Instrument Training Questions

F

fukhar

Pre-Flight
Joined
Jun 13, 2011
Messages
33
Display Name
Display name:
Fukhar
Hi again!

Since you guys think its a bad idea to practice IFR without having taken any lessons and since I am 25 PIC cross country and 32 simulated IFR hours away from being eligible to apply for an instrument rating, I was thinking of taking lessons and at the same time building my X-C time and hood time with a safety pilot.
I have a few questions:
1) how many dual hours do you guys ESTIMATE I will need (I am guessing that the required 15 won't be enough)? I am a very proficient private pilot with 85 hours TT and I have already studied very thoroughly for the IR knowledge test (taking it next week).
2) I plan on doing my training in an instrument certified Cessna 150 that cruises at 75-80 TAS, what are your thoughts on that?

Thanks!
 
fukhar said:
1) how many dual hours do you guys ESTIMATE I will need (I am guessing that the required 15 won't be enough)? I am a very proficient private pilot with 85 hours TT and I have already studied very thoroughly for the IR knowledge test (taking it next week).
Click to expand...
From Peter Dogan's Book (am through the first few chapters and it's really good... highly suggest you obtain a copy):
There is no specific minimum number of total flight ours requred for the rating. However, the applicant must have logged at least 50 hours of cross ountry time as pilot in command.

If the pilot has completed 45 hours of PIC XC time prior to beginning the 10-day course [referring to the 10-day immersive Professional Instrument Course, Inc. training -- AM88] the time logged during the course can complete the requirement.

The rules require 40 hours of instruction experience, of which 15 must be instruction from a CFII. Technically, this means that a pilot may present himself for the flight test with 25 hours of hood time floawn with a safety pilot and only 15 hours of instruction. However, in practice, at least 40 hours with a current competent instrument instructor are needed to achieve the necessary profeciency.​

2) I plan on doing my training in an instrument certified Cessna 150 that cruises at 75-80 TAS, what are your thoughts on that?
Click to expand...
If it's got everything for IFR flight, no issues with that at all.
 
1) You'll need more hours than you think. I don't think 15 hours would be nearly enough unless you fully understand everything you're doing before you start. I'd honestly say 25 hours with a CFII would be needed by most pilots.

2) No problems...though it would be nice if it had a GPS so that you could learn to fly RNAV approaches. Does it?
 
fukhar said:
2) I plan on doing my training in an instrument certified Cessna 150 that cruises at 75-80 TAS, what are your thoughts on that?
Click to expand...

Doing the instrument stuff in something like a 150 has its pluses and minuses. On the positive side, you will have plenty of time to configure and get yourself set up for the approaches. On the down side, expect the flight test to take a bit longer.
 
fukhar said:
Hi again!

Since you guys think its a bad idea to practice IFR without having taken any lessons and since I am 25 PIC cross country and 32 simulated IFR hours away from being eligible to apply for an instrument rating, I was thinking of taking lessons and at the same time building my X-C time and hood time with a safety pilot.
I have a few questions:
1) how many dual hours do you guys ESTIMATE I will need (I am guessing that the required 15 won't be enough)? I am a very proficient private pilot with 85 hours TT and I have already studied very thoroughly for the IR knowledge test (taking it next week).
Click to expand...
Anywhere from 15 to 500. There really is a lot to cover during instrument training. If someone approached me having flown 25 hours hood with a safety pilot, then expecting me to sign them off after 15 hours, I'd tell them they'll be signed off when they are ready and it could easily take double that.
2) I plan on doing my training in an instrument certified Cessna 150 that cruises at 75-80 TAS, what are your thoughts on that?
Click to expand...
Thats a really slow 150. They should true easily true around 90-95 knots. As long as it has all the equipment required then it will be fine (provided you can find a DE that can fit)
 
Last edited:
Quote:
"I am a very proficient private pilot with 85 hours TT and I have already studied very thoroughly for the IR knowledge test (taking it next week)."

Please don't take this the wrong way, self measuring proficiency can be a very dangerous thing.....

