First true IMC during training

D

drotto

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Dec 16, 2013
Messages
1,162
Location
NJ
Display Name
Display name:
drotto
Was doing a IFR training flight a few days ago, and the costal area of NJ and NY had fairly low ceilings, while inland 25 miles was completely clear. Decided to take advantage of the costal clouds and intentionally filed through the NYC bravo out Long Island to KHVW chasing the low clouds. Within 2000 feet of takeoff was into then above the clouds. To the west was clear, but out towards the Atlantic was a solid layer. Despite some breaks KHVW was reporting 600 foot ceilings, so got to shoot the ILS 6 under actual. Only got to log like 0.3 IMC, but perfect first day to experience it.
 
Marine layer? That's a perfect first IMC experience.

I got several of those during training; it's what happens in summer here.

I also got some "mountain obscuration" in training, which is more challenging, as it tends to be much more turbulent.
 
Ive been fortunate enough to get about 3 hours actual during my IR training. Done some 500 ft vein approaches. Great experience, and it gives you a good feel of what the real thing is actually like
 
My first formal instrument rating training flight was last week and we went up in actual IMC. Ceilings were about 800 overcast, stratus clouds with distant buildups and icing level way, way up there. We filed a flight plan for 7000 MSL, route our airport to the IAF for one of the GPS approaches and then back to our airport. The tops were about 6000 so we were in VMC for most of the flight but I logged 0.8 actual and 1 instrument approach to about 300 feet above minimums, and learned a very important lesson: The right time to do your first actual IMC flying is when you can afford the time and money to keep going and get your rating, because if you're anything like me you'll become immediately addicted to clouds.
 
Flying an approach on your first instrument training flight?

While I guess you have to if it's overcast, that's not the best idea. Basics first.
 
MAKG1 said:
Flying an approach on your first instrument training flight?

While I guess you have to if it's overcast, that's not the best idea. Basics first.
Click to expand...
Don't get me wrong. My CFII and I both agree with your point not to work too much on approaches right off the bat, which is why we only shot the approach necessary to get back on the ground after the lesson.
 
MAKG1 said:
Flying an approach on your first instrument training flight?

While I guess you have to if it's overcast, that's not the best idea. Basics first.
Click to expand...
Yep. Approaches were one of the last things I did for instrument training.
 
Last edited:
iamtheari said:
Don't get me wrong. My CFII and I both agree with your point not to work too much on approaches right off the bat, which is why we only shot the approach necessary to get back on the ground after the lesson.
Click to expand...
Well I'm not a CFII or even a CFI, but I don't see a problem with giving the trainee a "look ahead" even if it's just for that reason. As long as you're not overtaxed, you come away primed and motivated to work hard toward mastering the basics so you can move on to "the real thing"..

I think approaches were what I worked hardest and longest on, even after having the basics down cold and spending quite a bit of time on holds. And after a break in training, they were the setting where my rust showed the most. There's a lot of multitasking going on when flying them, a lot of headwork and they take the most focus of anything in instrument flying.

Sorry to take a contrarian position. YMMV.
 
Glad you got to experience some real IMC with your CFII. Down here in TX, it is not easy to find IMC that won't kill you (most often it is convective or icy in the winter).
I saw OVC010 one day during my IR training and begged my CFII to go up with me. He wasn't available. But my ATP buddy was so we filed and went up. It was a great experience and am glad I did it with somebody in the right seat.
 
My CFII is fairly by the book with the time logging, that is why I only got 0.3. He then admitted he only has about 100 true IMC and he is over 4000 hrs, and that is with flying many charters up and down the east coast. He claims most of the time you break though most layers and are technically VFR.
 
drotto said:
My CFII is fairly by the book with the time logging, that is why I only got 0.3. He then admitted he only has about 100 true IMC and he is over 4000 hrs, and that is with flying many charters up and down the east coast. He claims most of the time you break though most layers and are technically VFR.
Click to expand...
We were able to log about half our flight because the layer was thicker. I would believe your instructor's claim. Stratus clouds are thin and thick cumulus clouds are thunderstorms. So that brings up a logging question. If you are on an active IFR flight plan and VFR on top, is that just total time or is there a better way to classify it in the logbook?
 
