Concurrency of IFR/XC training

[obelix]

Have a question, I'm sure it's tucked away in the vast archives here somewhere. The requirement for 50 hrs XC, and 40 hours of instrument, can they be done at the same time. Example, a 100nm round trip to somewhere under the hood count for 1 hr of XC and 1 hr of IFR training?

 

[MAKG1]

Yes, but IMO the savings will go away because you won't get the IR in minimum time without the 50 XC.

IR is all about precision and having the discipline to hold heading, altitude, and airspeed precisely. Practice that on your 50 XC.

And take the family/SO/whatever somewhere nice while you're at it.

The IR only requires 15 hours instruction. It requires 40 hours simulated or actual instrument conditions. The remaining 25 can be done any which way (with a safety pilot for simulated or an instrument rated pilot for actual), but you'll probably need the instruction.

FYI, a 100 mile round trip cannot all be both simulated instrument and XC. You can't land a plane under the hood, and you must land the plane for it to be XC.

However, most of it can be simulated instrument conditions. I find it hard to get less than 0.2 hours overhead on a flight like that. I suppose you could do the run-up under the hood, but that's kinda weird.

If you're new at this, flying an approach is above your skill level. So, the descent and approach also has to be with the hood off.

 

[obelix]

Thanks... I'm still trying to wrap my head around what its going to take to make it through the IFR rating.

 

[Bonchie]

I did about 28 hours of the XC requirement while training for the IR and passed my IR c-ride with 42.1 simulated instrument.

It's not a big deal to combine them. Just plan your flights appropriately.

As was said above, for every 1.0 hour flight, 0.2 or so will not count toward your instrument time. So you'll build XC faster then the simulated. It works out pretty well as long as you plan well.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Thanks... I'm still trying to wrap my head around what its going to take to make it through the IFR rating.

To expand on MAKG's "yes," it is fairly common for pilots to combine the some of the 50 hour cross country PIC requirement with their dual IFR training flights.

Whether that works or not for you depends on a couple of things.

First, the 50 hour cross country experience requirement is just that, an experience requirement. It gets you away from the home drome to new places with new traffic patterns, new terrain and, potentially, weather changes. Independent of it being countable toward advanced certificates and ratings, a flight you are solely responsible for to an airport >50 NM away you have never been to before, really does help to increase pilot experience, skill, competence, and confidence. You lose much of that benefit on a dual flight.

If your goal is the airlines, that may not matter to you, since it's sometimes about accumulating certificates and ratings in the shortest period of time. But if your goal is to be a competent , proficient and safe Part 91 pilot, I think it should.


Second, it might really not be a time and cost saver. I'm actually one of those who decries the lack of significant attention given to IFR cross country training (beyond a single required dual flight), so I think some combined time is appropriate. But, for better or worse, IFR training tends to be fairly local, concentrating on approaches. Makes some sense given the overall time requirements because only about 20% of the IR is about flying the airplane; the rest of it it about procedures. And the primary focus of procedures is the ones where you can hit terrain and obstructions - approaches.

Depending on where you are, it's often possible to get a multitude of different approaches very close to each other. Why spend and hour on <ho hum> en route straight and level flight when you can easily accomplish 3-5 different instrument approaches in the same time period?

BTW, that goes for flights under the hood with a safety pilot. Most of us have needed more than the minimum 15 hours of dual, so how much it actually saves depends. You can increase the quality of those safety pilot hours by using them as a form of IFR student "solo" - practicing what you have been taught, preferably coordinating the practice sessions with your instructor who will have a good idea of your strengths and weaknesses and what procedures practice will "make perfect" as opposed to simply ingraining bad habits.

 

[MAKG1]

Thanks... I'm still trying to wrap my head around what its going to take to make it through the IFR rating.

A lot of work.

I'm very nearly there myself, currently in the home stretch dealing with vacations, CAP, and a bunch of other distractions.

It sounds a lot easier than it is, particularly when things don't go as planned. Like, Approach didn't like anything about the first leg of my instrument XC. Gave me vectors to the IAF instead of the T airway I filed (no biggie -- that's easy -- just do what they say), and then denied the ILS due to unusual opposite direction landing traffic (that's a bigger deal).

 

[AggieMike88]

Another useful time sink is to do charity missions like Pilots-n-Paws flights. Doing that halls make the time spent more worthwhile than just doing laps between airports that meet the XC requirement. And you get the chance to visit differen places like Mark mentions.

 

[JustinD]

Have a question, I'm sure it's tucked away in the vast archives here somewhere. The requirement for 50 hrs XC, and 40 hours of instrument, can they be done at the same time. Example, a 100nm round trip to somewhere under the hood count for 1 hr of XC and 1 hr of IFR training?

