survival instinct that starts to surface after about age 25.

Towering Q

27th Sep 2002, 11:55

But....if they do survive those early years they get the magic 3 renewals that QF want.

wing_nut

27th Sep 2002, 11:58

I know of a guy that had the bare minimum - completed his ME CIR with around 200 hours and then got a job flying a light twin (6 seater) casually (a couple a days a week) out of a Capital City. Went onto turbines as an FO at around the 800 hour mark and is now in the airlines as an FO flying jets and has about 6000 hours. Total time on singles is around 150 and all of his time after the 200 hour mark has been IFR.

Guess he was just lucky. He told me that an instructor rating never entered his mind.

Charlie Foxtrot India

27th Sep 2002, 16:19

I remember a time in my homeland which has cr@ppy weather when you had to have 700 hours TT before you could do a CPL or IR.
There were good reasons for that.

geisha girl

27th Sep 2002, 22:54

Thanks Mainframe you summed it up perfectly in your last paragragh. Excess ego is a dirty word.

hmm...

29th Sep 2002, 07:02

Well said Mainframe!

Hit the nail right on the head!

PLovett, ICUS is a waste of time and MONEY!!!

It means nothing in the log book just like twin dual hours! :eek:

You have got a CPL, why spend money on ICUS??? :confused:

Remember they should be paying you! :mad:

Centaurus

29th Sep 2002, 12:32

Geisha Girl.
I see no problem with a basic CPL holder with 150-200 hours doing a CIR on a single of multi. I have put through many with these hours over the past 10 years.

The RAAF graduation their pilots with 210 hours and their CIR equivalent - only more searching in terms of limited panel and unusual attitude recovery training.

Regardless of whether a pilot has an instructors course behind him/her or not, it makes little difference in my experience.

The vital factor appears to be the experience level of the instructor who is teaching you the CIR. If he is experienced and has an easy manner then you will absorb the instruction better and save costs.

Certainly there is no guarantee that you will walk into an IFR job with 200 hours and a CIR. But there is no doubt in my mind that you will be far better equipped to cope in event that you inadvertently get caught out in bad weather while flying VFR. For those that will instantly leap in to criticize that last sentence - I repeat the word inadvertently

On the other hand it has also been my experience that those going for a CIR and who have been taught by non-instrument rated instructors the sequences of VOR and ADF orientation for purposes of night VFR, most have had to start again from scratch in these sequences perhaps because their previous instructors - being VFR qualified only - were not really sure how to teach orientation exercises in the first place.

Just make sure that if you intend to go for a CIR then avoid getting sucked into doing most of your training on a twin. It is highly expensive and because there is no twin command time while under training - only dual - the value for money is less.

Spend as much time as possible in a synthetic trainer before flying your first dual IFR flight. In fact try and reach instrument rating standard on the ground trainer first. This can save you lots of money providing the ground instructor knows what he is about.

In my view, the learning phase of instrument rating training should be on the synthetic trainer and something like a C172.

The twin training should be mainly concerned with the asymmetric skills needed for the IR test. That should be no problem for a reasonably competent 150-200 hour CPL.

Certainly CIR training is much more enjoyable than an instructors course and the thrill of a well flown ILS with needles centred all the way in IMC is quite something. Beats a well pattered glide approach in a C150 any time!

Go for it...

PLovett

29th Sep 2002, 22:45

Hmmm

You appear to be more concerned about money than experience.

I am fully aware that no operator is going to let a low houred pilot lose on mult-engine IFR operations, if for no other reason than the insurance premiums go through the roof.

The point I was trying to make was that the experience of actual IFR operations reinforces the training to the point that the renewals are easier.

In saying that I also recognise that there may be some operators whose idea of ICUS is for someone to sit there and pay for the experience but don't touch anything. My experience of ICUS has been good and I have learnt more everytime.

As to having to pay for ICUS, that is a whole different argument which I don't intend to address here. Suffice to say that I don't disagree with you but the prospect of "cream on the cake" is too good for most operators to pass up on.

geisha girl

29th Sep 2002, 23:17

My concern is that I have seen many young pilots who are not up to CPL VFR standard who also own Multi-engine instrument rating. The question is how do they get through the system.