I'm finishing up my IR and scheduling for the checkride now after more than 75 hrs simulated and actual. Part 61, winter ice, and life in general add hours and will often do that to you. There's no rush and no advantage to pushing into the rating. Jesse is totally correct: when your instructor feels you're ready you'll get signed off. Forget the 'hours' game. You need to get into many more situations in that plane, especially into actual IMC, before you should even consider the rating.

At just over 400 hrs TT my personal pilot proficiency is strictly as a
"student", and I will always be a student...and I like to keep it that way.
 
The amount of time that you take for your instrument training will vary. Honestly, you will do it the fastest if you have a good instructor with you, because otherwise you'll end up creating and reinforcing bad habits Really, I'd say that you should plan at least 25 hours with an instructor, probably more. Without knowing you or flying with you, it's hard to say much more about how much time you'll need. But 40-50 hours is probably accurate. It will go faster with an instructor.

Not a problem using the 150, but keep in mind that it's not a good IFR platform simply because it's slow. Having a /U or /A plane for initial training I think is the best way to go. Learning GPS use for IFR is very simple and quick. The /U and /A training will make you a better pilot.
 
Listen to Jesse and Ted. Both great instructors. I guess I just don't understand why you're in such a hurry to get these hours done without your CFII. If you're going flying, why not take your instructor with you instead of your buddy? I think that you'll be wasting more time by trying to fly off hours without him than you would gain by having the hours when you get to him. Enjoy your cross country time by looking out the window. You won't be gaining much by working it under the hood.

If you really want to save some money, then find a PCATD somewhere so that you can use it (with your instructor) during your training. Doing that saved me at least $500 in rental and we were able to use the time in very productive ways. Burning off cross country under the hood isn't a very productive use of your time IMHO.
 
jason said:
Listen to Jesse and Ted. Both great instructors.
Click to expand...

Thank you. :)

I guess I just don't understand why you're in such a hurry to get these hours done without your CFII. If you're going flying, why not take your instructor with you instead of your buddy? I think that you'll be wasting more time by trying to fly off hours without him than you would gain by having the hours when you get to him.
Click to expand...

Precisely.

Enjoy your cross country time by looking out the window. You won't be gaining much by working it under the hood.

If you really want to save some money, then find a PCATD somewhere so that you can use it (with your instructor) during your training. Doing that saved me at least $500 in rental and we were able to use the time in very productive ways. Burning off cross country under the hood isn't a very productive use of your time IMHO.
Click to expand...

The one thing I'd offer up here is that the instrument rating really is about cross country work. Doing short cross countries to airports just barely 50 nm away are actually about the highest workload flights you'll have as an instrument pilot. A good instructor will throw in things that provide good training. Stuff such as "I need to use the bathroom, get me on the ground now," can be good ways to challenge the student (since such things often include partial panel, etc.). This is how a lot of my instrument training went (I started with about 70 TT and finished at about 120 TT). For someone who only has 85 hours and really needs to learn more about doing trips, this definitely has value vs. someone like you who had 15 years of flying experience and wasn't a stranger to taking a trip or being in the system.

The syllabus that I have for the accelerated instrument course is scenario-based, and focuses on cross countries of varying lengths for this reason.
 
jason said:
Listen to Jesse and Ted. Both great instructors. I guess I just don't understand why you're in such a hurry to get these hours done without your CFII. If you're going flying, why not take your instructor with you instead of your buddy? I think that you'll be wasting more time by trying to fly off hours without him than you would gain by having the hours when you get to him. Enjoy your cross country time by looking out the window. You won't be gaining much by working it

<snip>
Click to expand...

Because he's visiting somewhere not his home drome for about a month. This was mentioned in another thread so I'm not picking, just explaining.

John
 
fukhar said:
Hi again!

Since you guys think its a bad idea to practice IFR without having taken any lessons and since I am 25 PIC cross country and 32 simulated IFR hours away from being eligible to apply for an instrument rating, I was thinking of taking lessons and at the same time building my X-C time and hood time with a safety pilot.
I have a few questions:
1) how many dual hours do you guys ESTIMATE I will need (I am guessing that the required 15 won't be enough)? I am a very proficient private pilot with 85 hours TT and I have already studied very thoroughly for the IR knowledge test (taking it next week).
2) I plan on doing my training in an instrument certified Cessna 150 that cruises at 75-80 TAS, what are your thoughts on that?

