IMC rating diary
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Oxford
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Holding may not officially form part of the test, but it all depends where you do it: I did mine at Oxford and was stacked (the first time I'd ever been stacked...) FL55, so had to hold for about 3 times round (once each at FL55, FL45, 3500), and I'm sure that the examiner was wanting to see them done properly...
Tim
Tim
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi there
when I did mine, I was told by the examiner , that holds had to be TAUGHT in the syllabus, and an entry made to that effect in your logbook.
If that was done, you did NOT need to be tested on holds, but if no evidence was in your logbook that you had done some , then you WOULD be tested on them....
Needless to say I made sure I was taught them <g>
Bill
when I did mine, I was told by the examiner , that holds had to be TAUGHT in the syllabus, and an entry made to that effect in your logbook.
If that was done, you did NOT need to be tested on holds, but if no evidence was in your logbook that you had done some , then you WOULD be tested on them....
Needless to say I made sure I was taught them <g>
Bill
Holding is part of the syllabus. It does not form part of the test. However, if ATC direct that a hold is required, the applicant must be able to enter the hold and fly the hold correctly. However, back in 'self-improver' days, many an IMC rated FI without an IR seemed to want to see the student practise endless holds - more for their own benefit than that of the student, I would guess. Same went for those gits who would fly 'demo ILS' approaches with ab-initio PPL students and then log them as part of what was then the mandatory 4 hours of IF training.....
The IMC Rating is a most useful rating for anyone. Personally I still think that FI(R)s should not be permitted to 'upgrade' to FI until they hold an IMC rating themselves and have demonstrated the ability to teach applied IF.
There have even been cases of FIs who, not only still had the 'No applied IF' restriction, but also didn't even hold an IMC rating themselves applying to become FEs.......
The IMC Rating is a most useful rating for anyone. Personally I still think that FI(R)s should not be permitted to 'upgrade' to FI until they hold an IMC rating themselves and have demonstrated the ability to teach applied IF.
There have even been cases of FIs who, not only still had the 'No applied IF' restriction, but also didn't even hold an IMC rating themselves applying to become FEs.......
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think holds should be taught because they are good for situational awareness, and very occassionally one does have to do one.
But they are relatively hard to do well, which is why I think getting the student to do them early on in the IMCR training is just a revenue generation scheme. A bit like doing the first T&G circuits (in the PPL training) with a 15kt gusty crosswind - brilliant for revenue but the student just sits there messing up one landing after another.
The thing which most instructors won't admit is that there is no need to fly the hold to perfection, because the protected area is big enough for much larger planes and in many cases big enough for a 747 at 180kt or whatever. What matters is that one is flying the correct inbound track to the beacon; the wind correction doesn't have to be spot on and indeed cannot be spot on the first time around, given the uncertain winds aloft and the crappy instruments in the teaching planes which make it hard to measure the track versus heading accurately.
But with most schools scraping out the bottom of the barrel financially, there is a lot of revenue generation going on, sadly.
But they are relatively hard to do well, which is why I think getting the student to do them early on in the IMCR training is just a revenue generation scheme. A bit like doing the first T&G circuits (in the PPL training) with a 15kt gusty crosswind - brilliant for revenue but the student just sits there messing up one landing after another.
The thing which most instructors won't admit is that there is no need to fly the hold to perfection, because the protected area is big enough for much larger planes and in many cases big enough for a 747 at 180kt or whatever. What matters is that one is flying the correct inbound track to the beacon; the wind correction doesn't have to be spot on and indeed cannot be spot on the first time around, given the uncertain winds aloft and the crappy instruments in the teaching planes which make it hard to measure the track versus heading accurately.
But with most schools scraping out the bottom of the barrel financially, there is a lot of revenue generation going on, sadly.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Loughborough Uni
Age: 37
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been reading these forums for a while but been too lazy to post anything. thought I'd stick something in here though.
I completed my IMC rating a few months ago and have already needed to use it (after "forgetting" that visibility in haze is quite bad when flying into the sun). and it has certainly improved my flying in general
I was taught all the theory on holds and entry to holds before having to fly any and I was told that there was no real need to be accurate in a hold, aslong as you can find your way back to the beacon after a reasonable length on time, and preferably from the right direction. All the seperation required in hold is done with altitude, so there is no real danger of flying into anyone if you are a bit off.