JULIET WHISKEY

30th Sep 2002, 10:12

Grogbog!!!!!!!(Grogmonster)

It is clearly obvious that you require some additional training with regard to conduct in Aviation and Aircraftspotting.

I have just the video for you.

Rivett counting at Sydney Kingsford Smith Airport.

(YSSY - A Rivett counters guide to the most accessible photography vantage points around Sydney International Airport.)

Includes a bonus release of :

A Listing of the names of all the who's who of the non flying world keen on Aviation Photography.

Covers :

*Appropriate Radio Frequencies.

*The top three brands of Step Ladders.

* How to get a copy of the QF movement sheet from
Flt Ops.

* How to get Baggage loaders to be you best mate.

*Best routes to take from 16R threshold to
16L threshold in minimal time during Curfew hours .

*Previously unseen night Photography techniques for the AAE 146

*55 Previously Unreleased lies to tell mum when you go out to photograph late on a Friday Night.....

* We test the best Aviator Watches for Night Operations at the perimeter fence......

* Persuasive and Convincing techniques to get the Airport workers to move the Dolleys and Mobile stairs to give give superb unobstructed views of the photographed aircraft in question.

RAJAM

30th Sep 2002, 15:12

My experience with low hour MECIR pilots is not so dim,
the best I have seen was a 19 year old,new CPL holder with an Instrument Rating,needing a cushion to see over the dash,non ego of course and that is out of hundreds.The only difference I have seen is the general smoothness in which the aircraft is handled between a low hour and a 1000 hour pilot,their ability to follow the procedures match even. I am not saying that the rating will get them a straight in ride to a twin job,they know it wont,if you ask them the question as to why they did it around the CPL you will most probably get an answer that equals "for insurance". If they happen to get caught out they will have more of a chance to get out, maybe its the parents that encourage these ratings,it's only natural as a parent to want to keep your children safe as is possible.I think you will find that a lot of the air accidents involving marginal weather are from VFR rated pilots becoming situationally unaware,they say you have what? 30-60 seconds? No doubt it is dangerous flying and must be taken and prepared with care,hopefully that is what they are being taught.
The flying schools dont encourage these ratings to low CPL holders just for the $$,wouldn't this be "robbing peter to pay paul" I'm sure all realise that sooner or later everyone that wants to become employed in an airline will do it today or in a years time,doesn't really matter when to them,all that does matter is that at the time they do it that they do the best job they can do.
And ICUS? well the person I last employed had some twin time but only 30 hours ICUS on type with another operator,I employed the guy and he has done about 1900 hours incident free since,he's brilliant,so I wouldn't say that his 30 hours was a waste of money and he wouldn't either,it got him the job and it will be a sad day when he moves on.
And no I'm not stupid! My mama told me that life's like a box of chocolates......;)

hmm...

1st Oct 2002, 13:03

PLovett I understood your point, I just don't understand ICUS!!! :p :p :p

PLovett

1st Oct 2002, 23:17

hmm

ICUS for me is a means to an end.

At present I am not employed in the aviation industry but I want to keep my skills current so that when the opportunity presents itself I am ready.

While that opportunity is unlikely to be multi-engine IFR, I do not want to let those skills lapse after expending blood, sweat, tears and gobs of cash on getting them.

ICUS is cheaper than private hire. :) :cool:

Captn Seagull

2nd Oct 2002, 02:57

Who else can see the dillema with not only low experience pilots gaining CIRs, but the training they are recieving coming from a G1 instructor whos IF experience is limited to his/her own instrument rating training.

It defies belief that there is no minimum IF experience (other than holding a command instrument rating) for an instructor to train others for the issue of a CIR. :eek: :confused: :eek: :rolleyes:

PLovett

2nd Oct 2002, 04:01

Captn Seagull

Isn't that a presumption?

I can't speak for all training organisations but the one I attended, the instructors also flew IFR charter and were experienced IFR pilots.

