Training flight with VFR over the top?

ebykowsky

ebykowsky

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Dec 12, 2012
Messages
1,405
Display Name
Display name:
goalstop
Theoretically, what's wrong with doing a VFR training flight (with CFI) when there's a 2000ft ceiling, filing IFR to get on top, then practicing maneuvers up there (assuming the layer is thin)? Why isn't this done more often? Afterwards, beating up the pattern would still be an option too.
 
Depends what you are working on. But remember, you need 3 hours of hood time. There is no reason it can't be done in the clouds, at least after you get the basics down. Other than that, you will be kind of limited. Steep turns are even harder, when there are no landmarks. :)
 
ja_user said:
Depends what you are working on. But remember, you need 3 hours of hood time. There is no reason it can't be done in the clouds, at least after you get the basics down. Other than that, you will be kind of limited. Steep turns are even harder, when there are no landmarks. :)
Click to expand...

Why would steep turns be more difficult? It's not a ground reference maneuver.
 
I generally do steep turns to heading anyway, not always via ground reference. Makes sure I'm doing a good cross check and hitting the rollout right on heading.
 
Witmo said:
Why would steep turns be more difficult? It's not a ground reference maneuver.
Click to expand...

Onlly different if you are used to looking out the window to gauge the time to start the rollout.

Not to big of a deal really...


Stalls would be fine, over a layer.
 
I used to take primary students up through a layer to do airwork on top and then shoot an approach back to home base. Looking back, it was a dumb thing to do.

Bob Gardner
 
bobmrg said:
I used to take primary students up through a layer to do airwork on top and then shoot an approach back to home base. Looking back, it was a dumb thing to do.

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...

Why so?
 
bobmrg said:
I used to take primary students up through a layer to do airwork on top and then shoot an approach back to home base. Looking back, it was a dumb thing to do.

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...


More insight please Bob? Do you think they didn't learn the correct lesson, or it made them want to bust through layers on their own?

I did it monday, but it was with a CFI student.. So it was just more distraction for him to teach through.
 
My instructor did that with me as a ppl student and it only reinforced how much fun flying could be. It lets the student see what's next :)
 
Legally, as long as the CFI and plane are both IFR-legal, there's no regulatory barrier. Beyond that, it's a matter of opinion and judgment.
 
My instructor did it with me several times when working on my PPL in the SF Bay Area. The alternative those days would have been to cancel and both go home.
 
I'm of the opinion that the student is paying for the flight time and my job is to maximize their time at the controls.

If I had a student that I felt could fly through the layer both ways and count it towards required instrument time then I'd do it. I don't think I'd feel good about me shooting the approach back home on his dime unless he was begging me to do it. Either way, it never came up.

In the end I'm a supporter of the CFI using their judgement to do whatever they think is best.
 
ja_user said:
More insight please Bob? Do you think they didn't learn the correct lesson, or it made them want to bust through layers on their own?

I did it monday, but it was with a CFI student.. So it was just more distraction for him to teach through.
Click to expand...

When the whole Puget Sound basin is filled with a cloud layer, where do you put it when the engine quits? Dumb beyond measure.

Bob
 
bobmrg said:
When the whole Puget Sound basin is filled with a cloud layer, where do you put it when the engine quits? Dumb beyond measure.

Bob
Click to expand...

So let me get this straight, if you and the airplane are instrument qualified, current and equipped, it's foolish to fly in anything other than VFR conditions within gliding distance of an airport or area with flat, cleared spaces suitable for an emergency landing in the off chance your engine might fail? IFR rating must be a waste of money and you must not go anywhere.
 
Witmo said:
So let me get this straight, if you and the airplane are instrument qualified, current and equipped, it's foolish to fly in anything other than VFR conditions within gliding distance of an airport or area with flat, cleared spaces suitable for an emergency landing in the off chance your engine might fail? IFR rating must be a waste of money and you must not go anywhere.
Click to expand...

It's situational, Tim. If you look at a map of the Seattle area you will see that there are no good choices that do not involve water, and I'm not Sully Sullenberger. Remember, these were primary students. For instrument students, my happiest days were those when I could leave the hood at the school and go fly in the clouds. Admittedly, the engine did not know what kind of students I was working with...but with the instrument students the flight had a purpose, while with the primary students I was just showing off. I was a newbie CFI.

Bob (I had a student named Tim Witt once upon a time......?)
 
bobmrg said:
When the whole Puget Sound basin is filled with a cloud layer, where do you put it when the engine quits? Dumb beyond measure.

Bob
Click to expand...

Any flight in a SE plane involves periods where an engine failure is going to result in an off airport landing. Most / many airports are such that an engine failure at for span of time is going to result in a fatal crash.

To fly SE is to accept this risk. Only part 25 certified aircraft are guaranteed a runway landing / stop throughout the entire flight. So, VFR on top of a layer is not dumb...its accepting the risk of engine failure for a sustained time. Many do it and its legal.
 
bobmrg said:
It's situational, Tim. If you look at a map of the Seattle area you will see that there are no good choices that do not involve water, and I'm not Sully Sullenberger. Remember, these were primary students. For instrument students, my happiest days were those when I could leave the hood at the school and go fly in the clouds. Admittedly, the engine did not know what kind of students I was working with...but with the instrument students the flight had a purpose, while with the primary students I was just showing off. I was a newbie CFI.

Bob (I had a student named Tim Witt once upon a time......?)
Click to expand...

That's a reasonable explanation. I just thought your original statement wasn't situational dependent, more like a blanket statement.
 
bobmrg said:
I used to take primary students up through a layer to do airwork on top and then shoot an approach back to home base. Looking back, it was a dumb thing to do.

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...

I don't think it was dumb, it was smart. If you didn't you would have to cancel a third of all your student flights. Plus it gives them real and valuable experience.


K
stlll your biggest fan!
 
I think it's an invaluable teaching opportunity if done in the context of a cross-country
 
bobmrg said:
When the whole Puget Sound basin is filled with a cloud layer, where do you put it when the engine quits? Dumb beyond measure.

Bob
Click to expand...

I get what you are saying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top