Thanks!
Click to expand...


IFR is a whole 'nother world as I'm sure you've realized. Here's my take, Do all 40 hrs with the very best possible CFII you can find, one that is going to brutalize you in the cockpit. I just flew an LPV and an ILS approach today after not having flown one in a couple of years, I would have broke out and survived. I credit a lot of that to my CFII, Satan's, training me nearly 20 years ago.
 
There's a reason CFIs never quit talking, it's to embed things deep in your brain.
 
Henning said:
IFR is a whole 'nother world as I'm sure you've realized. Here's my take, Do all 40 hrs with the very best possible CFII you can find, one that is going to brutalize you in the cockpit. I just flew an LPV and an ILS approach today after not having flown one in a couple of years, I would have broke out and survived. I credit a lot of that to my CFII, Satan's, training me nearly 20 years ago.
Click to expand...

Wow your CFII's name is Satan too?

Must be a common CFII name...Maybe mine's 'Son of Satan'?
 
thanks guys.

what the current status with the IR airplane knowledge test? i heard that they are changing it or something. has this happened yet?
 
fukhar said:
thanks guys.

what the current status with the IR airplane knowledge test? i heard that they are changing it or something. has this happened yet?
Click to expand...


From what I understand, they have done the changes and are using the new tests. Here's the thing, if you studied the material, you'll likely pass just fine. If you studied the test, your chances get worse although if you understood it, you should still be ok.
 
Henning said:
From what I understand, they have done the changes and are using the new tests. Here's the thing, if you studied the material, you'll likely pass just fine. If you studied the test, your chances get worse although if you understood it, you should still be ok.
Click to expand...

The changes are not significant enough to have any impact of significance.
 
Henning said:
IFR is a whole 'nother world as I'm sure you've realized. Here's my take, Do all 40 hrs with the very best possible CFII you can find, one that is going to brutalize you in the cockpit. I just flew an LPV and an ILS approach today after not having flown one in a couple of years, I would have broke out and survived. I credit a lot of that to my CFII, Satan's, training me nearly 20 years ago.
Click to expand...

Yup. This is what I did. 10.2 on a ATC610 or something like that and 30 in the air. I had three CFII during the process as they moved on to bigger things, but the last one was the one that really put me over the coals.

"Hands off the yoke Ed."
"Why?"
"Your control wheel locked up for some reason."
"Ok, so I'm supposed to intercept and fly the ILS how?"
"You figure it out."
So it was trim and rudders only to 50' with the hood on and I had to be over the runway when it came off in order for me to get signed off for the test.

A lot of our training was also at night, and I was basically "solo" for any XC flights we did.

"Joe, can you hand me that chart?"
"I'm not here."
"Damn you."

So I had to try and fiddle with a chart, hold a flashlight, copy down ATC instructions, oh yeah, and fly the plane. What a pain in the ass that was. But now, flying IMC is pretty much boooooring compared to what I had to do then. I wouldn't recommend a safety pilot during training, ever. Do all 40+ with a CFII. You'll be better in the long run.
 
I hear single pilot IFR is hard. I can't wait to find out for myself
 
Jaybird180 said:
I hear single pilot IFR is hard. I can't wait to find out for myself
Click to expand...

Like most things, it's hard if you have poor training and aren't properly prepared. There is a high workload aspect to deal with.

But I've done about 1200-1300 hours of it, and it's not bad at all.
 
At what point did you know you were well prepared?
 
Jaybird180 said:
At what point did you know you were well prepared?
Click to expand...
First, when I passed the checkride with no issues at all. Everything was well within standards.

Second, when I had my attitude indicator roll over and die in IMC in a Mooney and I had to continue partial panel before reaching some VMC. Was a tense couple of minutes until I settled down in the new scan and blocked off the AI.

Third, when I shot my first "real" ILS to minimums at KTEB in snow, with maybe a half-mile visibility, with my then boss on board the C206. Maybe 30 feet above decision altitude, I saw the lights, and then continued to a normal landing. Even now I still get the "wow this s&^t works" feeling when coming out of the clouds.

