Autopilots do fail but even the least reliable ones (KFC225, with its "smoking servos") do work some 99.9% of the time, and using one reduces pilot workload massively, and thus massively increases safety.

Most accidents (under IFR) were directly or indirectly caused by pilot workload, not by a lack of IFR theoretical knowledge :)

I actually enjoy hand flying in IFR and rarely use the autopilot unless on long boring legs. Even then I prefer to fly most of the time.

The bottom line is that any "advanced" training makes a pilot safer. The IR is probably the hardest rating to do, even harder than the inital PPL some would say....and I agree. By contrast the CPL with is VFR is easy peasy. The skills you learn on an IR make you a more accurate pilot but not only that you do learn when "NOT" to go. Aerobatics are also a good skill to have, and no doubt also increase accuracy but unless the aerobatic pilot knows how to fly on instruments, being aerobatic won't do any good in the cloud (other than recovering from the spin below them :}). By the way the Bulldog I used to fly was IFR certified and would have made a good IFR tourer - or even useful for recovering back from "on top"....

Speaking from a SEP / MEP without radar point of view......If they are full of ice, I won't go. If they are too bumpy (Cb's) I won't go and I'll make damn sure I know where the granite is before I go ;)

Hi Fuji,
I am not allergic to aerobatics and yes I have flown aeros in the past.
It was a lot of fun turning the aircraft upside down on a sunny day and I can fully understand why people desire to spend time inverted and feeling Gs although I do not make a habit of it myself.

Nowadays most of my flying is point-to-point and is more about getting there quickly and safely in most weather.

In fact, most of the 300 or so hours I accumulate per annum are through hand flying (half in a helicopter) - so I am not dismissing skills that I do not have - I'm merely stating my point of view :ok:

Fly safely,
SB

Scooter Boy / eHarding

Yes, I see.

I wasn’t going to post again, but perhaps I have not explained my self clearly or I don’t understand your point of view.

I was never intending to imply aerobatic pilots are better flying an aircraft in instrument conditions.

The poster asked if an IMC rating made a "better pilot". I don’t think he said does an IMC rating make a better pilot in instrument conditions.

I therefore was advancing the view that if you could either do an IMC rating or an aerobatic course, for me, in VMC, the aerobatic course would advance yours skills further than an IMC rating in terms of handling the sort of emergency that leads to pilots killing themselves.

The area in which I was perhaps not clear was in so far as flying in instrument conditions is concerned. I tried to make it clear there is no substitute for instrument training - this is the only way to fly safely in IMC. However on the periphery of my argument I also advanced the view that in the event of a loss of control in IMC (and I intended to infer a complete loss of control) the aerobatic pilot would do a good job of handling the aircraft, and, in some circumstances, perhaps a better job than the instrument only pilot. I gave the example of exiting the cloud base in a spin or spiral dive. Of course I agree this is a situation an instrument pilot should never find himself in, but I also advanced the view, that life is unfortunately not always black and white. For example, in the quotes I posted, it is possible some totally unforseen event could result in a serious upset in IMC the consequence of which was an aircraft in a fully developed spin or spiral dive. CFIT aside, how many fatal instrument flights end in this way? I would suggest the vast majority, because, other than CFIT, a complete loss of control by definition usually precedes the eventual crash.

I agree these scenarios are extreme emergencies. I also agree by "safer" at first we want I pilot who is as well equipped as possible to deal with any situation that could arise. Any form of instrument training increases the skills of a pilot and therefore is a good thing. In my opinion any training that increases stick rudder skills is also a good thing because in VMC these skills are a significant contributor to recognising loss of control before it happens and, if it does, recovering control. That was the reason I advanced the proposal that if it was a question of only being able to do either an IMC rating or an aero "rating" for a pilot intending to operate in VMC, I personally think the aero "rating" would result in a safer pilot.

Does that explanation help or do we still disagree?