IFR rating questions

Ozone

Ozone

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Aug 10, 2014
Messages
206
Location
Minnesota
Display Name
Ozone
Home Airfield
KSGS (power) KSYN (soar)
My wife has finally approved the idea that I spend more money on my flying habit by going for an IFR rating. With an otherwise busy professional life, I would like to be both efficient and cost effective in getting my rating. I do have the possibility of taking a short time off and doing one of those 10-day courses; does anyone have anything to say, good or bad, about those?

I also have the possibility of working on it through CAP or my flying club. Either way, I would need a DVD/CD/written course to get the book work done. Anyone have advice on which electronic courses are worth considering? Sporty's, King, Jeppessen?

Any and all advice would be appreciated.
 
First, when it comes to DVD/online courses, there are two types. One is designed strictly to get you through the knowledge test. The other covers that but is also integrated with a flight syllabus. The former is mostly drill & test, and I don't think there is that much real difference among them.

On the latter type, my only experience is with the Sporty's DVD/online course, and it was favorable. In that case, it was a student with a non-aviation career that meant lesson availability once a week, twice on a good week. We followed the Sporty's syllabus so he could prepare for the lesson beforehand and review it whenever he wanted after. We found it very effective and efficient and I recommend it, especially if you are going to take the "slow" route of working it in.

My own instrument training was a bit like that but in the Stone Age when 3.5" floppies were the great new thing. My ground school was mostly books, except for doing the weekend knowledge test cram course offered by Aviation Seminars.
 
I did the Cessna/King online package via a part 141 program. Very structured and the side benefit was there was no 50 hrs x/c requirement and I did it in 35hrs vs 40 for part 61. No matter which way you go,as Mark said try to fly as often as you can.

The accelerated 10-day programs work but they are intense and not for everyone, me included. Do a search as there's plenty of posts by folks who have gone this route.
 
I have not been overly thrilled with Jepp's study material. I did a regular in class ground school, let the test expire. Second time around a few years later I did John and Martha King and that seemed pretty good to me. I found Irwin Gleim's stuff best for drill-n-kill on the exam prep.

If you can handle the pace, the ten day courses are likely the best time and expense wise. I would suspect while CAP might cost you a little less, it's going to take a lot of calendar time to work it in.

I did the ten day course and got two days off for good behavior.
 
Sheppard for the IFR written. You'll get the test behind you quickly, and while you're working the flying some of it will it be "ah ha, this is what that's about".

I've adopted the method of 'Cram and pass' for the written tests, than go learn with an instructor, and be done. You get TWO years on the written.
 
For ground study, the king school is the golden standard, I've never had it fail a student, ever.

Doing it with CAP, well it's CAP, I'm not even going there ;)



Now as for the 10 day program, are you looking to become a safe and competent instrument pilot, or are you looking to just pass the test?

As someone who fly instrument for a living, there's just too much to PROPERLY cover it all in 10 days, think of it as getting your PPL again, INVEST the time, this ain't ordering fast food. Find a CFII with lots of actual IMC time and time outside from instructing, ideally a ATP and gold seal instructor, find one who will get you as much IMC as possible, as much night as possible and knows when to use a sim (and that number should be rather high).
 
James331 said:
For ground study, the king school is the golden standard, I've never had it fail a student, ever.

Doing it with CAP, well it's CAP, I'm not even going there ;)



Now as for the 10 day program, are you looking to become a safe and competent instrument pilot, or are you looking to just pass the test?

As someone who fly instrument for a living, there's just too much to PROPERLY cover it all in 10 days, think of it as getting your PPL again, INVEST the time, this ain't ordering fast food. Find a CFII with lots of actual IMC time and time outside from instructing, ideally a ATP and gold seal instructor, find one who will get you as much IMC as possible, as much night as possible and knows when to use a sim (and that number should be rather high).
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:, That's the way I did it. I had about 7 hrs. of actual when I took the checkride. That being said, if. you don't have the time and you go the 10 day route I been told it's best if you can get away from your daily live and just focus on the task at hand. That may mean checking into a hotel somewhere so that there are fewer distractions... Good luck with the training no matter which route you take.... Keep us posted on your progress...
 
If you don't have the time for real training, where will you find the time to stay current, and I'm not just takin' bare bones legal 666?
 
Well, I find staying current a lot less time consuming than the time I invested in getting the IR... Just saying... YMMV...
 
