Instrument Rating Schools (USA)
Guest
Posts: n/a
US instrument Training
Wondering if anyone can help????
I'm looking for an Flight school in the US, preferably the Seattle area equipped with an IFR R22. Caan't seem to pin anything down in this area on the net and would appreciate any help.
Thanks..
I'm looking for an Flight school in the US, preferably the Seattle area equipped with an IFR R22. Caan't seem to pin anything down in this area on the net and would appreciate any help.
Thanks..
Guest
Posts: n/a
while we're on the subject of US training - does anyone know anything about HAI (now in florida) - I was thinking of using them for CPL(H) and FI (a la JAR) - good, bad, ugly ?
don;t want anyone to get slanderous just a personal opinion would do - and if you really have a reason to get slanderous pot it to my email address - last thing I need to do is shell out loads of cash to a crap school
don;t want anyone to get slanderous just a personal opinion would do - and if you really have a reason to get slanderous pot it to my email address - last thing I need to do is shell out loads of cash to a crap school
Join Date: May 2000
Location: poor gps coverage
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Instrument Rating Schools
Does anyone know of a flight school with a good rep and a quick turn around for the faa ifr ticket, anywhere in the states will do. couldnt find anything on the search so all help will be gratefully recieved.
I need help
I need help
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Denver, CO and the GOM
Age: 63
Posts: 515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hummingbird Helicopters
Helicopter Adventures
Vortex
Quantum
Classic Helicopters
...just to name a few - click away!
Helicopter Adventures
Vortex
Quantum
Classic Helicopters
...just to name a few - click away!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Switzerland
Age: 53
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would recommend Quantum Helicopters because it is in Phoenix where the waether is not grounding you about 99% of the time and the examiner is the owner of Quantum Helicopters.
Quantum uses R22 Beta II's and they have a nice IFR panel with an HSI and a Garmin 430 or 530 GPS (which makes it sooo much easier).
I myself did the IFR and the ATP with them.
Good luck!
Quantum uses R22 Beta II's and they have a nice IFR panel with an HSI and a Garmin 430 or 530 GPS (which makes it sooo much easier).
I myself did the IFR and the ATP with them.
Good luck!
Bitmonx:
I thought that the idea of the IR was to fly in bad weather conditions ....... without the GPS ......
I always wondered about this FAA IFR ticket. Sounds like you can do this course and presumable the test in a R22? Is there any need to fly an IFR certified helicopter as part of the training? (don't tell me the R22 is an IFR machine over there ....
) I just can't imagine many people being proficient flying into real IMC conditions without actually having experienced this during their training. Does this ticket allow you to do this? 
I thought that the idea of the IR was to fly in bad weather conditions ....... without the GPS ......
I always wondered about this FAA IFR ticket. Sounds like you can do this course and presumable the test in a R22? Is there any need to fly an IFR certified helicopter as part of the training? (don't tell me the R22 is an IFR machine over there ....
) I just can't imagine many people being proficient flying into real IMC conditions without actually having experienced this during their training. Does this ticket allow you to do this?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Hartford, CT USA
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, Im not sure about for fixed wing, but for helicopters, you can receive your FAA instrument rating without ever flying in IMC conditions. I am about to receive my ticket, and although I am up to official standards, I certainly don't feel ready to go off flying in actual IMC. It seems to me like another "license to learn" 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Denver, CO and the GOM
Age: 63
Posts: 515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The real answer is: you are not going to fly in IFR conditions to train for the FAA instrument-helicopter rating.
The R22, 300CB, B47 and E280, which are the training helicopters, are not IFR-certified or certifiable and as such cannot be flown in anything less than VFR conditions. An IFR-rated pilot (CFII) can file an IFR flight plan, which can then be flown dual with a student. You can also take the checkride in a non-certified helicopter, as long as it has the necessary equipment to allow all of the checkride elements to be tested.
Even if you want to throw down the $1500/hour to fly an actual IFR-certified helicopter, I doubt you could find an operator willing to allow training of this nature.
