Today's Pilot Article: IMC in Helicopters
Guest
Posts: n/a
Today's Pilot Article: IMC in Helicopters
Just finished a thought provoking article (Whirly?) on IMC in helicopters, I actually think it is just as relevant to plank pilots too.
I agree with the premise that PPL instrument training is potentially misleads the pilot into believig that they can fly in cloud. When I did my plank IMC I was fortunate enough to do most of it in IMC, but I do have a strong memory of wearing foggles and suddenly developing the leans as we flew into cloud. Those erstwhile hidden visual clues suddenly because obvious by their absence and a mild confusion welled up, it took a few moments for this clear, probably coincidental with exiting the clound; one episode the article recounted too. I am sure that could have been a real issue if I were solo. I actually feel fortunate for having that experience because the sensation of leans induced befuddlement has stuck with me since. I haven't experienced it since though so it is possibly a foggles induced phenomenon.
Would dropping instrument training from the PPL be a wise move? I am generally against fatenning the PPL syllabus because I think the PPL should be bare basic foundations upon which you add all the other stuff like aeros, tailwheel, complex, etc (another debate no doubt!). But should the 45hrs incorporate or be extended to include an IMC rating or would that compound the issue?
I agree with the premise that PPL instrument training is potentially misleads the pilot into believig that they can fly in cloud. When I did my plank IMC I was fortunate enough to do most of it in IMC, but I do have a strong memory of wearing foggles and suddenly developing the leans as we flew into cloud. Those erstwhile hidden visual clues suddenly because obvious by their absence and a mild confusion welled up, it took a few moments for this clear, probably coincidental with exiting the clound; one episode the article recounted too. I am sure that could have been a real issue if I were solo. I actually feel fortunate for having that experience because the sensation of leans induced befuddlement has stuck with me since. I haven't experienced it since though so it is possibly a foggles induced phenomenon.
Would dropping instrument training from the PPL be a wise move? I am generally against fatenning the PPL syllabus because I think the PPL should be bare basic foundations upon which you add all the other stuff like aeros, tailwheel, complex, etc (another debate no doubt!). But should the 45hrs incorporate or be extended to include an IMC rating or would that compound the issue?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Today's Pilot Article: IMC in Helicopters
Is there a proposal to drop instrument training from the PPL?
If I was teaching somebody who I care about to fly I would never stop at the bare PPL stage. The ability to fly an ILS, RV if nothing else, is IMV mandatory. I would do it without necessarily adding the IMCR, so the capability would not be officially sanctioned. But it could save the person's life one day.
What does the RAF do?
Time to duck
If I was teaching somebody who I care about to fly I would never stop at the bare PPL stage. The ability to fly an ILS, RV if nothing else, is IMV mandatory. I would do it without necessarily adding the IMCR, so the capability would not be officially sanctioned. But it could save the person's life one day.
What does the RAF do?
Time to duck
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: beverley
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Today's Pilot Article: IMC in Helicopters
I think the problem with adding on an imc to a ppl course would be asking for trouble,if you did it in minimums,you would have 60hrs tt when finished.
Asking for trouble when people with so few hours start their first local flight with freinds by going in to cloud panicking and ending up in a field.
I have 70 ish hours now and would be happy to start imc but at 45hrs I don't think I would have.
High Wing Drifter You could have a point with slimming the syllabus though,isn't this why spinning was taken out-so as not encourage people to try it? The basic instrument stuff in the ppl is only meant to help you do a 180 out of the cloud,but how do you not see it in the first place during the day? So this could maybe be binned (prepares for flak from somewhere
)
IO540 Got to agree with you there!My instructor did care about my training and Wherever possible we did some extra instrument stuff including SRA,ILS,VOR tracking etc mainly because I am on my way to fatpl and it all helps.I do feel alot more confident and safer now especially night flying due to these extra bits of training I am happy on instruments,quite useful for night rating. If I did manage to get myself in the sh1t I would like to think that my 180 out of cloud would be safe rather than panicked
Asking for trouble when people with so few hours start their first local flight with freinds by going in to cloud panicking and ending up in a field.
I have 70 ish hours now and would be happy to start imc but at 45hrs I don't think I would have.