iamtheari said:
We were able to log about half our flight because the layer was thicker. I would believe your instructor's claim. Stratus clouds are thin and thick cumulus clouds are thunderstorms. So that brings up a logging question. If you are on an active IFR flight plan and VFR on top, is that just total time or is there a better way to classify it in the logbook?
Click to expand...
If you are not in actual instrument conditions, you are not supposed to log it as "actual", if that is what you were asking. Of course it counts toward total time and whatever other kinds of time apply (e.g., single engine, PIC, etc.).
 
azure said:
If you are not in actual instrument conditions, you are not supposed to log it as "actual", if that is what you were asking. Of course it counts toward total time and whatever other kinds of time apply (e.g., single engine, PIC, etc.).
Click to expand...
Not exactly. Just thinking that it's odd not to have any requirement to log time spent under instrument flight rules.
 
drotto said:
My CFII is fairly by the book with the time logging, that is why I only got 0.3. He then admitted he only has about 100 true IMC and he is over 4000 hrs, and that is with flying many charters up and down the east coast. He claims most of the time you break though most layers and are technically VFR.
Click to expand...
I have 1600 hrs and probably less than 3 hrs actual. Some of us can't find the clouds.
 
This is an interesting post. I too trained IFR on the NY coast. Very little actual time. I only hold the rating less than one year now but I look for the cloudy days now to better my skills. Flying in the clouds is becoming more and more comfortable for me. Definitely different than flying under the hood. All aspects of flying have improved for me.
 
Like others I was fortunate to get a decent amount of cloud time in the latter stages of my instrument training (in New England). Some of it at night since I did most of my training after work.

Two highlights that stick with me:
  • Watching my CFI shining a flashlight out the side window to see if we were picking up any ice.
  • Getting down to DA on an ILS, seeing nothing, and doing a real missed.
 
I've done quite a few Cat II down to 100' agl. Required to have the AP on during the approach and off at 80'agl. I can only imagine Cat III where the AP does it all, including the landing, but I think those planes are required to have 2 maybe 3 APs.
 
Well over half my hours in IR training were in actual, and that includes some approaches where I couldn't have possibly landed due to 0/0 conditions. And I've done a couple departures in actual 0/0 conditions.
 
mscard88 said:
I've done quite a few Cat II down to 100' agl. Required to have the AP on during the approach and off at 80'agl. I can only imagine Cat III where the AP does it all, including the landing, but I think those planes are required to have 2 maybe 3 APs.
Click to expand...
I don't know about "required," but our 747 has three autopilots, two AHRSs, and a set of standby instruments, as part of its autoland system. I know the crew has to be qualified as well as the aircraft. To get some scary perspective, the pilot's eyeballs on a 747 are nearly 50 AGL. You may not be able to see the runway on the ground.
 
Usually your FOM (Flight Ops Manual) or maybe even Op Specs have a required equipment list.
 
Not the same thing. What I'm addressing is required equipment for Cat II or Cat III ops. Similar but not the same.
 
A MEL will allow you to defer Cat II or III critical/required components but then you have to downgrade the aircraft from CATII/III ops as well. Same principle applies to RVSM and ETOPS.
 
My first exposure to IMC was when I flew to see Dr Bruce for my first medical. I then had a flight through a thin stratus layer as an introduction. So I agree with azure. I just got my ticket and included in my hours were about 30 hours actual. It is definitely a different experience than the hood. My partner in our Cirrus had about 200 hours combined hood and actual prior to getting his ticket in May. He said about 40% was actual.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Two highlights that stick with me:
  • Watching my CFI shining a flashlight out the side window to see if we were picking up any ice.
  • Getting down to DA on an ILS, seeing nothing, and doing a real missed.
Click to expand...

Sounds weird, but those were the two things that really stuck with me as "interesting" from my training with @jesse, too.

I wonder what the average amount of Instrument time is before someone has to do a real missed when they're from the desert southwest and trained here. Raising the hood or foggles just isn't the same feeling of expectation knowing you're going to push up the throttle and leave if you don't see your buddies, the runway lights and environment. :)

The flashlight thing is a surprise the first time. You think... Hmm. Yeah. I guess when it's dark you need to look out there somehow...
 
denverpilot said:
Sounds weird, but those were the two things that really stuck with me as "interesting" from my training with @jesse, too.