That situation was also true of a number of other training organisations that I checked prior to selecting the organisation that I did.

FiveTanks?

2nd Oct 2002, 11:02

My two bobs worth (for what its worth. 'Thanks Paul') to new CPL,s is if you have the wherewithall, then do the CIR. In for a penny in for a pound is the way benefactors and bank managers see the mounting costs that started with a $50 TIF.

Accuracy in your flying; heading, height, date on charts, met, notams (this list is by no means exhaustive), and all available information on hand is a learning curve best started early.

You 'will' get your first job. Tight circuits, talking down to refuellers, war story's in bars. A couple of month's into it, if you are lucky a more senior person will say, hey Biggles whats the max oil temp on the Mooney, 172, Maule whatever. "Tip" 'the red line' is not correct'. An appreciation of how much there is to know, and the realization that a hell of a lot of it is in published form should follow.
Next, the first Renewal, probably at your own expense. If you don't squib it and go back to your flying school, you are in for a hell of a shock. First renewals (and probably the rest of them) are like a red rag to a bull for ATO's. Fully ammended documents are a given, hand written ammendments, the lot. Practical questions on CAO48, TTF'S, TAF'S. Why is 810' in parenthisis on the plate?, What does 25/23 on the TTF mean? What does nosig mean?
"Tip", 'Rules For Descent Below Lowest Safe' should be a mantra repeated daily. SIM next, piece of ****, unreal scene,unless you really try they are hard to fail. Aircraft next! There is a section on the IR form, says A/C Knowledge. You are probably flat out working out which Nav/Com relates to which Instrument let alone the Particular Amendment in the Flight manual relating to fuel drain procedures.
Next you sweat and rough handle the machine through various manouvres (pretending that this light twin could actually climb out in IMC after an EFATO). Did I mention Flight Planning and T/O minima.

You passed! Well Done. No shame in most of the sequences. Keep on the learning curve. Its not always fun but we persevere.

Captn Seagull

3rd Oct 2002, 10:18

Rattle your chain did I lovett?

If the shoe fits wear it!

I was actually refering to the bizarre legalities that let this situation exist. Now read my previous post again with your paranoia disabled!!!;) :D ;)

bushpig

4th Oct 2002, 04:01

I don't see an instrument rating doing any harm at all at an early stage. If you can afford it do it. I saw a case of a VFR C206 over water some years ago in woefull conditions, circling to remain visual which was impossible. There was no horizon, the only thing related to visual would have been the water in sight ( it was over the sea)and only a narrow cone beneath. The conditions between the aircraft and the airfield about 20 miles away and the only nearest airfield worth considering was a "wall of water" coming out of the sky. The C206 was an IFR for private category aircraft but the 500 hr (approx) pilot had a VFR job. The pilot had an instrument rating but had never used it in earnest. The pilot was becoming noticably rattled, it was obvious by the standard and sound of the radio transmissions. I felt it was only a matter of time before we heard no transmissions. After consultation with the Chief Pilot of the company it was suggested to the pilot by ATC (with the Chief Pilot present) that the pilot climb to LSALT in a safe direction and reurn for an ILS approach. Fortunately the aircraft was not to far from the commencement point. This was all carried out to a successful conclusion.

The pilot had the basic skills but was probably so intent on trying to keep water in sight, stop from flying into it, probably already getting very disoriented, stick to the rules etc. that the obvious way out didn't enter the brain. There were passengers on board, an incident report would have been put in, but so what! The safest way out of a very nasty situation was resolved because the basic skills were there and perhaps needed a little "nudge". This was an extreme situation and definitely not recommended "normal safe practice"but I have no doubt in my mind that that pilots training saved their lives. To say that the situation shouldn't have occurred is superfluous as it did happen. I have seen similar situations come to the same conclusion, not often thank goodness, but I have.

Instead of wondering "what the f**k do I do now" and going into a panic, perhaps having been suggested a task that was reasonably familiar (not having to be talked through it) and a way out was just enough to have the pilot start to take control of things again.