High Wing Drifter You could have a point with slimming the syllabus though,isn't this why spinning was taken out-so as not encourage people to try it? The basic instrument stuff in the ppl is only meant to help you do a 180 out of the cloud,but how do you not see it in the first place during the day? So this could maybe be binned (prepares for flak from somewhere
)IO540 Got to agree with you there!My instructor did care about my training and Wherever possible we did some extra instrument stuff including SRA,ILS,VOR tracking etc mainly because I am on my way to fatpl and it all helps.I do feel alot more confident and safer now especially night flying due to these extra bits of training I am happy on instruments,quite useful for night rating. If I did manage to get myself in the sh1t I would like to think that my 180 out of cloud would be safe rather than panicked
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: 5 nM S of TNT, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 698
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Today's Pilot Article: IMC in Helicopters
I have not read the article in question, but I think the issue here is that there is a huge difference between instrument flying in planks and helos. I have a fixed wing PPL and old non current IMC rating, I also have a PPL(H). Whilst I would be relatively confident of getting myself out of trouble in IMC if needed in a plank, I would never ever even attempt it in a light helicopter. The aeroplane wants to fly and will do so of its own accord if trimmed properly and left to its own devices, whereas the helicopter is dynamically unstable and you can't even let go to scratch your nose without it all going very rapidly pear shaped on you. I only ever once have inadvertently entered real IMC in an R22 and it was not nice at all.
I totally agree with the proposal that instrument training be removed from the PPL(H) syllabus, as it does lead new pilots to erroneously think they have the ability to fly in IMC. Believe me, they haven't.
I totally agree with the proposal that instrument training be removed from the PPL(H) syllabus, as it does lead new pilots to erroneously think they have the ability to fly in IMC. Believe me, they haven't.
Re: Today's Pilot Article: IMC in Helicopters
At least one of my 45 hours of PPL(A) was done with me being unable to look out the window - either foggles or screens, or both.
It was nothing more than climbing, decending and turning, but IMO it was time well spent. I've just decided to do my IMC as well, as it will hopefully give me the confidence the stretch that elastic band from the home airfield
It was nothing more than climbing, decending and turning, but IMO it was time well spent. I've just decided to do my IMC as well, as it will hopefully give me the confidence the stretch that elastic band from the home airfield
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Today's Pilot Article: IMC in Helicopters
I have yet to read that article.
Speaking from a PPL(A) point of view, I can see where you are coming from with the remove instrument training from PPL syllabus argument. ie. if you tell people it's deadly dangerous, so don't go near the stuff, and then don't give them any training for it, they will be scared witless of it and they will stay away.
However, I don't agree with removing it from the syllabus. The first time I put the foggles on I got the leans, and it gave me a healthy respect for cloud flying. No way would I voluntarily go into cloud now. My PPL training in no way encouraged me to think I could deal with cloud.
Since getting my PPL, I have inadvertently gone into could on about 5 occasions (4 of which were on one trip where I was pushing things a little too far, and which I learnt a lot from). The fifth was only a matter of a few seconds and hardly worth mentioning. I've little doubt that the instrument part of my PPL training saved my life. It let me deal with the situation quickly and CALMLY enough to get back out again.
One of those times stands out very clearly in my memory. I had to make a complete 180 turn on instruments, and held the heading, and when this didn't get me back out, a slow decent for 200ft brought me back out. I'd estimate that I was in that cloud for about 90 seconds to 2 minutes. Long enough to have lost control. Long enough to have panicked if I'd never been flying on instruments alone before.
The strange thing about this, is that I never realised I was about to enter that cloud. It was a miserable day, and I was flying along just under the cloud base. Despite looking out, I didn't see the bit of the cloud that extended downwards, and while I was looking ahead, it all just went grey. If I had never flown on instruments before, I imagine my immediate reaction would have been a steep turn to get back out, and not a calm rate 1 turn. Without that training, I could well not be here.
I really consider you guys & gals in the UK to be extremely lucky to be able to do an IMC rating. If I could do it here, I'd have it done ages ago.