If the choice is between a 10-day course and doing it piecemeal at the local 'drome, I strongly recommend the more compressed format. It goes quickly and allows you to focus exclusively on the flying skills. I did mine many years ago at a busy flight school in Portland, OR. I mostly flew with one instructor, but if he was busy, another would pick up the slack. Flew 3-5 hours almost every day with self study ground school in the evenings. In Oregon, in February, we had IMC more days than VFR. The instructors seemed to prefer to teach in actual conditions, and it definitely was valuable to become comfortable routinely doing IFR approaches and x/c legs in the soup.
 
James331 said:
What's your definition of staying current?
Click to expand...
Well, bare bones 666 is "current," which is nothing more than a regulatory term. "Proficient" might be a different story entirely. I'd guess there are many more "current" instrument pilots than truly "proficient" ones, at least when it comes to the full range of instrument skill and knowledge. And that's OK by me so long as the pilot understands the difference.
 
James331 said:
Now as for the ten-day program, are you looking to become a safe and competent instrument pilot, or are you looking to just pass the test?

As someone who fly instrument for a living, there's just too much to PROPERLY cover it all in 10 days,
Click to expand...

I'm going to agree in part and disagree in part. Yes, it's too much to learn in ten days, but that doesn't mean that there's no merit in the ten-day course. Your average, fly periodically with Joe CFI who has at best the Jepp IFR syllabus and frequently not even that, is no more going to prepare you for heavy IFR than the ten-day class. In fact, I'd say many of the instruction out there is largely counterproductive. It doesn't turn out better IFR pilots than the PIC courses.
 
Ozone said:
My wife has finally approved the idea that I spend more money on my flying habit by going for an IFR rating. With an otherwise busy professional life, I would like to be both efficient and cost effective in getting my rating. I do have the possibility of taking a short time off and doing one of those 10-day courses; does anyone have anything to say, good or bad, about those?

I also have the possibility of working on it through CAP or my flying club. Either way, I would need a DVD/CD/written course to get the book work done. Anyone have advice on which electronic courses are worth considering? Sporty's, King, Jeppessen?

Any and all advice would be appreciated.
Click to expand...

Don't ignore ASA: www.asa2fly.com. There are a lot of useful videos on YouTube for insight into flying in the system.

Bob Gardner
 
For ground, I used Pilot Training Solutions. What I liked about their model is: (a) full access across all my devices, even for offline content, and (b) you actually learn the content rather than just memorize test questions. He's really good about explaining the topics in a way which worked well for me.

Also, look for videos like this one - really does a great job of ensuring you are prepared for your oral test.

I almost went Sporty's and mZeroA, but: (1) sporty's would not allow multiple device access for offline content, and (2) mZeroA charges monthly rather than one time.

Best of luck!
 
flyingron said:
I'm going to agree in part and disagree in part. Yes, it's too much to learn in ten days, but that doesn't mean that there's no merit in the ten-day course. Your average, fly periodically with Joe CFI who has at best the Jepp IFR syllabus and frequently not even that, is no more going to prepare you for heavy IFR than the ten-day class. In fact, I'd say many of the instruction out there is largely counterproductive. It doesn't turn out better IFR pilots than the PIC courses.
Click to expand...

Which is why I said to think of it as getting your PPL all over again, also find a ATP CFI who has real world (outside of school) IFR knowledge.

Personally, if I wasn't flying at least, say, 10hrs a month, 5 of which IFR in IMC or night, I wouldn't feel good launching into the soup. As a part 91 pilot, I'd also look for a high time instrument pilot (CFI or not) to go,up with every 6mo or so, someone who can point out things you might have become numb to.

And remeber IFR and VFR are two DIFFRENT skill sets, one is not better or more or less difficult than the other, so now you'll have two blades in your belt you'll need to invest time in keeping sharp, don't forget this industry has a very good reputation of self "regulating" those who don't have the skills required.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Well, bare bones 666 is "current," which is nothing more than a regulatory term. "Proficient" might be a different story entirely. I'd guess there are many more "current" instrument pilots than truly "proficient" ones, at least when it comes to the full range of instrument skill and knowledge. And that's OK by me so long as the pilot understands the difference.
Click to expand...

This. And there's also the difference between being proficient on steam vs proficient on glass.

Strangely, I'm usually proficient on steam and barely passable on glass, mostly because my airplane is steam.

Give me a bunch of VOR flippity-floppity twisty-turny and setting up for an ILS or LOC or
VOR approach, over messing with the buttonology of a Garmin any day of the week.

