low hour Instrument rated pilots
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Vietnam
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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!
You have got a CPL, why spend money on ICUS???
Remember they should be paying you!
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!
You have got a CPL, why spend money on ICUS???
Remember they should be paying you!
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...
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...
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: everywhere
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Guest
Posts: n/a
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 $$,wouldn't this be "robbing peter to pay paul" I'm sure all realise that sooner or later everyone that wants to become employed in an airline will do it today or in a years time,doesn't really matter when to them,all that does matter is that at the time they do it that they do the best job they can do.
And ICUS? well the person I last employed had some twin time but only 30 hours ICUS on type with another operator,I employed the guy and he has done about 1900 hours incident free since,he's brilliant,so I wouldn't say that his 30 hours was a waste of money and he wouldn't either,it got him the job and it will be a sad day when he moves on.
And no I'm not stupid! My mama told me that life's like a box of chocolates......
the best I have seen was a 19 year old,new CPL holder with an Instrument Rating,needing a cushion to see over the dash,non ego of course and that is out of hundreds.The only difference I have seen is the general smoothness in which the aircraft is handled between a low hour and a 1000 hour pilot,their ability to follow the procedures match even. I am not saying that the rating will get them a straight in ride to a twin job,they know it wont,if you ask them the question as to why they did it around the CPL you will most probably get an answer that equals "for insurance". If they happen to get caught out they will have more of a chance to get out, maybe its the parents that encourage these ratings,it's only natural as a parent to want to keep your children safe as is possible.I think you will find that a lot of the air accidents involving marginal weather are from VFR rated pilots becoming situationally unaware,they say you have what? 30-60 seconds? No doubt it is dangerous flying and must be taken and prepared with care,hopefully that is what they are being taught.
The flying schools dont encourage these ratings to low CPL holders just for the $$,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......
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Tasmania
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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. 
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.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Tasmania
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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!!! 
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!!!
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: Queensland
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The dark corner of the bar
Posts: 351
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We all started somewhere. You would be better off to fly vfr for a while before attempting/getting an IFR rating. As I have seen in a past job, most employers wont let you fly IFR any way due to insurance requirements. Dont get sucked into ICUS scams and try for a charter job instead of instructing.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Brisbane Australia
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it is interesting that an instructor rating or CIR is a requirement for some 'airline' degrees...
...where you'll be charged for it regardless of whether you want to do it or not
I don't see how it could hurt to have done it, if 2 people are at the top of a list for a job, the only difference being one was proactive and got a CIR and the other did not... then it might be a factor
Every little thing counts!
...where you'll be charged for it regardless of whether you want to do it or not
I don't see how it could hurt to have done it, if 2 people are at the top of a list for a job, the only difference being one was proactive and got a CIR and the other did not... then it might be a factor
Every little thing counts!