I'd be all in favour of making the IMC rating something that was the natural, and expected extension of a PPL, rather than an optional extra. Maybe referring to a PPL as a "PPL(Restricted)" with the "restricted" being removed when an IMC rating was obtained. Obviously this can't work at present in the JAR environment, as it doesn't fit in with other JAR countries.
I agree with Markflyer that making the IMC rating part of the PPL syllabus would be wrong too. People need to add a little experience in VMC to their licence before being let loose in IMC.
dp
Speaking from a PPL(A) point of view, I can see where you are coming from with the remove instrument training from PPL syllabus argument. ie. if you tell people it's deadly dangerous, so don't go near the stuff, and then don't give them any training for it, they will be scared witless of it and they will stay away.
However, I don't agree with removing it from the syllabus. The first time I put the foggles on I got the leans, and it gave me a healthy respect for cloud flying. No way would I voluntarily go into cloud now. My PPL training in no way encouraged me to think I could deal with cloud.
Since getting my PPL, I have inadvertently gone into could on about 5 occasions (4 of which were on one trip where I was pushing things a little too far, and which I learnt a lot from). The fifth was only a matter of a few seconds and hardly worth mentioning. I've little doubt that the instrument part of my PPL training saved my life. It let me deal with the situation quickly and CALMLY enough to get back out again.
One of those times stands out very clearly in my memory. I had to make a complete 180 turn on instruments, and held the heading, and when this didn't get me back out, a slow decent for 200ft brought me back out. I'd estimate that I was in that cloud for about 90 seconds to 2 minutes. Long enough to have lost control. Long enough to have panicked if I'd never been flying on instruments alone before.
The strange thing about this, is that I never realised I was about to enter that cloud. It was a miserable day, and I was flying along just under the cloud base. Despite looking out, I didn't see the bit of the cloud that extended downwards, and while I was looking ahead, it all just went grey. If I had never flown on instruments before, I imagine my immediate reaction would have been a steep turn to get back out, and not a calm rate 1 turn. Without that training, I could well not be here.
I really consider you guys & gals in the UK to be extremely lucky to be able to do an IMC rating. If I could do it here, I'd have it done ages ago.
I'd be all in favour of making the IMC rating something that was the natural, and expected extension of a PPL, rather than an optional extra. Maybe referring to a PPL as a "PPL(Restricted)" with the "restricted" being removed when an IMC rating was obtained. Obviously this can't work at present in the JAR environment, as it doesn't fit in with other JAR countries.
I agree with Markflyer that making the IMC rating part of the PPL syllabus would be wrong too. People need to add a little experience in VMC to their licence before being let loose in IMC.
dp
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Today's Pilot Article: IMC in Helicopters
Leave the syllabus as it is with a basic appreciation of instruments and the ability to do a 180 in an emergency. It would be better to educate people to make appropriate airmanship decisions to avoid flying in conditions that may lead to inadvertent IMC. However I still have to concede that educating people does not always work as there are still plenty of people who have managed to hit solid clouds over the years. If people want to the ability fly in poorer conditions or climb through cloud then they can choose to do an IMC or IR if they're really serious about it. I think it would be very difficult to get new people to take up flying as a hobby if even more expense was added by adding an IMC to the PPL syllabus.
IO540: As for the military we do instrument flying at all stages of flying training. This is to gain experience on simpler aircraft such as the Firefly or Tutor before eventually getting onto more complicated types on the frontline, where we eventually gain a military instrument rating with different operating limitations depending on your experience level and how current you are. IF in the military is a tool that allows us to complete our tasking in most weather conditions. For example in the aircraft I fly most instrument flying is done at 100ft over the sea by day or night in order to allow us to complete tasking. Needless to say this sort of IF has to be practiced regularly in order to stay current.
IO540: As for the military we do instrument flying at all stages of flying training. This is to gain experience on simpler aircraft such as the Firefly or Tutor before eventually getting onto more complicated types on the frontline, where we eventually gain a military instrument rating with different operating limitations depending on your experience level and how current you are. IF in the military is a tool that allows us to complete our tasking in most weather conditions. For example in the aircraft I fly most instrument flying is done at 100ft over the sea by day or night in order to allow us to complete tasking. Needless to say this sort of IF has to be practiced regularly in order to stay current.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Today's Pilot Article: IMC in Helicopters
I would not seriously suggest making the IMCR an integral part of the PPL syllabus, because
a) the increase in the cost of a PPL (as shown on the school's price list) would help to kill off the already declining PPL training market;
b) one generally needs some tens of hours solo, post-PPL, before commencing instrument training
but equally I would not remove the existing training because doing so would ensure that just about every PPL will die immediately upon entering IMC.
