It is not taught as 'one exercise' any more than Ex12/13 are!

I recall the early days of RAIM ALERT warnings which often occurred at inopportune moments and froze the GPS. I gather that Garmin later tweaked the firmware though.

Indeed, I did my IMCR in an HSI/RMI equipped a/c. How people manage to do an NDB approach with a non rotating ADF card is beyond me, and full marks to those that do.

Radio nav should be taught as much as possible, tracking a beacon or getting a position fix should not be a difficult task in VMC.

However, many training aircraft are not fitted with these instruments, some might only have one functioning VOR with no DME, or the kit might not even be installed, so position fixing is more of a handful. And for an aircraft which is only used for day VFR flying, there is no real incentive to spend the money to get the kit fitted, or fixed when it goes wrong.

Peter - As much as many of us VFR only PPL's would love to take up an IMCR and clearly see the benefits of it, there are some wider considerations here:

- Not all of us fly a/c with IF kit or capability. VFR only it is.
- The cost of simply maintaining VFR currency.
- The cost of an IMCR....that will also need renewing/refreshing.

While it is not anywhere near the extent of an IMCR, have flown from quite a few schools and find any experienced instructor more than happy to do IF work over and beyond the syllabus, including ILS/DME and VOR. GPS is certainly not an anathema either these days. But they will want to see that you can get home with DR, as you should....

This point is more the issue of what use the IMC training is without a suitable a/c in which to practice or do it for real. Would be interesting to see what % of clubs have an IMC-capable tourer worthy of the name.

We have two at our club, never any problem to get hold of them.

As usual the CAA display their inability to write in plain english - I am still confused by their statement.

I am meant to be doing the IMC test next week. Why am I doing it? I view it a bit like an advanced PPL. It certainly has helped my flying, my radio work, my overall understanding of the skies and my confidence.

I have no desire to fly in bad weather - I do want to have half an idea what to do if the sht hits the fan re the weather and I have made a bad call and should not have been up there in the first place. For example - I would have had NO CLUE what a SRA was for example before doing the IMC.

So useful skills to have been taught.

PS Plan to keep pretty current on it as well as one thing I have learnt in IMC flying - currency keeps you sharp - amazing how quick you loose these skills!

They did add 5 hours to the total time as well as removing 3 hours of IF to fit it in.

Of the aircraft that I've been learning on - one has no working nav aids, the other doesn't have any installed. There are aircraft in groups connected to the club with full IFR kit but not normally available for Ab Inito training although I've sat in the back.

Most club members have portable GPS units they bring with them for longer journeys which I'm familiar with (Skydemon / MD, Skydemon / IPad, Airnav Pro / IPad, Aware GPS) but I've not been taught their use as primary Nav.

I've done a practice SRA (with some of the bells and whistles removed) as part of the basic PPL Instrument awareness stuff and practised using a QDM. Can't do much more without the kit...

Sure, but a GPS which just shows lat/long is almost totally useless. Plotting the numbers on a map is very error prone.
Of course, but then you won't be doing an IMCR.

An IMCR is a great help even for VFR (e.g. poor vis, or just knowing for sure where you are) but if you haven't got the kit, it's not much good to you. I hate to sound elitist but every level of capability has a certain entry level cost. It doesn't matter whether it is flying or mountain biking.

I suppose it is a problem for those who want to get the IMCR in the bag (in case it goes away) but cannot find a suitable plane.
Nobody actually wants to fly in bad wx. The IMCR enables you do do so however, and land with an instrument approach. Pure 100% guaranteed legit "VFR" is very restrictive and a lot of flights get cancelled when actually they would have been fine on the day.

It should not be hard to switch on a GPS and look at the moving map. For VFR, that is all I do, usually. I tend to program the route into the panel mounted GPS but that is mainly so I can drive the autopilot from it. If flying with a handheld, one flies the plog and uses the moving map to show you that you are on the planned route.

If you get your own GPS, then you can get the manual out and learn how to enter a route into it, etc.

Actually no, I got caught in IMC afew times, and did a lot of dodging around cloud, and made a fair number of weather diversions or unscheduled night stops - both in group A and in microlights. Since I still (also) fly microlights - which don't have the instrumentation to fly for any period in IMC, I still do on occasion.

On occasion, it was a real embuggerance. On the whole however, it was just part of the game and I accepted it.

My point really being that a VFR PPL is useable, and does allow you to do a lot of fun flying - including long distance touring.


Yes, absolutely, an IMC capability gives you a lot of options that a VFR-only pilot doesn't have, substantially reduces the embuggerance factor, and makes using a light aeroplane for work much more feasible. But a great deal of fun, and with a bit of flexibility, touring, is do-able VFR only.