So ironically, you will require better weather for most IFR training than you need for VFR training!
Florida weather is usually about 75% annually - the longest stretch I've seen of piss weather in central FL has been about 2 days over the last 2 years, and the training is pretty consistent.
Arizona will have better visibility, but winds and thermals (think turbulence) can be a problem - you ain't lived until you are doing a full auto in an R22 and STILL not able to get back to the glide slope...
The R22, 300CB, B47 and E280, which are the training helicopters, are not IFR-certified or certifiable and as such cannot be flown in anything less than VFR conditions. An IFR-rated pilot (CFII) can file an IFR flight plan, which can then be flown dual with a student. You can also take the checkride in a non-certified helicopter, as long as it has the necessary equipment to allow all of the checkride elements to be tested.
Even if you want to throw down the $1500/hour to fly an actual IFR-certified helicopter, I doubt you could find an operator willing to allow training of this nature.
So ironically, you will require better weather for most IFR training than you need for VFR training!
Florida weather is usually about 75% annually - the longest stretch I've seen of piss weather in central FL has been about 2 days over the last 2 years, and the training is pretty consistent.
Arizona will have better visibility, but winds and thermals (think turbulence) can be a problem - you ain't lived until you are doing a full auto in an R22 and STILL not able to get back to the glide slope...
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, you can get any instrument rating without any actual under the FAA. Since the R-22 and R-44 and anything else less then about 1.5 Million is not IFR certified, actual in a helicopter is unlikely unless you are rich or unlucky. My suggestion is fly 20 or 30 hours in an airplane simulator and maybe another 10 or 20 in an airplane seeking out actual conditions. It will probably be the only way to get actual before your helicopter instrument rating.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blimey Barannfin, that sounds scary!
If one doesn't feel ready to even fly IMC with a fresh FAA IR ticket it doesn't bode too well for the prospects of successfully flying to an alternate for a procedural NDB on a mucky night!
The extra workload of the CAA/JAR IR could be a good investment for those in the UK considering an FAA or JAR IR!
If one doesn't feel ready to even fly IMC with a fresh FAA IR ticket it doesn't bode too well for the prospects of successfully flying to an alternate for a procedural NDB on a mucky night!
The extra workload of the CAA/JAR IR could be a good investment for those in the UK considering an FAA or JAR IR!
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Ireland
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While all of the above is true it isnt in the least bit scary. Just because you do your IR in a better equipped aircraft will not make much difference if you have mininmal IR time. Anyone who goes out flying hard IMC with even the fanciest kit and autopilot with 40 hours on instruments is asking an awful lot of themselves and thats assuming things go smoothly.
The FAA system allows the average guy to pay for a rating which will be very useful to him even if he never enters a cloud. He will be safer and have a much better appreciation and understanding of the traffic around him/her. Flying an approach to minima in an R22 with foggles and a screen is just as difficult as any other aircraft. Many operators in the U.S. specify it as a requirement for employment even if their machines are VFR only. They also do inadvertent IMC training for their VFR pilots and I would certainly feel that the % of pilots posessing IRs even if they never fly IMC is significantly higher.
Like in Europe many of the pilots begin their IR careers in the p2 seat which is without doubt the best place, and move on from there as they build up experience. And like in Europe, before operating public transport on an IFR machine a full VFR and IFR check on that machine is required whether p1 or p2.
An IR in an R22 may not be the ideal, but is certainly a great place to start. Try it.....
PS and one last point... Every N registered 747, 777, 767 etc you see in Heathrow has just been flown there by someone with the same rating from that same licensing authority... Maybe we need to be learning more from each other....
The FAA system allows the average guy to pay for a rating which will be very useful to him even if he never enters a cloud. He will be safer and have a much better appreciation and understanding of the traffic around him/her. Flying an approach to minima in an R22 with foggles and a screen is just as difficult as any other aircraft. Many operators in the U.S. specify it as a requirement for employment even if their machines are VFR only. They also do inadvertent IMC training for their VFR pilots and I would certainly feel that the % of pilots posessing IRs even if they never fly IMC is significantly higher.