I completed my IMC rating a few months ago and have already needed to use it (after "forgetting" that visibility in haze is quite bad when flying into the sun). and it has certainly improved my flying in general
I was taught all the theory on holds and entry to holds before having to fly any and I was told that there was no real need to be accurate in a hold, aslong as you can find your way back to the beacon after a reasonable length on time, and preferably from the right direction. All the seperation required in hold is done with altitude, so there is no real danger of flying into anyone if you are a bit off.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: _
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Obs cop, your diary makes good reading, thanks. As for the issue surrounding holds I personally feel the workload is extremely high in the hold and I think given a little time to gain experience it will provide an opportunity if nothing else to learn how to cope in very high workload situations whilst also mixing in the busy environment of the aerodrome surroundings and then moving onto the next high workload situation - the instrument approach itself. I'm sure the more experienced instrument fliers find holds and positioning from the hold to the approach fairly routine but I find they teach me a lot and provide a measure of how I'm progressing depending on how well I fly them and how much I take from the first trip round a hold and successfully apply to the subsequent trips. Although they're not examined for the IMC I think any instructor worth their salt would teach a student how to hold since they're entitled upon passing their flight test to fly IFR in controlled airspace where they could very well be slung into a hold before they go any further. Even though they're busy I still enjoy holds and think they're well worth learning. Just my £0.02
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All the seperation required in hold is done with altitude, so there is no real danger of flying into anyone if you are a bit off.
So, not being able to accurately fly one in IMC could ruin someones day.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However it must be the case that a hold flown at 100kt is going to be about half the linear size of one flown at 200kt - using Rate 1 turns in both cases.
So a spamcan pilot would have to be a helluva long way off to come out of the area used by holding jet traffic.
So a spamcan pilot would have to be a helluva long way off to come out of the area used by holding jet traffic.
Why do it if it's not fun?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bl00dy typical - I go off-line for a few weeks and when I get back everyone's started diaries and I don't have the time to catch up on everything I've missed! At least Obs had the decency to only start his diary shortly before I got back on-line, unlike Mazzy whose diary is in full-swing already! 
Keep it up, guys - good luck with the training, and thanks for taking the time and effort to write it up - I know how difficult that can be!
FFF
---------------
Keep it up, guys - good luck with the training, and thanks for taking the time and effort to write it up - I know how difficult that can be!
FFF
---------------
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Midlands
Age: 50
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hour 2
My apologies for those who may feel that this diary does not have the frequency of updates that other diaries enjoy. Like many who amble along in the private flying forum (I suspect anyway), I can only generally get airbourne once a week or so.
Instrument flying is quite clearly a practised art, a fact becoming ever so evident to me this afternoon. I was going to be developing my skills from merely being able to fly on instruments to actually using them to navigate. Hence the addition to my instruments to scan of the OBI (Omnidirectional Bearing Indicator). Basically this fine instrument tells you whether you are left or right of a desired track to or from a selected VOR beacon. As it is quite a complicated instrument to explain, it is best left to my new found bedtime reading material "The Air Pilot's Manual - Volume 5", suffice to say initially it caused me a couple of minor upsets.
I arrived at the airfield full of anticipation today as unlike my previous flight, there were actually some clouds about and I might actually get some proper un-hooded IFR flight time. My instructor was still airbourne in a different aircraft so I took the opportunity of uncovering and pre-flighting the aircraft. Once completed, I settled in to a nice cup of coffee and 15 minutes later we started briefing. We covered where we were going to operate (Daventry VOR), the route out and the exercises we were going to fly. Never one to miss an opportunity, I reaffirmed my read up homework and we discussed the OBI and how to use it. This included the set up proceedure TITO.
T Tune in the required beacon.
I Identify the beacon.
T Test the beacon/instrument.
O Orientate the Instrument.
My aircraft has a combined GPS (only ever used for remaining clear of controlled airspace!), Comms radio and Nav radio set up. So I have quite a complex piece of kit to learn on but all becomes more relevant later.
We walked out to the aircraft, started up as usual and off we went. I took the chance during the startup to set the Nav radios, but due to the fact we were on the ground and were not within a line of sight of the beacon, it obviously gave no indication. Once airbourne and departing to the Southeast the OBI came alive and I set 130 on the OBI which was the QDM towards the Daventry beacon from our location before turning towards a heading of 130. I was given the grace of being allowed to identify the beacon and test it before the dreaded hood. Each beacon transmits a morse code 3 letter identifier along with it's navigational signal and by turning the Nav audio on, you can listen to this morse signal and identify you have the correct beacon. Sure enough Delta Tango Yankee came over my headset and I then tested the instrument. I simply did this by cahnging the frequency of the nav radio, watching the OBI needle go to the side and the warning flag come up. This told me that the intrument was not recieving any signals from a VOR and on restoring DTY, the needle came back and the flag vanished telling me I had a nav signal. I had already orientated it to 130 so all of my checks were complete and on went the hood.