Fair point - yes those appear to be Annex II with UK Cs of A, so should be able to be continuously flown on an IMCR so long as the instruments are fitted and serviceable, ditto all Stinsons, most Bulldogs, some Chipmunks.... But these remain a small minority of CofA flying machines sadly.

G

Fingers crossed for the continued UK recognition on all relevant aircraft types.

Saying that, I've managed over 10 years of daytime VFR flying, having a jolly good time, without the need, ability, or aircraft capability for IMC flight. Not as much as others on here, but still it shows that it doesn't have to be the be all and end all.

Not everyone can afford fancy instruments (and I'll include radios and transponders in this category on an optional basis). Not everyone can afford the training and continuity to keep such a rating. And not everyone can afford to make the long flights that are more likely to result in the necessity of exercising such privileges. The weather planning for a local bimble, or aerobatic fix, tends to reduce the risk of running into yuck. Plus if it is a bit marginal, there's always the option of retreating to the bar. Here many hours of flying can be experienced at much less cost albeit somewhat embroidered with extra testosterone...

Fact is there are plenty of different ways to get your kicks in the air; touring is one of them but it is not the only way. Vive la difference!

In exactly the same way as entering those numbers as a Waypoint! In fact its easier to check the Lat and Long read off a GPS for accuracy, by looking out of the window, than if entered as a Waypoint, because very few people cross check the waypoints.

I avoid user waypoints like the plague, but in general one has more time to do those because one is doing them when on the ground.

Position fixing in flight by reading off lat/long and plotting them on a map, while hand flying, perhaps in bumpy air, is bonkers.

I have done quite a lot of map georeferencing for non-aviation stuff (basically picking points on a map whose coordinates are read off the map) and know how error prone that business is when sitting at home...

There is also confirmation bias, where you "plot" your position on the map from lat/long, think there should be a lake there, you look out and sure enough there is a lake there (but it's the wrong lake :) ).

In defence of steam driven GPS
 

I agree - plotting a position in flight from lat-long is time consuming, takes your attention away from the primary task (flying the aeroplane!) and error prone. It is not a good idea to attempt in the air.

This doesn't however mean that you can't use a steam-driven GPS usefully. Take something like a Garmin 55 - classic early model GPS. It can display lat/long, but it will also display groundspeed and track, and it also has an aviation database in it. Invariably that database will be out of date - but airports don't generally move, just don't trust it for anything but fixed waypoints.

So, if you have a operational flight plan (and you should, however you navigate) the simple fact of being able to fine tune track, and check against your predicted groundspeed does a lot to enhance your navigation.

And for position - just select "go to" a convenient airport in the database, and use it like a VOR /DME with the VOR in "to" mode, and no DME slant error. Dead easy to get your position with a VOR plotter.

Even with, say, a walking GPS - just programme in a handful of known locations spread out across the chart, and magically you now have this capability without an aviation database.

Of course a moving map is much nicer, but a basic old fashioned "numbers only" GPS can still do a lot for you and if that's what's in the aeroplane, I'll use it.

G

Its little wonder we have so many airspace infringments and people getting lost....

Well there's also good old fashioned ded-reckoning/PLOG, which I think everybody but Peter does still use. Just as well, not instead of GPS.

And I thought that the number of infringements was steadily going down.

G

Only because the number of hours being flown is dropping as well I suspect.....

I would be interested in seeing the infringements against hours flown numbers.

Use of walking GPS and Lat/Long units in this day and age is inexcusible. Cobling old crap to gether to save a couple of quid is just asking for trouble.

Plan and PLOG, use a modern moving map GPS and use blended navigation to ensure accurate navigation and situational awareness.

Not so. As I have written many times, I fly with a printed plog.

What I don't do is sit there with a stopwatch, timing the legs. With GPS (or VOR/DME) this is pointless because you have continuous lateral guidance and the distance to the next waypoint.

Bose - for IMC flight, which is the thread title, I do agree with you. For VFR flight - what's wrong with good old fashioned map and compass? I've enjoyed microlight touring like that for years, and on occasion in light aeroplanes. Anything more than that can only be enhancing, but unnecessary.

Peter - does anybody time legs with a stopwatch? I certainly never have. I do write down the times at waypoints so that I can revise ETAs.

G

Nothing at all. My comment is abouit using walking GPS's and other cobbled types of GPS for navigation. Use the correct tool for the job. If you are going to use a GPS, use a modern one suited for the job and blend it with your classic naviagtion.