Like in Europe many of the pilots begin their IR careers in the p2 seat which is without doubt the best place, and move on from there as they build up experience. And like in Europe, before operating public transport on an IFR machine a full VFR and IFR check on that machine is required whether p1 or p2.
An IR in an R22 may not be the ideal, but is certainly a great place to start. Try it.....
PS and one last point... Every N registered 747, 777, 767 etc you see in Heathrow has just been flown there by someone with the same rating from that same licensing authority... Maybe we need to be learning more from each other....
Last edited by Decks; 23rd Mar 2004 at 19:22.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Switzerland
Age: 53
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Woolf:
The idea of the IR is learning how to scan your instruments, learning the IFR procedures and approaches. Having to waist a couple of thousand bucks just to have flown in an actual IFR approved helicopter is in my opinion a waste of your resources especially for people who are short of money.
The GPS is used more and more especially while under IFR. Every day there are numerous GPS approaches added while NDB's are going out of service. If you want to fly IFR, you need to use ALL your resources (CRM.....). GPS is not flying for you, it makes it more safe and that is what we all want.
I am flying the Bell 212 Day/Night VFR/IFR. Let me tell you that flying the R22 under Simulated IFR is a lot more challenging than the 212. The R22 is a trainer and in my opinion the best there is. The R22 has its limitations just like other Helicopters have and that's good so.
The idea of the IR is learning how to scan your instruments, learning the IFR procedures and approaches. Having to waist a couple of thousand bucks just to have flown in an actual IFR approved helicopter is in my opinion a waste of your resources especially for people who are short of money.
The GPS is used more and more especially while under IFR. Every day there are numerous GPS approaches added while NDB's are going out of service. If you want to fly IFR, you need to use ALL your resources (CRM.....). GPS is not flying for you, it makes it more safe and that is what we all want.
I am flying the Bell 212 Day/Night VFR/IFR. Let me tell you that flying the R22 under Simulated IFR is a lot more challenging than the 212. The R22 is a trainer and in my opinion the best there is. The R22 has its limitations just like other Helicopters have and that's good so.
Decks/Bitmonx:
I still think it's bloody scary
! I agree with most of what has been said, the R22 is a good trainer to get your scan going and learn procedures. However it has it's limitations and will not provide one of the most important parts of IR training - Flying in IMC. I do agree that an ILS on a R22 is hard work compared to a real IFR stabilized machine. However flying an ILS in real IMC conditions is another story altogether. Training to overcome the effect of "the leans" etc. is in my opinion as important as learning to fly the procedures and should be integral part of the IR. Foggles, screens, etc cannot simulate real IMC.
I think you are quite right, it probably is a good tool for pilots in many conditions (night, bad vis, inadvertant IMC...) I just don't feel comfortable with the idea that someone can quite legally fly IMC with this qualification. I suppose it puts the responsibility onto the ifr operators to make sure that their pilots are properly trained.
The JAR/UK IR requires around 55h (mixture of FNPT's, R22, IFR Helicopter) flying and is very expensive £30000+. However I think that after this course most pilots ARE able to fly IFR/IMC for real.
I also agree that the GPS is a very useful tool for IFR flying . I treat it as a bonus though because it can and will fail, like everything else. So I rather be prepared.
Safe flying! (especially in IMC
)
I still think it's bloody scary
! I agree with most of what has been said, the R22 is a good trainer to get your scan going and learn procedures. However it has it's limitations and will not provide one of the most important parts of IR training - Flying in IMC. I do agree that an ILS on a R22 is hard work compared to a real IFR stabilized machine. However flying an ILS in real IMC conditions is another story altogether. Training to overcome the effect of "the leans" etc. is in my opinion as important as learning to fly the procedures and should be integral part of the IR. Foggles, screens, etc cannot simulate real IMC.I think you are quite right, it probably is a good tool for pilots in many conditions (night, bad vis, inadvertant IMC...) I just don't feel comfortable with the idea that someone can quite legally fly IMC with this qualification. I suppose it puts the responsibility onto the ifr operators to make sure that their pilots are properly trained.