Legalities aside, it isn't realistic to expect a PPL to simply avoid IMC. There is a really fundamental problem with clouds: there is an awful lot of them about! As with airframe icing, the correct way to approach IMC is to have an exit route. One day you WILL need it. Not training any instrument flight cuts off the exit route.
More legalities aside, it is more or less impossible to do any significant VFR flying without entering IMC here and there.... but that one is a bit more controversial
a) the increase in the cost of a PPL (as shown on the school's price list) would help to kill off the already declining PPL training market;
b) one generally needs some tens of hours solo, post-PPL, before commencing instrument training
but equally I would not remove the existing training because doing so would ensure that just about every PPL will die immediately upon entering IMC.
Legalities aside, it isn't realistic to expect a PPL to simply avoid IMC. There is a really fundamental problem with clouds: there is an awful lot of them about! As with airframe icing, the correct way to approach IMC is to have an exit route. One day you WILL need it. Not training any instrument flight cuts off the exit route.
More legalities aside, it is more or less impossible to do any significant VFR flying without entering IMC here and there.... but that one is a bit more controversial
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Today's Pilot Article: IMC in Helicopters
IO540,
Yes I guess I agree (how dull), I suppose Helen's (article writer) and Muffin's view is that helicopters are easier to put down safely if you run out of airborne exit options so removing it completely from the vanilla PPL(H) is logical. Maybe then the skills test should include more than a 180 (this was all I was asked to do) but also also climbs and descents. In addition a "satisfactory handling in IMC" signature from an instructor in the logbook for the annual/bienniel class revalidation for those without an IMC or IR - it only takes 15 mins to do a few turns climbs and descents, doesn't seem onerous and can be incorporated into the existing instructor hour.
With the accent on significant rather than sub 2 hour legs nationally and with diversions readily available I guess that must be the case. Even more an aurgument for a private owner oriented IR so staying legal is also a practical option!!
Yes I guess I agree (how dull), I suppose Helen's (article writer) and Muffin's view is that helicopters are easier to put down safely if you run out of airborne exit options so removing it completely from the vanilla PPL(H) is logical. Maybe then the skills test should include more than a 180 (this was all I was asked to do) but also also climbs and descents. In addition a "satisfactory handling in IMC" signature from an instructor in the logbook for the annual/bienniel class revalidation for those without an IMC or IR - it only takes 15 mins to do a few turns climbs and descents, doesn't seem onerous and can be incorporated into the existing instructor hour.
More legalities aside, it is more or less impossible to do any significant VFR flying without entering IMC here and there.... but that one is a bit more controversial
Better red than ...
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Appleby-in-Westmorland Cumbria England
Posts: 1,412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Today's Pilot Article: IMC in Helicopters
Simplish(ish) algebra.
{Non IR helicopter pilot + Non IFR rated helicopter} in IMC = You die
Check out the rotary accidents reports from AAIB (there's even a new one out today).
The message has got to be clearer than it is today. Non IFR helicopters do not go into cloud/mist/fog. That would be a useful use of the extra few hours on a PPL(H) course. More and better Met and off airport landings so there is a familiarity with the ability to land before the visiability reaches the terminal stage.
{Non IR helicopter pilot + Non IFR rated helicopter} in IMC = You die
Check out the rotary accidents reports from AAIB (there's even a new one out today).
The message has got to be clearer than it is today. Non IFR helicopters do not go into cloud/mist/fog. That would be a useful use of the extra few hours on a PPL(H) course. More and better Met and off airport landings so there is a familiarity with the ability to land before the visiability reaches the terminal stage.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Today's Pilot Article: IMC in Helicopters
The problem really in giving someone an IMC "tick" on the PPL is that it is all done with foggles and they do not give a proper limiting view. This then makes people believe that if they can make the turn in foggles they can make it in cloud and then it all ends in tears. If any instrument training is to be included or continued to be included then it has to be proper view limiting like blinds. The number of people who have had IMC training in foggles and the first time they have entered cloud they have got the leans is frightening. Foggles are only really any use for the Instrument Navigation part of the training not for the instrumment flying.