I feel that like anything else, when you've done enough flying on instruments it's like riding a bike - the physical skills come back even after some dormancy. The mental skills (knowing the procedures cold and being able to stay well ahead of the airplane) drop off but they also come back pretty quickly. A look at my log shows 168 hours of actual and another 100 hours of hood time.
 
Jaybird180 said:
I hear single pilot IFR is hard. I can't wait to find out for myself
Click to expand...

I disagree. The only people that think it is hard probably shouldn't be allowed in an airplane to begin with.
 
Jaybird180 said:
I hear single pilot IFR is hard. I can't wait to find out for myself
Click to expand...

I think it's about the most challenging thing you can do in an airplane. For some people, and instrument rating is something they use to fly on nice days in the system. But if you get an instrument rating (which is pretty hard to do) and you use it to fly in challenging weather to travel, and you do it single pilot, then I would agree with those that say it's one of, if not the most challenging thing you can do in an airplane.

Traveling on an instrument ticket makes preflight weather planning more difficult, not easier. It's easy to call on no-go on a VFR flight. What's hard is really figuring out how to interpret the weather, make some real judgement calls, and then manage it while it flight.

Not the least of the challenges with single pilot IFR is staying proficient. Flying a lot in the system will help but even then, your special skills like partial panel get no workout. It's just hard to stay proficient without working at it very diligently. I'd practice every 6 months or so whether I needed the approaches or not. And, I'd always get a full IPC annually from Satan and it was always productive.

All of that is just scratching the surface of it and anyone that thinks all of that is easy is either kidding or delusional.
 
Jaybird180 said:
At what point did you know you were well prepared?
Click to expand...

It was gradual. A lot of cross countries in a wide variety of weather conditions.

Shooting the ILS into KNEW to minimums, then taking advantage of the 100' rule after the approach lights came into view. There is no color differential between Lake P and ground fog/marine layer. A takeoff back out of KNEW with the airport at minimums, then flying into KLBX on the same day to minimums - 5 minutes later another plane missed at KLBX.

But the real test was flying approaches within one dot on an IPC after not flying any approaches for almost 6 months. That goes back to early training and experiences in between.

I have a PCATD (no letter of authorization, but was bought as a PCATD and upgraded the software to later version) using OnTop and the full yoke/panel/rudders. It's touchier than the airplane, but works pretty well for keeping procedures fresh in mind & keeping mind focused. Especially good for practicing partial panel & HSI failure.
 
Henning said:
Or they turn on the autopilot right after rotation...:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I don't have an autopilot.

What it all comes down to is how your brain works. You can throw down calculus, chemistry, and physics problems in front of me and I have no problem with them. For me it's easy. Now, playing a guitar. Horrible. I have 0 artistic talent when it comes to that, no matter how much I practiced. I played till I had blisters on my fingers and it still sounded like crap. No rhythm or timing.

So which is harder? Playing a guitar, or stoichiometry?
 
Henning said:
Or they turn on the autopilot right after rotation...:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

When I'm flying with pax aboard on a trip, the autopilot goes on at 1000 AGL and generally stays on until the missed approach point. That's the safest way to operate, since it's a GOOD autoflight system and I'm proficient at using it.

When I fly for proficiency, I fly an entire sequence (takeoff, departure/climb, cruise, descent/arrival, approach, missed approach) with multiple approaches by hand, and include partial panel work. The point of this flying is to ensure I'm sharp and can fly the airplane without the automation. Then I fly an arrival/approach WITH the automation to ensure I'm still proficient on that. I try to do these flights in the Redbird since it can do failure modes on the G1000 in a realistic manner (and it's cheaper than the airplane by a large number).

And then there are VFR fun flights, where I may never use the autopilot at all.
 
EdFred said:
Or they are just better at it than you.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that's true but that doesn't make the nature of the act itself less "hard" or challenging. It's a fact that the pilot work load is more complex and higher flying single pilot IFR and that the proficiency required is much more difficult to maintain regardless of how smart or skilled a pilot might be. I didn't say it can't be managed safely by many pilots but it's going to be, by nature, harder to do than the skills and recurrent skills training required of a VFR pilot.