The JAR/UK IR requires around 55h (mixture of FNPT's, R22, IFR Helicopter) flying and is very expensive £30000+. However I think that after this course most pilots ARE able to fly IFR/IMC for real.
I also agree that the GPS is a very useful tool for IFR flying . I treat it as a bonus though because it can and will fail, like everything else. So I rather be prepared.
Safe flying! (especially in IMC
)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: N2832W8100
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is it with the JAR system, they seem to love the oneupmanship of the training (I have no Idea why)
People in the U.S have been flying IMC with Basic single engined Instrument ratings for years, with relatively little problem,
It may be a bit of a small shock first time round for some people going into cloud after being trained for so long to fly IMC in VFR, but not enough to make you crash, you can train just as effectively to prevent the leans under the hood then having a white screen in front of you.
And as for the GPS approach arguement, JAA loves to brag on about how great the training is but doesn't seem to want to embrace the extremely useful technology and make things more simple, practical and economical, yes a GPS can fail, as can an ILS a VOR a glideslope, localiser etc etc.
Have they so little faith in the pilots they approve that they think they cant learn a new technology?
Glad I got that off my chest.
People in the U.S have been flying IMC with Basic single engined Instrument ratings for years, with relatively little problem,
It may be a bit of a small shock first time round for some people going into cloud after being trained for so long to fly IMC in VFR, but not enough to make you crash, you can train just as effectively to prevent the leans under the hood then having a white screen in front of you.
And as for the GPS approach arguement, JAA loves to brag on about how great the training is but doesn't seem to want to embrace the extremely useful technology and make things more simple, practical and economical, yes a GPS can fail, as can an ILS a VOR a glideslope, localiser etc etc.
Have they so little faith in the pilots they approve that they think they cant learn a new technology?
Glad I got that off my chest.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree everything Woolf says. I'm sure flying an ILS under the hood in an R22 is very tough, especially in gusty conditions. But that is not the point.
Which is, that the passing of a test, after training, to get any rating should mean that the pilot is competent to safely make use of the privileges of that rating. Sure he will be rough round the edges and as ever, will continue to learn, but he has the proven skills to keep he and his trusting passengers safe.
One has only got to look at the accident reports to know that IMC conditions and helis are a hazardous mix. And whilst you can often just put the machine down in VMC if you really don't like it, in IMC you often don't have that luxury, and have to assume that you are going to have get to either your destination or alternate(s) and that the weather may well deteriorate from any soft IMC. You're (entitled to be) on your own, the fuel's burning up, and clear decisions with cool implementation of training is crucial.
On-going training is invaluable, but I believe once you have got that ticket, in this case the IR, you should be confident you can do the job it permits. And so should your passengers.
Which is, that the passing of a test, after training, to get any rating should mean that the pilot is competent to safely make use of the privileges of that rating. Sure he will be rough round the edges and as ever, will continue to learn, but he has the proven skills to keep he and his trusting passengers safe.
One has only got to look at the accident reports to know that IMC conditions and helis are a hazardous mix. And whilst you can often just put the machine down in VMC if you really don't like it, in IMC you often don't have that luxury, and have to assume that you are going to have get to either your destination or alternate(s) and that the weather may well deteriorate from any soft IMC. You're (entitled to be) on your own, the fuel's burning up, and clear decisions with cool implementation of training is crucial.
On-going training is invaluable, but I believe once you have got that ticket, in this case the IR, you should be confident you can do the job it permits. And so should your passengers.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Age: 71
Posts: 1,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Weather in Europe makes it likely that at least part of an IR course will have been flown real IMC BUT
Is there is a REQUIREMENT to have flown real IMC in the UK CAA/JAR IR Training Syllabus? I don't think so ..................
Is there is a REQUIREMENT to have flown real IMC in the UK CAA/JAR IR Training Syllabus? I don't think so ..................