I'll get better at the Garmin once I have to fly them more often, or shove one in our panel, but without hours and hours behind the things, I'm just flat out better at steam.

But at least I know how easily the CDI button will kill me. ;)

I completed an IPC using the Garmin but I wouldn't say I'm proficient with it and everything it can do. Totally love how it handles depicted holds though -- that's some serious cheating there, coming from my usual habit of reaching for a stopwatch. :)

Speaking of IPCs. Do them. I've heard it said that new instrument pilots who don't get much time in actual shouldn't bother with 6-6-6 and a hold... just schedule an IPC with an instructor you know will work your butt off the day you pass the ride, for a date on the calendar prior to expiration of currency, and fly with them...

And many say to do that for at least two years. Then as necessary when you know things are rusty.
 
denverpilot said:
This. And there's also the difference between being proficient on steam vs proficient on glass.

Strangely, I'm usually proficient on steam and barely passable on glass, mostly because my airplane is steam.

Give me a bunch of VOR flippity-floppity twisty-turny and setting up for an ILS or LOC or
VOR approach, over messing with the buttonology of a Garmin any day of the week.

I'll get better at the Garmin once I have to fly them more often, or shove one in our panel, but without hours and hours behind the things, I'm just flat out better at steam.

But at least I know how easily the CDI button will kill me. ;)

I completed an IPC using the Garmin but I wouldn't say I'm proficient with it and everything it can do. Totally love how it handles depicted holds though -- that's some serious cheating there, coming from my usual habit of reaching for a stopwatch. :)

Speaking of IPCs. Do them. I've heard it said that new instrument pilots who don't get much time in actual shouldn't bother with 6-6-6 and a hold... just schedule an IPC with an instructor you know will work your butt off the day you pass the ride, for a date on the calendar prior to expiration of currency, and fly with them...

And many say to do that for at least two years. Then as necessary when you know things are rusty.
Click to expand...

Lol, opposite here, aside from a VOR check, or haven't navigated via VOR in, maybe years, just GPS and ILS, and personal preference I prefer a LPV to a ILS, it's more seamless going from GPS nav and if you're high you can come down onto it if needed, not good but nice to have the option.

Agree 100% with the IPC, I'd almost say do a mini every 6 months, with how procedural instrument flying is, 2 years is a huge stretch
 
IMO there nothing wrong with the accelerated training (e.g. 10 day course). I believe that anyone reasonably capable of learning new things can become at least as competent with that kind of training as they would be if they spread the training over several months. And AFaIK the total time commitment is usually less in the condensed version, mostly because there's a lot less need for review. I think the only concern is that skills acquired quickly tend to fade more quickly than those gained over a longer period of time (possibly due to the greater need for review/repeat in the slower option). Thus if you do go with a "10 day" IR course you should plan to fly "in the system" and "on the gauges" fairly often during the subsequent 5-10 months and/or schedule frequent recurrent training during the first year.

Some other considerations for an accelerated training experience: You must believe the recommendation that you devote ALL of your attention to the training during the two weeks. I.E no interference from work, family, sports, etc. This kind of total immersion learning environment feels like drinking from a firehose and some folks never get comfortable with that. Also it greatly helps if you can deal with setbacks and plateaus without getting emotional. Both are extremely likely with any form of IR training (or any flight training for that matter) and the schedule simply can't accommodate taking a mental health day off to recover. You just have to have a "hacuna matata" attitude (Lion King reference meaning put the past behind you and move on).
 
James331 said:
Lol, opposite here, aside from a VOR check, or haven't navigated via VOR in, maybe years, just GPS and ILS, and personal preference I prefer a LPV to a ILS, it's more seamless going from GPS nav and if you're high you can come down onto it if needed, not good but nice to have the option.
Click to expand...

Yeah I did LIKE the GPS stuff I flew, I just wouldn't say I'm proficient at it, completely. It's just a lack of flying stuff with one on board.

Seemed straightforward and heck of a lot nicer that there's usually an approach going both directions and even more to crosswind runways at many places in GPS land, whereas you get the single approach built into the prevailing wind for many ILS at smaller airports or none at all these days.

And they keep removing markers and LOMs taking a lot of the built in backups to things and additional safety out of them. Middle markers were always a "hey stupid... check your altitude!" last resort in the all-up and working VOR/ILS world.

All getting dismantled for "the future".

We got off easy this solar cycle. It was very wimpy compared to the previous one; when far less relied on GPS.