Cool, now I had an 8th instrument to play with. I had my 6 flight instruments, my tachometer and now the OBI. I was mesmerised by the needle, following it's slow but deliberate movement away from the centre. I was going off track so skillfully, I used my AI to enter a right turn and my DI to set the heading of 140. Hey how hard can this be. But wait, why am I 200 feet too low, no problems, back to the AI, raise the nose a touch and bing.....ohh why am I flying 120 degrees, I want 140. No problemo, slight turn to the right and whadya know I'm too high and still off track. Why won't it turn right to 140? Like a muppet, I had a new toy and had stopped my scan, missing the fact I was flying out of trim and spending too long looking away from my AI.
A thorough self administered beating later, I had forced myself to revert to a proper scan. There are 2 types of basic scan, a radial scan used if you are on autopilot or such like where all you are looking for is inconsistancies in instrument indications to alert you of problems and what I would call a "spoke" scan. Imagine the AI is the hub of a bicycle wheel and with this it becomes your primary focus. From this point spokes radiate out to each of the other required instruments. Most of your attention is focused on the AI as it is your attitude information and hence with your power setting determines the aircraft's performance. From the AI you glance to single instruments before going back to the AI. For example to maintain straight and level you may go from your AI to your DI to check your heading, back to your AI to ensure you are maintaining attitude, then to your altimeter to check your altitude and again back to your AI. Every now and again you can then insert a check of your ASI or slip ball to check balance etc.
Now I had the thing in control again, we tracked all the way to DTY and as planned flew through the overhaed to examine what happens. To cut a long story short, VOR beacons don't transmit a signal directly above and so as you close, the OBI becomes very sensitive and then goes off to one side showing no signal before coming back to life on the far side. As it does so, the to flag changes to from to tell you that the set OBI heading is going to take you away from the beacon. We continued for 3 to 4 miles before doing a rate 1 turn to the right. The intention ws to set up an intercept of the 360 track to DTY but with my turn and the wind, we ended up pretty much overhead the neacon. With 360 set on the OBI I flew 330 waiting for the needle to move in from the left. Not a flicker. We should have neen well away from the overhead, why wasn't the needle moving? I turned further left to 320. Still nothing. Putting me out of my misery my instructor pointed out that the magnetic compass was showing a heading of 350 to that of my DI which had drifted well away. DI brought back to 350, a turn to the left and bingo, the needle on the OBI , moved, I was getting back on track. I'm concentrating on the instruments that much, I am scaring myself with the fact I have lost a lot of my basic airmanship skills. My hope is that as I become more attuned to my new environment, I will have more mental capacity to bring them back in, but then hey, last week I couldn't fly a specified track on a VOR. Now I can. We went North and then turned 180 degrees and practices an intercept of the 180 QDM (heading towards a beacon as opposed to QDR which is a radial from a beacon).
After a bit more VOR tracking we headed back to the field where we set up for a straight in approach. This gave me the chance to try my first ILS approach. Put simply it is just a much more sensitive VOR which gives glideslop information. Working to IMC limitations, my decision height would be 800' on the QNH (the decision height is based on a number of factors but IMC limitations are more restrictive than those applied to an Instrument rated pilot). The concentration was intense, but I managed to nail the track at 2000 feet altitude and as the aircraft drifted right of my chosen track of 230, I went to 220. This brought the needle back into the middle and I then bisected the 2 headings hoping 225 would be a good wind adjusted heading to track me down the centrline. All was looking good until I ganced at the glideslope indicator which was racing past the middle of my instrument. Damn, I haven't even started a descent yet. Carb heat hot, power to 1900 and stuff the nose down 5 degrees. Phew it's coming back. I'm quite a modest person usually, but nailed the approach. Although I was sweating and couldn't talk, I nailed it. 800 feet, hood up and there she was in all her daylight bathed tarmac glory, runway 23. Another hour airbourne, 50 minutes instrument time logged amd lesson over.
Todays lesson in summary, if you can't or even won't scan properly........
Stick to VFR. For me anyway this needs serious practice and I would say that with 75 hours experience it is readily achievable, but far more demanding in terms of piloting skills than the PPL.
Have a nice week, I hope to be flying in the middle of the week - A VOR and NDB based nav route.
