Is this normal?

Z

Z06_Mir

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Oct 6, 2012
Messages
1,737
Display Name
Display name:
Radna
Issue resolved. Thanks everyone.
 
Last edited:
Not normal for my students. However, we are blessed with a number of IAPs in the Puget Sound area. I understand your frustration. What's the idea behind flying the approach 1000 feet low...to stay out of the clouds? Bad idea, if true. Maybe a flight or two with another instructor?

Bob Gardner
 
Sounds like the CFI is more interested in you passing the checkride than learning to fly IFR.

The examiner most guys use at my airport has a normal pattern with the same three airports he uses for instrument checkrides, so there is lotsa practice at these three.

I'm glad I have my home airport's ILS memorized, as its used frequently, but but I would insist on different approches at different airports, and definately not changing plans to avoid actual IFR.

I enjoyed getting some actual instrument conditions. Really fun to break out of the clouds and see a runway right where it belongs in front of you.

I'd have a good talk with the instructor, and if he/she doesn't agree with your goals, maybe it's time so find a CFII that enjoys clouds.
 
I just noticed you're in Phoenix- It's possible your CFII has very little actual IFR experience, and is uncomfortable in actual conditions.
 
Normal is relative it may be enough to get you the IR, but it hardly seems like it is providing experience that will lead to safety in the real world. Out of curiosity have you asked why he won't fly in IMC with you?

-Jon
 
It's normal for a lot of the 141 schools, where they are limited by their TCO and other constraints, but not normal for PIC, for whom I teach. My trainees in the 10-day course will typically see at least half a dozen airports and multiple different approaches at most of them, plus approaches from all over the country selected to exercise particular skills in the sim. That said, when I get "finish-up" trainees, I often see they've been flying the same three approaches at their home airport over and over and over during their previous training.

As mentioned above, I think it has a lot to do with the experience of the instructor. Get one with decades and thousands of hours of operational IFR experience, and you're more likely to get a wider range of experience in training. Get one who's never been out of sight of the school house in his/her 500 hours of flying time other than for the long solo XC for CP and the long IFR XC for the IR, and you may not get such breadth of experience in your IR training, either.
 
WingNut42 said:
Normal is relative it may be enough to get you the IR, but it hardly seems like it is providing experience that will lead to safety in the real world. Out of curiosity have you asked why he won't fly in IMC with you?

-Jon
Click to expand...
+1 -- though don't be surprised if the answer is "oh, we'll do actual, I don't have a problem with that, but I want to get you ready for the stage check and then the checkride."

It's called "teaching to the test". And sometimes it's an excuse for reluctance due to some other reason -- I strongly suspect that my first CFII didn't want to be the legal PIC in my airplane either because he isn't involved in its maintenance, or because he isn't familiar with all its "toys". That might not apply in the OP's case though as they will be doing the long XC in her airplane.
 
Non Compos Mentis said:
I just noticed you're in Phoenix- It's possible your CFII has very little actual IFR experience, and is uncomfortable in actual conditions.
Click to expand...

This. And he is teaching the same way he might have been taught. At my old company, the PHX base was notorious for having pilots with weak IFR skills because they never used them. If this guy has never flown IFR he may be reluctant to do so. I have had a few friends go to Shebles and none of them came out ready to do anything, if your CFI went through an accelerated training program, he might have taken that type of training and applied it to the way he teaches, which is to just pass a checkride.

I was fortunate that my CFI wanted as much actual as possible with me. Possibly due to us both getting used to the soup at the same time, but he was confident and willing to do as much actual as I wanted.
 
What Ron said. I'm not sure that you and your CFI have congruent goals insofar as your training is concerned. You obviously want to learn about IFR flying and he wants to fill squares on the training records.
 
Probably not unusual at some schools, but not the best way to do things in my opinion. Its your training like Ron said. If you feel like you need to speak up then do so. Nothing wrong with that
 
This will sound extreme, but I think this is criminal.

I'm aware that many parts of the country don't have much IFR. OK, fine, the wheels keep on turning. However, I don't think that means training in actual equals training with foggles. I wish any student in a non-ifr area would take a trip on Southwest to somewhere with frequent actual and do some training with a CFI there before going out on there own.

Another thing I believe the CFI should purposely file an altitude so that the enroute is completely in IMC. Basically, take a trip where you go into the clouds on take-off, handfly in IMC the whole way, shot an approach into a never before landed at airport, only seeing the ground again on the approach. That's what brings all this "training" to life.

We all yap a lot about safety. This kind of experience goes a long ways toward it.
 
flyingmoose said:
Probably not unusual at some schools, but not the best way to do things in my opinion. Its your training like Ron said. If you feel like you need to speak up then do so. Nothing wrong with that
Click to expand...