For two days in late October 2003, WAAS was unusable for precision approaches... and FAA issued their first ever radiation warning for flights further north than 35 degrees of latitude.

https://www.nrl.navy.mil/content_images/05FA5.pdf

Most sources show that X-class solar flare as an X28, but if you read the data, that's where the sensor overloaded on the GOES satellite. A team utilized the ionosphere itself and measurements of it gathered from around the globe to later class that as a X47. But the press had already stuck on X28, so that's what most of the articles still say.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/03/040316072425.htm

That one plastered a lot of stuff those two days, and we'll see that class of flare again, sooner or later. Since we're on the downhill slide right now, expect it around 2025 or so.

Sweden got it in 2003 and right on the way out of solar cycle 24, they got a goodbye parting shot...

http://www.thelocal.se/20151104/solar-storm-grounds-swedish-air-traffic

Sometimes, ground based stuff is just better when the Sun is acting up. Every 11 years...
 
James331 said:
Doing it with CAP, well it's CAP, I'm not even going there ;)
Click to expand...

Well, you did.

CAP is not relevant to the quality of flight training. It's all about the instructor, like anywhere else. And CAP instructors are rarely exclusive to CAP. So now you get to explain why training in the CAP plane with the same instructor over a rental makes any difference. Oh yeah, that's right. CAP sucks just because. Dude, THINK before you spout BS.

If the OP can find a good instructor willing to train in the CAP aircraft (for free), that's fine. The airplanes tend to be quite well maintained, and there are lots of safety pilots around. And it definitely helps get the cost down. But it's asking a lot to get that much training for free. And flight release can be an irritant, though if you do it a lot, you'll find a regular FRO that works.

Myself, I used a CAP instructor, but in a rental, so I could pay him for it. He was worth every penny, and probably twice as much (he really wasn't very expensive). Fabulous instructor; very good at problem solving. Then, after the rating, he helped transition me to IFR G1000 in the CAP plane. He's giving me an annual Form 5 later this week.

Note that unless you're MP qualified (or you're a cadet), you'll need approval from Wing to train in a CAP airplane for a certificate or rating. Though apparently, that's not too difficult beyond primary training. That's not something I've tried, though several of the local MPs have done bits of commercial training (not all of it, since none of the airplanes are complex).

Do pay close attention to the instructor. There is one CAP instructor I won't fly with, because I keep fixing his mistakes on the ground. Like forgetting to lock the airplane (it's on the checklist!). And his recent 172 runway overrun (with a student) doesn't inspire confidence.
 
One word
Demographics



Sure there are really great instructors in CAP, ones who love to teach and don't fantasize in the mirror with their uniforms on, ones I could actually have a conversation with.

There are also folks in prison who didn't actually do it.


Point is, for me at least, I don't like spending my time looking for hens teeth, much easier to find great CFIs by asking around the local airport, asking on the interwebz, or second to all that interviewing just CFIs at the local schools. Asking for a CFII through CAP would probably be a Hail Mary move for finding a CFI for me.
 
James331 said:
One word
Demographics
Click to expand...

Two words: bull ****.

They are the SAME instructors. There is NOT ONE CAP instructor I've ever met who instructs exclusively at CAP.

Don't go making stuff up and blaming it on "demographics." And if you ever want to go there, you need a valid survey or you're FOS. Full stop; demographics cannot be done without it.
 
MAKG1 said:
Well, you did.

CAP is not relevant to the quality of flight training. It's all about the instructor, like anywhere else. And CAP instructors are rarely exclusive to CAP. So now you get to explain why training in the CAP plane with the same instructor over a rental makes any difference. Oh yeah, that's right. CAP sucks just because. Dude, THINK before you spout BS.

If the OP can find a good instructor willing to train in the CAP aircraft (for free), that's fine. The airplanes tend to be quite well maintained, and there are lots of safety pilots around. And it definitely helps get the cost down. But it's asking a lot to get that much training for free. And flight release can be an irritant, though if you do it a lot, you'll find a regular FRO that works.

Myself, I used a CAP instructor, but in a rental, so I could pay him for it. He was worth every penny, and probably twice as much (he really wasn't very expensive). Fabulous instructor; very good at problem solving. Then, after the rating, he helped transition me to IFR G1000 in the CAP plane. He's giving me an annual Form 5 later this week.
Click to expand...
I'll be training with a CAP CFII but in my airplane - we haven't negotiated price yet.
Note that unless you're MP qualified (or you're a cadet), you'll need approval from Wing to train in a CAP airplane for a certificate or rating.
Click to expand...
I think that's a wing-specific decision. I've trained for both MP and IFR in a CAP airplane with a CAP CFII and never asked for Wing approval.
Though apparently, that's not too difficult beyond primary training. That's not something I've tried, though several of the local MPs have done bits of commercial training (not all of it, since none of the airplanes are complex).