Better still have all IMC training to actually include a significant amount of real cloud flying.
Better still have all IMC training to actually include a significant amount of real cloud flying.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Today's Pilot Article: IMC in Helicopters
There exists a cadre of PPL (fixed wing) holders who have never had any IF training.
Does this make them safer as they never enter cloud?
Stik
Does this make them safer as they never enter cloud?
Stik
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: beverley
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Today's Pilot Article: IMC in Helicopters
Better still have all IMC training to actually include a significant amount of real cloud flying.
My skills test instrument flying invovled a climb through cloud to get on top,whilst on the nav route,vor fix on top,then turns during the descent back thruogh the cloud to see if was where I predicted.As soon as I was vmc and sure of my position the throttle was chopped for a PFL!!!
Bit of an ordeal,but better than doing a level 180 with some daft plastic specs on.
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
Re: Today's Pilot Article: IMC in Helicopters
I did read the article, with a lot of interest. Knowing that Whirly regularly flies both C150s and R22s, and is also a rotary instructor, I would say she is ideally placed to comment on the syllabus of the PPL(H), and the differences between fixed-wing and rotary.
From a fixed-wing point of view, I would be in favour of increasing the amount of instrument flying which is done and tested on, but not to the extent of including an IMC rating in the PPL. Specifically, I would include climbs and descents on instruments, which are not currently part of the syllabus. All of my students learn to climb and descent. And they also do this in actual IMC if it all possible (and in this country, it usually is!)
The reason for this is because the 180 degree turn is fine if you accidentally fly forwards into a cloud. But people don't often fly forwards into a cloud. All of the times I've found myself inadvertently in IMC, it's because I've flown up into a cloud. In which case, turning isn't going to get me out it. My immediate reaction must be to either climb (if I am below MSA) or descend (if I am above MSA).
I also get all my students to do an SRA, purely because the facility exists at my home airport. Most of my students can manage an SRA after spending a bit of time on instruments, and it's nice to know that they have this option to get out of trouble if absolutely necessary. But anyone who goes flying VFR in weather which turns bad enough to absolutely need to do an instrument approach is either very unlucky, or should have their license taken away from them. My students who fly SRAs invariably find it extremely hard work, and tell me that they would certainly not want to repeat it by themselves. I have spoken to air traffic controllers who have been responsible for helping PPLs who have got into trouble, and they all seem to think that descending the PPL to VMC somewhere safe (over the sea, for example) is far better than attempting an instrument approach.
FFF
-------------
From a fixed-wing point of view, I would be in favour of increasing the amount of instrument flying which is done and tested on, but not to the extent of including an IMC rating in the PPL. Specifically, I would include climbs and descents on instruments, which are not currently part of the syllabus. All of my students learn to climb and descent. And they also do this in actual IMC if it all possible (and in this country, it usually is!)
The reason for this is because the 180 degree turn is fine if you accidentally fly forwards into a cloud. But people don't often fly forwards into a cloud. All of the times I've found myself inadvertently in IMC, it's because I've flown up into a cloud. In which case, turning isn't going to get me out it. My immediate reaction must be to either climb (if I am below MSA) or descend (if I am above MSA).
I also get all my students to do an SRA, purely because the facility exists at my home airport. Most of my students can manage an SRA after spending a bit of time on instruments, and it's nice to know that they have this option to get out of trouble if absolutely necessary. But anyone who goes flying VFR in weather which turns bad enough to absolutely need to do an instrument approach is either very unlucky, or should have their license taken away from them. My students who fly SRAs invariably find it extremely hard work, and tell me that they would certainly not want to repeat it by themselves. I have spoken to air traffic controllers who have been responsible for helping PPLs who have got into trouble, and they all seem to think that descending the PPL to VMC somewhere safe (over the sea, for example) is far better than attempting an instrument approach.