Short answer to your question is yes. If the flight is over 50nm then it is XC time, if you fly under the hood then its also simulated instrument time. However keep in mind simulated instrument time can only be logged for the time spent under the hood, being that it would be impossible for the entire flight to be logged as simulated instrument, because taxi, takeoff, and landing would not be conducted under the hood.

 

[labbadabba]

I'm in the same boat. I'm trying to do my X/C and Sim Instrument time concurrently. Thankfully, I'm close to a Bravo so I have lots of options to practice approaches that are >50 miles away.

 

[MAKG1]

You'll rather quickly discover that enroute is a lot easier than approaches, and once you're good at enroute, you're wasting hood time going more than 50 miles away. 30 miles or so is a good distance if you're learning emergencies, custom holds, or amended clearances. Otherwise, the best distance is as close as possible.

You generally don't take the most direct route, either, so it's an expensive 50 miles. And you don't get the experience of dodging weather and traffic, and finding the airport visually, all of which are useful but aren't seen much under the hood.

So, yes, it's perfectly legal to combine XC and simulated instrument. But I really don't think it's a good idea.

 

[BigBadLou]

Another useful time sink is to do charity missions like Pilots-n-Paws flights. Doing that halls make the time spent more worthwhile than just doing laps between airports that meet the XC requirement. And you get the chance to visit differen places like Mark mentions.

^^ THIS ^^

Do something meaningful with your XC times. Yes, you can bring a safety pilot and log Sim IMC while tracking radials (especially in shifty x-winds), get vectored for approaches etc.
Just have fun on the XC's, they are required for a good reason.

I too flew a lot of dogs for PnP to accumulate XC time outside of my immediate area. It was a lot of fun, lots of new experience and lots of new pilot friendships made.

 

[Bonchie]

You'll rather quickly discover that enroute is a lot easier than approaches, and once you're good at enroute, you're wasting hood time going more than 50 miles away. 30 miles or so is a good distance if you're learning emergencies, custom holds, or amended clearances. Otherwise, the best distance is as close as possible.

You generally don't take the most direct route, either, so it's an expensive 50 miles. And you don't get the experience of dodging weather and traffic, and finding the airport visually, all of which are useful but aren't seen much under the hood.

So, yes, it's perfectly legal to combine XC and simulated instrument. But I really don't think it's a good idea.

I think it's a fine idea as long as you plan.

It depends on how quick of a learner you are as well. The en-route is still a valuable learning experience, especially if you don't have an autopilot like me. Even moreso in less then ideal conditions and in IMC. But someone who struggles with approaches throughout could be different. I also planned my flights carefully as well so I maximized what I was doing along the way.

For example, I'd fly 52 miles to from VKX to 7W4 (25 minutes), do the GPS approach. Then I'd head back and stop at RMN (only about 10 minutes away from 7W4 so it's almost all setting up the approach) and do ILS/VOR approaches, or next door and do an NDB at Shannon. Then the short flight back to VKX to shoot another GPS. The BRV VOR was about halfway between VKX and 7W4 so I did holds there as well on the way back.

My area allowed all those options, minimizing en-route time while still allowing me to get XC time.

If you are just flying 70 miles to an airport and then back, it might be an issue (I did that to SBY plenty of times though). But most places in this country allow for more then that if you plan well and can stand to be in the airplane for over 2 hours. Get your XC on the way, then use the flight back to your maximum advantage by using the airports and navaids along the route.

 

[Legiox]

I'm still trying to build my time. I only have about 25hrs of hood time and 40hours of XC time as PIC. My money is running low and I'm trying to push through it. Have the test scheduled for October 21

 

[Caramon13]

In the same boat as the OP and Legiox. I've got the PIC XC requirement basically done. My problem is hood time. I can do another 9 hours of ATD time before I max that out (only 10 hours allowed apparently in that type of device). Then I need another 12 or so hours of hood time, subtract 3 or 4 hours for my 250M IFR XC and it's not so bad.

Money is tight and every hour counts. I'm hardly flying any time for fun anymore as I'm trying to save every penny I spend to finish up my rating.

 

[genna]

For what it's worth, I just finished with my IR and I combined most of the time for XC and hood. Finished with just over the minimums. Over here it is relatively easy to plan a 50nm flight(end to end) with some approaches in between or to the side. As long as you do not land, you can hit many places in between the XC end points.

XC under the hood is still quite useful with Flight Follow as a substitute for IFR plan. and in 50 nm, it's only maybe 15 minutes that you are not doing something useful for approaches.

But I did realize somewhere around 40h XC and 35 hood that I really needed to spend more time with just doing the approaches.

 

[MikeELP]

I'm still trying to build my time. I only have about 25hrs of hood time and 40hours of XC time as PIC. My money is running low and I'm trying to push through it. Have the test scheduled for October 21

I understand, but sacrificing quality for quantity usually does not turn out well.

JMHO