Do pay close attention to the instructor. There is one CAP instructor I won't fly with, because I keep fixing his mistakes on the ground.
Click to expand...
Very true. There's one I refuse to fly with for any reason, training or mission.
Like forgetting to lock the airplane (it's on the checklist!). And his recent 172 runway overrun (with a student) doesn't inspire confidence.
Click to expand...
 
murphey said:
I think that's a wing-specific decision. I've trained for both MP and IFR in a CAP airplane with a CAP CFII and never asked for Wing approval.
Click to expand...

It's CAPR 60-1 2-8(c). It's national. But it doesn't matter if it's in your airplane.
 
James331 said:
For ground study, the king school is the golden standard, I've never had it fail a student, ever.

Doing it with CAP, well it's CAP, I'm not even going there ;)



Now as for the 10 day program, are you looking to become a safe and competent instrument pilot, or are you looking to just pass the test?

As someone who fly instrument for a living, there's just too much to PROPERLY cover it all in 10 days, think of it as getting your PPL again, INVEST the time, this ain't ordering fast food. Find a CFII with lots of actual IMC time and time outside from instructing, ideally a ATP and gold seal instructor, find one who will get you as much IMC as possible, as much night as possible and knows when to use a sim (and that number should be rather high).
Click to expand...
I've been looking for a study method too, and I've read a lot of reviews that indicate the KING program is behind in updating the curriculum...I passed on it because of that... Strongly leaning toward the Sportys on line/DVDs... I listened to a couple of Pilot-Edge videos on you tube and I'm hoping sportys comes close to that quality....
 
King's is a bit behind....on the other hand, the fundamentals are just that. Minimums, weather, navigation, etc don't change. Some of the technology changes, tho. I've been listing questions/concerns and sent them to King support (last week) haven't gotten any response back.

1) Why is GPS overview the first lesson? But not GPS navigation?
2) IFR Cross Country Flying, Topic 4, VOR Changeover Point Quiz #3, ref Figure 65. V552 between COP and LFT. Total distance is 68 miles. There's no bend, no symbol to indicate changeover. Halfway would be close to the HATCH intersection. Yet the "correct" answer is 34 miles from LFT. This makes no sense. Please explain.
3) Departures & Procedures: 5067 Ref 174 & 174 "When DFW is landing to the north, at CURLE expect…"
Either "Fly course of 010" or "radar vectors" is correct as per the text description.
4) Airports w/o tower: FSS? What airport has an on-field FSS anymore?
5) For every 30 seconds of video, I have 30 seconds of download time. I'd be much further into course if the video files weren't so large and take so much time to download. Not everyone has a 1Gig network.
6) Marker beacons? There are few, if any, marker beacons still operational in Colorado. I don't even have a marker beacon receiver.
7) Ref 5083 "If the ILS outer marker is inop, you may substitute…"
The lesson insists a compass locator or precision radar. However, the discussion on compass locators comes AFTER this lesson. As for precision radar, other than the military bases, there aren't any that I know of in Colorado. Neither I nor any CFII I know of, have ever used precision radar.

There's more, but this gives you the idea.
 
murphey said:
King's is a bit behind....on the other hand, the fundamentals are just that. Minimums, weather, navigation, etc don't change. Some of the technology changes, tho. I've been listing questions/concerns and sent them to King support (last week) haven't gotten any response back.

2) IFR Cross Country Flying, Topic 4, VOR Changeover Point Quiz #3, ref Figure 65. V552 between COP and LFT. Total distance is 68 miles. There's no bend, no symbol to indicate changeover. Halfway would be close to the HATCH intersection. Yet the "correct" answer is 34 miles from LFT. This makes no sense. Please explain.
Click to expand...

COP is 1/2 the distance if no bend or symbol. Doesn't 68/2=34?
 
I did the Sporty's iPad app. I liked it. I felt like the material was well-organized and well-presented to prepare me for the written test and for the in-flight lessons. I also liked the written test endorsement and unlimited practice tests. That helped me keep sharp until I finally got around to taking the written test, and I got a 90 on the real thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top