I wonder what the average amount of Instrument time is before someone has to do a real missed when they're from the desert southwest and trained here.
Click to expand...
A lot. In 20 years in Colorado the lowest ceiling I ever had in an approach was about 900'
 
midlifeflyer said:
A lot. In 20 years in Colorado the lowest ceiling I ever had in an approach was about 900'
Click to expand...

Probably could have gotten some 400's here this spring in non-convective rain since it's been so wet, but still exceedingly rare to need to go missed.

Was kinda looking forward to maybe having to file to shoot approaches in the Seminole this weekend, which still would have broken out at 800 or so, but the scud layer would have meant we'd probably need to file for cloud clearance stuff... and we'd be in and out of puffies while being vectored or making out own way to the approaches.

But the HSI going tango-uniform killed that plan dead dead dead.

The inevitable delays and reschedules are starting to get on my nerves a little bit. Not a lot. But a little.

I should go outside and take out my frustrations on the weed whacker. Rain has also grown some impressive vegetation behind the house.
 
I got a good solid marine layer down to 400 AGL today. Shot the RNAV 2 at KWVI (Watsonville). Went great. Landed, called Approach to cancel, taxied to 20, got a new clearance, and did the WVI3 SID. Good day. I had to take the ~3 knot tailwind on landing (or go missed), but it's a long runway and went fine with lots to spare.

3 deg glideslopes look weird. I was RIGHT on the LPV GP, but it looked low when I broke out.

And I don't think I've ever seen that airport so quiet. I had it to myself. Gotta love crappy weather as an instrument pilot. That approach is essentially unusable in VMC due to opposing traffic.

The best part is, no delays anywhere -- not even departing Reid across San Jose.
 
Last edited:
I mentioned this in a past thread, but my most surprising event regarding the issue of IMC during training happened when I was training for my heli PPL rating.
As background, I got my airplane IR years earlier with a high percentage of IMC, including ice and thunderstorms, and very little hood time. Even my IR checkride was in low IMC.
But at the heli flight school I had a conversation one day with their chief pilot CFII, who was doing mostly IR instruction so I never flew with him. I used to commute to my heli lessons in my plane, and I casually mentioned to him how on my last flight home I had to shoot a very tight ILS to minimums in moderate rain. He looked at me and quietly said, "you won't believe this, but I have never flown inside a cloud."
 
Had a 3-leg IFR flight yesterday morning. PnP mission.
I can tell you that if I didn't have IR, I'd be sitting on the ground until afternoon, waiting for the OVC to dissolve. And it was 100F after lunch.
Shot ILS into San Antonio in fluffy clouds. Fluffy in TX means "beat the snot out of ya", it was not a benign fog layer, those were daytime build-ups.
Got some good instrument time (not much, just to get up and down 5 times) and enjoyed it.
 
My first IMC experience was the day after my IFR checkride. 400ft overcast in El Paso with winds from the north. Home airport 5T6 was MVFR ~1000ft Very rare day. In retrospect, I probably should have gone with an instructor. When I first got in IMC I tried to look out the window, immediately got disoriented and decided I better glue my eyes to the cockpit. Flew the LOC approach over Mexico (they don't let you do that VFR) flew it perfect. Instead of going missed, I did a full stop cheered in excitement then called up clearance delivery for a whole new clearance back home. Although it all went very smooth, the excitement of actually being in the clouds, flying an approach I had never flown before (over Mexico), made it the most memorable flight.
 
BigBadLou said:
Nice experience for sure. What was it in? (I made a few landings at Dona Anna in the past, great little airport)
Click to expand...
It was in a 1990's 172. A plane rented out by Blue Feather Aero at Dona Ana. Back in what I thought was the FBO's Hayday (I am 26 so take that lightly). If I remember correctly they had a 310, v35, 2- 182's, a 3-4 172's and 2 152's. It was great place to fly!
 
Sweet. Lots of nice airplanes.
I flew a 177 out of there. And then I flew it out of there (literally) ... back home. :) Maybe you know John and Gerhard from east hangars?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top