Obs cop
PS. I only know of 30 seconds of actual IFR in the clouds! Today I was mainly hooded again.
My apologies for those who may feel that this diary does not have the frequency of updates that other diaries enjoy. Like many who amble along in the private flying forum (I suspect anyway), I can only generally get airbourne once a week or so.
Instrument flying is quite clearly a practised art, a fact becoming ever so evident to me this afternoon. I was going to be developing my skills from merely being able to fly on instruments to actually using them to navigate. Hence the addition to my instruments to scan of the OBI (Omnidirectional Bearing Indicator). Basically this fine instrument tells you whether you are left or right of a desired track to or from a selected VOR beacon. As it is quite a complicated instrument to explain, it is best left to my new found bedtime reading material "The Air Pilot's Manual - Volume 5", suffice to say initially it caused me a couple of minor upsets.
I arrived at the airfield full of anticipation today as unlike my previous flight, there were actually some clouds about and I might actually get some proper un-hooded IFR flight time. My instructor was still airbourne in a different aircraft so I took the opportunity of uncovering and pre-flighting the aircraft. Once completed, I settled in to a nice cup of coffee and 15 minutes later we started briefing. We covered where we were going to operate (Daventry VOR), the route out and the exercises we were going to fly. Never one to miss an opportunity, I reaffirmed my read up homework and we discussed the OBI and how to use it. This included the set up proceedure TITO.
T Tune in the required beacon.
I Identify the beacon.
T Test the beacon/instrument.
O Orientate the Instrument.
My aircraft has a combined GPS (only ever used for remaining clear of controlled airspace!), Comms radio and Nav radio set up. So I have quite a complex piece of kit to learn on but all becomes more relevant later.
We walked out to the aircraft, started up as usual and off we went. I took the chance during the startup to set the Nav radios, but due to the fact we were on the ground and were not within a line of sight of the beacon, it obviously gave no indication. Once airbourne and departing to the Southeast the OBI came alive and I set 130 on the OBI which was the QDM towards the Daventry beacon from our location before turning towards a heading of 130. I was given the grace of being allowed to identify the beacon and test it before the dreaded hood. Each beacon transmits a morse code 3 letter identifier along with it's navigational signal and by turning the Nav audio on, you can listen to this morse signal and identify you have the correct beacon. Sure enough Delta Tango Yankee came over my headset and I then tested the instrument. I simply did this by cahnging the frequency of the nav radio, watching the OBI needle go to the side and the warning flag come up. This told me that the intrument was not recieving any signals from a VOR and on restoring DTY, the needle came back and the flag vanished telling me I had a nav signal. I had already orientated it to 130 so all of my checks were complete and on went the hood.
Cool, now I had an 8th instrument to play with. I had my 6 flight instruments, my tachometer and now the OBI. I was mesmerised by the needle, following it's slow but deliberate movement away from the centre. I was going off track so skillfully, I used my AI to enter a right turn and my DI to set the heading of 140. Hey how hard can this be. But wait, why am I 200 feet too low, no problems, back to the AI, raise the nose a touch and bing.....ohh why am I flying 120 degrees, I want 140. No problemo, slight turn to the right and whadya know I'm too high and still off track. Why won't it turn right to 140? Like a muppet, I had a new toy and had stopped my scan, missing the fact I was flying out of trim and spending too long looking away from my AI.
A thorough self administered beating later, I had forced myself to revert to a proper scan. There are 2 types of basic scan, a radial scan used if you are on autopilot or such like where all you are looking for is inconsistancies in instrument indications to alert you of problems and what I would call a "spoke" scan. Imagine the AI is the hub of a bicycle wheel and with this it becomes your primary focus. From this point spokes radiate out to each of the other required instruments. Most of your attention is focused on the AI as it is your attitude information and hence with your power setting determines the aircraft's performance. From the AI you glance to single instruments before going back to the AI. For example to maintain straight and level you may go from your AI to your DI to check your heading, back to your AI to ensure you are maintaining attitude, then to your altimeter to check your altitude and again back to your AI. Every now and again you can then insert a check of your ASI or slip ball to check balance etc.