It would also silly to assert that it's no harder than flying IFR with a copilot that's skilled in CRM. Hence, single pilot IFR is more challenging than many of these other things we do in a airplane.

So which is harder? Playing a guitar, or stoichiometry?
Click to expand...

They're both easy. Now double reed instruments, that's hard. But I'm delighted to hear you say that it's easy for you to mange single pilot IFR. It's an encouragement to people like Jay who are still dreaming about it.
 
PittsDriver said:
I'm sure that's true but that doesn't make the nature of the act itself less "hard" or challenging. It's a fact that the pilot work load is more complex and higher flying single pilot IFR and that the proficiency required is much more difficult to maintain regardless of how smart or skilled a pilot might be. I didn't say it can't be managed safely by many pilots but it's going to be, by nature, harder to do than the skills and recurrent skills training required of a VFR pilot.

It would also silly to assert that it's no harder than flying IFR with a copilot that's skilled in CRM. Hence, single pilot IFR is more challenging than many of these other things we do in a airplane.



They're both easy. Now double reed instruments, that's hard. But I'm delighted to hear you say that it's easy for you to mange single pilot IFR. It's an encouragement to people like Jay who are still dreaming about it.
Click to expand...

But my Cuban 8s look like ****.
 
TMetzinger said:
When I fly for proficiency, I fly an entire sequence (takeoff, departure/climb, cruise, descent/arrival, approach, missed approach) with multiple approaches by hand, and include partial panel work. The point of this flying is to ensure I'm sharp and can fly the airplane without the automation. Then I fly an arrival/approach WITH the automation to ensure I'm still proficient on that. I try to do these flights in the Redbird since it can do failure modes on the G1000 in a realistic manner (and it's cheaper than the airplane by a large number).
Click to expand...
Yup, when I'm trying to keep my skills up (or dust off the rust), just about the only time I use the autopilot is when putting the hood on. The whole point is to push the envelope of what you can do when the workload is high. That said, my CFII encouraged me to use the AP, as opposed to asking him to do something, when switching approaches at the same airport, or when trying to troubleshoot something on the GPS that wasn't working as I expected. That rarely happens nowadays, since I'm a lot more familiar with the 480's quirks and weirdnesses.

And then there are VFR fun flights, where I may never use the autopilot at all.
Click to expand...
I probably shouldn't admit this, but on VFR long cross country flights, I use the AP almost all the time -- to keep myself from tiring, and so I can focus on traffic avoidance and monitoring vital systems.
 
TMetzinger said:
When I'm flying with pax aboard on a trip, the autopilot goes on at 1000 AGL and generally stays on until the missed approach point. That's the safest way to operate, since it's a GOOD autoflight system and I'm proficient at using it.

When I fly for proficiency, I fly an entire sequence (takeoff, departure/climb, cruise, descent/arrival, approach, missed approach) with multiple approaches by hand, and include partial panel work. The point of this flying is to ensure I'm sharp and can fly the airplane without the automation. Then I fly an arrival/approach WITH the automation to ensure I'm still proficient on that. I try to do these flights in the Redbird since it can do failure modes on the G1000 in a realistic manner (and it's cheaper than the airplane by a large number).

And then there are VFR fun flights, where I may never use the autopilot at all.
Click to expand...

Exactly what I do, too, though in single pilot IFR I'll use the coupled autopilot on an ILS when the weather is low.

I'll add that I do IPCs periodically rather than just maintaining currency through the 6 approach/hold/intercept/track. Flying with a CFII makes sure that I'm flying something other than my "routine" or "normal" flying, and it means that I'll do full approaches as opposed to radar vectors.
 
EdFred said:
So which is harder? Playing a guitar, or stoichiometry?
Click to expand...

Depends on what you or someone else needs to accomplish.

If I had a stadium full of people I needed to entertain, I now know not to contact you. ;)

In some circles, people are impressed by guitar. In others, stoichiometry. Some circles think one or the other is hard. Others find one or the other easy. (Or both.)

We'll all be sure to call you when we need some stoichiometry problems worked out. ;)

Meanwhile it means little to anyone struggling with Instrument flying that you can do math. Try figuring out a way that'd make it just as easy for them. They'd find that more useful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top