FFF
-------------
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Today's Pilot Article: IMC in Helicopters
Originally Posted by IO540
but equally I would not remove the existing training because doing so would ensure that just about every PPL will die immediately upon entering IMC.
Legalities aside, it isn't realistic to expect a PPL to simply avoid IMC. There is a really fundamental problem with clouds: there is an awful lot of them about!
Legalities aside, it isn't realistic to expect a PPL to simply avoid IMC. There is a really fundamental problem with clouds: there is an awful lot of them about!
If that is to be believed, the country should be littered with dead microlight pilots. After all, those PPL have absolutely no IMC training, reguluarly tour near and far and fly aircraft with so few instruments that a current IR holder would find it practically impossible to maintain control for any length of time in IMC.
If IMC training is such a requirement then there must also be a requirement for every aircraft to be equipped for IMC flight (and the instruments to be serviceable).
Learning to do a rate 1 180 deg turn on instruments is useless when one goes on to fly an aircraft without instruments.
PPLs need to be taught;
1. IMC = death.
2. Enroute navigation scud running (at any altitude) increases the posibility of 1
3. Fly enroute for example at a minimum of 1000ft above obstacles and 500ft minimum below the cloud (unless law requires more) and if unable to do that don't fly.
4. If one wants to fly enroute in IMC (and thus avoid cancellations due to 3.) get an IR.
I believe that one of the reasons for many basic PPL holders entering cloud is that the aircraft is equipped and overconfidence disolves the IMC= Death training. The reason why I believe that is because the very same average PPLs put in poorly equipped aircraft do not enter IMC on such a regular basis.
Conclusion - it is not a training issue alone. It is a culture issue and the IMC rating does not help.
Regards,
DFC
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Today's Pilot Article: IMC in Helicopters
DFC=sometimes talking complete and utter bollox.
I often wonder if you just post this sort of crap to wind people up?
There is nothing wrong with the IMC rating when taught correctly. IMC does not equal death when encountered by a properly trained PPL, a properly trained PPL can be an IMC holder.
I often wonder if you just post this sort of crap to wind people up?
There is nothing wrong with the IMC rating when taught correctly. IMC does not equal death when encountered by a properly trained PPL, a properly trained PPL can be an IMC holder.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Today's Pilot Article: IMC in Helicopters
<Conclusion - it is not a training issue alone. It is a culture issue and the IMC rating does not help.>
Then why mention the IMC......
Then why mention the IMC......
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Today's Pilot Article: IMC in Helicopters
Have to agree with DFC.
It does seem to be a cultural issue. I have come across a number of pilots who insist on flying in marginal conditions without appropriate training. Most have been very lucky and got away with it some of those have learnt from their mistake others have thought they've got away with it and do it time and time again. Others have not been so lucky.
I think instrument appreciation training is important but an IMC rating should be something you move onto after a PPL not part of it. Drumming into people from the start how to make proper airmanship decisions as to what sort of weather conditions they fly in based on their individual skill level and experience at the time is very important. I think a lot of PPLs forget this after they get their license.
I have been flying for over 18 years now both privately and military and have never entered inadvertent IMC.
Professional flying aside I have a basic PPL without IMC or IR as I have no intention of getting myself into a situation where I would enter inadvertent IMC.
A superior pilot is one who uses his superior judgement to avoid a situation where he may have to use his superior skill.
Regards,
Jucky
It does seem to be a cultural issue. I have come across a number of pilots who insist on flying in marginal conditions without appropriate training. Most have been very lucky and got away with it some of those have learnt from their mistake others have thought they've got away with it and do it time and time again. Others have not been so lucky.
I think instrument appreciation training is important but an IMC rating should be something you move onto after a PPL not part of it. Drumming into people from the start how to make proper airmanship decisions as to what sort of weather conditions they fly in based on their individual skill level and experience at the time is very important. I think a lot of PPLs forget this after they get their license.
I have been flying for over 18 years now both privately and military and have never entered inadvertent IMC.
Professional flying aside I have a basic PPL without IMC or IR as I have no intention of getting myself into a situation where I would enter inadvertent IMC.
A superior pilot is one who uses his superior judgement to avoid a situation where he may have to use his superior skill.
Regards,
Jucky