Now I had the thing in control again, we tracked all the way to DTY and as planned flew through the overhaed to examine what happens. To cut a long story short, VOR beacons don't transmit a signal directly above and so as you close, the OBI becomes very sensitive and then goes off to one side showing no signal before coming back to life on the far side. As it does so, the to flag changes to from to tell you that the set OBI heading is going to take you away from the beacon. We continued for 3 to 4 miles before doing a rate 1 turn to the right. The intention ws to set up an intercept of the 360 track to DTY but with my turn and the wind, we ended up pretty much overhead the neacon. With 360 set on the OBI I flew 330 waiting for the needle to move in from the left. Not a flicker. We should have neen well away from the overhead, why wasn't the needle moving? I turned further left to 320. Still nothing. Putting me out of my misery my instructor pointed out that the magnetic compass was showing a heading of 350 to that of my DI which had drifted well away. DI brought back to 350, a turn to the left and bingo, the needle on the OBI , moved, I was getting back on track. I'm concentrating on the instruments that much, I am scaring myself with the fact I have lost a lot of my basic airmanship skills. My hope is that as I become more attuned to my new environment, I will have more mental capacity to bring them back in, but then hey, last week I couldn't fly a specified track on a VOR. Now I can. We went North and then turned 180 degrees and practices an intercept of the 180 QDM (heading towards a beacon as opposed to QDR which is a radial from a beacon).
After a bit more VOR tracking we headed back to the field where we set up for a straight in approach. This gave me the chance to try my first ILS approach. Put simply it is just a much more sensitive VOR which gives glideslop information. Working to IMC limitations, my decision height would be 800' on the QNH (the decision height is based on a number of factors but IMC limitations are more restrictive than those applied to an Instrument rated pilot). The concentration was intense, but I managed to nail the track at 2000 feet altitude and as the aircraft drifted right of my chosen track of 230, I went to 220. This brought the needle back into the middle and I then bisected the 2 headings hoping 225 would be a good wind adjusted heading to track me down the centrline. All was looking good until I ganced at the glideslope indicator which was racing past the middle of my instrument. Damn, I haven't even started a descent yet. Carb heat hot, power to 1900 and stuff the nose down 5 degrees. Phew it's coming back. I'm quite a modest person usually, but nailed the approach. Although I was sweating and couldn't talk, I nailed it. 800 feet, hood up and there she was in all her daylight bathed tarmac glory, runway 23. Another hour airbourne, 50 minutes instrument time logged amd lesson over.
Todays lesson in summary, if you can't or even won't scan properly........
Stick to VFR. For me anyway this needs serious practice and I would say that with 75 hours experience it is readily achievable, but far more demanding in terms of piloting skills than the PPL.
Have a nice week, I hope to be flying in the middle of the week - A VOR and NDB based nav route.
Obs cop
PS. I only know of 30 seconds of actual IFR in the clouds! Today I was mainly hooded again.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Midlands
Age: 50
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bose-x
I certainly am flying a 152 from Coventry, but I will stress that the diary was and is not intended to reflect any organisations, but rather my experiences, high and lows.
Obs cop
I certainly am flying a 152 from Coventry, but I will stress that the diary was and is not intended to reflect any organisations, but rather my experiences, high and lows.
Obs cop
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is your experiances that are great to read. Keep them coming!
It was just your comment about the combined GPS that led the trail there! As far as I know the only 152 that has that level of fit apart from our 2 is AFT's! I was sat in it the other day comparing notes!
It was just your comment about the combined GPS that led the trail there! As far as I know the only 152 that has that level of fit apart from our 2 is AFT's! I was sat in it the other day comparing notes!
Spicy Meatball
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Liverpool UK
Age: 41
Posts: 1,115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great summary Obs
I done a post in my diary regarding instrument flying as I done ex19 the other day. Learning at my level certainly requires a hell of a lot of concentration and focus, it really took it out of me the first time, so I can respect how difficult it must be at your level. I too like the spoke style scan, rather than go round the instruments in a radial, I prefer to start at the AI, then to altitude, back to AI, then to VSI etc. I find this helps keep a better attitude as you are looking at the AI more, and in turn will help you keep all the other instruments in tune.
This thread makes me wanna do an IMC and I aint even got my PPL yet
Keep up the good work!
Maz
I done a post in my diary regarding instrument flying as I done ex19 the other day. Learning at my level certainly requires a hell of a lot of concentration and focus, it really took it out of me the first time, so I can respect how difficult it must be at your level. I too like the spoke style scan, rather than go round the instruments in a radial, I prefer to start at the AI, then to altitude, back to AI, then to VSI etc. I find this helps keep a better attitude as you are looking at the AI more, and in turn will help you keep all the other instruments in tune.
This thread makes me wanna do an IMC and I aint even got my PPL yet
Keep up the good work!
Maz
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I was teaching somebody I care about to fly, I would do the PPL stuff plus what is needed for IFR (IMC) flight and instrument approaches. That's the baseline for safe UK flying.
The IMCR is also pretty well essential for pre-planned flight in the UK - even if many flights actually take place in what happens to be probably legal VFR conditions.
Sadly, a decent aircraft and decent currency ON TYPE are equally essential, and one can't teach those...
I am getting out of here before I get shot down by all those retired old boys, living close to the airfield, who say "you can go everywhere VFR, young man"
One more thing though... I found the IMCR training to be a real grind too, so these diaries make disturbing reading for me. The key to it being a lot more pleasant is to do it in a decent plane with decent avionics, plus building it up gradually and not doing the hard stuff until one has decent situational awareness. But that would take more than the min prescribed 15 hrs and I don't think many students would be too keen on that.
The IMCR is also pretty well essential for pre-planned flight in the UK - even if many flights actually take place in what happens to be probably legal VFR conditions.
Sadly, a decent aircraft and decent currency ON TYPE are equally essential, and one can't teach those...
I am getting out of here before I get shot down by all those retired old boys, living close to the airfield, who say "you can go everywhere VFR, young man"
One more thing though... I found the IMCR training to be a real grind too, so these diaries make disturbing reading for me. The key to it being a lot more pleasant is to do it in a decent plane with decent avionics, plus building it up gradually and not doing the hard stuff until one has decent situational awareness. But that would take more than the min prescribed 15 hrs and I don't think many students would be too keen on that.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Midlands
Age: 50
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks all for the comments guys.
There are a few factors that are undoubtedly making rhe IMC rating easier and some that are making it harder in my particular case. In no particular order:
Helping
Flew 30 hours in last year, 27 of which were in the exact aircraft I am doing the IMC in - as close to current on type as I can get!
Same instructor as for my PPL and conversion onto PA28.
Getting on well with instructor.
Same airfield as my PPL.
Previous instrument training (all be it some years ago ) courtesy of the Royal Navy, including NDB let downs, PAR's and SRA's.
Well equiped aircraft.
Desire.
Ex-Royal Navy Observer so used to no view out of the window.
Hindering
Lack of continuity - only 1 hour per week.
Motion sickness (life long hinderance).
Only 75 ours total light aircraft experience.
Studying for ATPL's at same time.
IO540, I agree with many of your sentiments, but would add that it is more important to do instrument training in say a well equipped C150/152 than a poorley equipped C182. In otherwords, the fit is more important than the airframe, but ideally you would be best with a nice stable easy to fly airframe with a good fit. IMHO
I'm off to read up on NDB's now.....
Obs cop
There are a few factors that are undoubtedly making rhe IMC rating easier and some that are making it harder in my particular case. In no particular order:
Helping
Flew 30 hours in last year, 27 of which were in the exact aircraft I am doing the IMC in - as close to current on type as I can get!
Same instructor as for my PPL and conversion onto PA28.
Getting on well with instructor.
Same airfield as my PPL.
Previous instrument training (all be it some years ago
) courtesy of the Royal Navy, including NDB let downs, PAR's and SRA's.Well equiped aircraft.
Desire.
Ex-Royal Navy Observer so used to no view out of the window.
Hindering
Lack of continuity - only 1 hour per week.
Motion sickness (life long hinderance).
Only 75 ours total light aircraft experience.
Studying for ATPL's at same time.
IO540, I agree with many of your sentiments, but would add that it is more important to do instrument training in say a well equipped C150/152 than a poorley equipped C182. In otherwords, the fit is more important than the airframe, but ideally you would be best with a nice stable easy to fly airframe with a good fit. IMHO
I'm off to read up on NDB's now.....
Obs cop
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Almost Scotland
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Obs Cop,
Thanks for the diary, and please keep it coming. Takes me back to my IMCR training last autumn.
(I particularly enjoyed your reference, in your second hour, to the 'glideslop' {sic} - may be accurate as a description!)
Reference Holds, they certainly formed a goodly part of my training, both VOR and NDB holds, left and right. There was an element of being asked to fly a couple of holds in the examination, but I think that was for enjoyment, rather than as an integral part of the examination itself.
Good luck.
Thanks for the diary, and please keep it coming. Takes me back to my IMCR training last autumn.
(I particularly enjoyed your reference, in your second hour, to the 'glideslop' {sic} - may be accurate as a description!)
Reference Holds, they certainly formed a goodly part of my training, both VOR and NDB holds, left and right. There was an element of being asked to fly a couple of holds in the examination, but I think that was for enjoyment, rather than as an integral part of the examination itself.
Good luck.