There are hundreds of schools dedicated to pumping people through IFR ratings. If people wan't to check a rating off in order to to get another rating such as a CPL or CFI, they are attracted to places like that. However, it is a huge disservice if the CFII doing the instruction was taught the same way, and is training to pass a checkride, not stay alive.
 
My comments above notwithstanding, there are times I have "taught the test" to an extent when I know the examiner routinely uses the same, complicated test profile in an effort to "get up, get down, get done." There is one examiner in Maryland who runs a profile which starts east of the Westminster VOR (EMI), enters a hold at an unpublished intersection about 12 miles east of EMI, then procedes inbound to join the 5nm DME arc counterclockwise around the VOR to join the 295 radial outbound, and then 5 miles later intercept the final approach course for the ILS 23 approach into Frederick.
http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1213/05089IL23.PDF
Try that some time in a complex airplane and see how you fare without having practiced it beforehand -- I'll bet you end up about 5 miles behind the airplane unless you're an experienced professional who does things like that in a different area every day. Note also that the minimum allowable radius for a DME arc in a published procedure is 7 nm, so it's happening fast on the arc, too. There's another examiner in another nearby state with a similarly complicated profile, and I'll admit to having the trainee practice that one, too, when I know we're going with that examiner. Frankly, on both of those, I'd be working hard to do it cleanly myself without prior preparation.
 
Ron Levy said:
My comments above notwithstanding, there are times I have "taught the test" to an extent when I know the examiner routinely uses the same, complicated test profile in an effort to "get up, get down, get done." There is one examiner in Maryland who runs a profile which starts east of the Westminster VOR (EMI), enters a hold at an unpublished intersection about 12 miles east of EMI, then procedes inbound to join the 5nm DME arc counterclockwise around the VOR to join the 295 radial outbound, and then 5 miles later intercept the final approach course for the ILS 23 approach into Frederick.
Click to expand...
Whew! Does the candidate get a chance to digest that route before climbing into the airplane for the checkride? I think I might be able to pull that off in a 172 slowed to about 60 KtGS but in my Baron at my normal gear up "slow" speed it would take longer for the DPE to explain the next step than the plane would need to get through it. Perhaps the examiner is doing this with the expectation that the applicant will screw it up a bit and he want's to see how the pilot manages when things get overwhelming?
 
I have no opinion about the busy-work checkrides other than to say a pilot's ability to plan and stay ahead is an important part of successful IR flying, and it's nice to know whether it's within his abilities.
 
Google 'Morey's west coast adventures' or 'Field Morey' for a different way to get your IFR rating.

This is not an endorsement, I haven't taken his course.... but it does seem like a lot of fun along with the work....

-Skip
 
This time of year in my part of the country, I would presume there was ice if I saw a solid layer at 3k. I would then look at some RUC soundings and PIREPS to find out.
 
I agree with Ales, and I do not think it is too extreme. I think your CFI (purposely left out the second I) is afraid of true IMC and is avoiding it. Take short trips to the same airports in the same conditions, stay in your comfort zone, and all is well. However, as we all know this is not what true flying is all about. That being said. My IFR training was concentrated around my home airport, and two othe airports, one south of us and the other one north, as these were the closest airports that had ILS approaches, and for the sake of time it made sense. However, one I was allowed to make the choices of airports in the extent that we discussed it prior and then made a decision. However from my point of view, and I could be wrong but the cruise part of flying IFR is fairly straight foward, and the vast majority of approaches are straight foward as well, and the goal is variety of different approaches(ILS, VOR, RNAV, DME arcs, etc). However, we never avoid true IMC and actually looked for it. We only canceled twice, one was a postponement to later in the day when the weather was below minimums, vis was nil and ceiling was nil, and went up when the fog lifted some, and the other time was because of winds(35 gusting to 50) and related to one of the hurricanes or trop storms. As others would agree I think, true IMC is very different from foggles, and should not be underestimated. The first time I flew true IMC I was real glad I had my instructor with me, it is very disorienting. I think I have a healthy respect for IMC. I personally think a disservice is done to PPL students by not having them fly at least once during training through a cloud. If you are not prepared for it, I can see how inadvertantly flying into a cloud can kill quickly.

My advice, speak to you instructor about he hesitancy to go true IMC, and if he cannot give you a good reason why, find one that will take you into IMC.

Just my opinion.

Doug
 
gismo said:
Whew! Does the candidate get a chance to digest that route before climbing into the airplane for the checkride? I think I might be able to pull that off in a 172 slowed to about 60 KtGS but in my Baron at my normal gear up "slow" speed it would take longer for the DPE to explain the next step than the plane would need to get through it. Perhaps the examiner is doing this with the expectation that the applicant will screw it up a bit and he want's to see how the pilot manages when things get overwhelming?
Click to expand...
No, he does tell the applicant during the briefing what they will be doing, but it's still a gasser. It reminds me a lot of the routine Sean Connery puts Catherine Zeta-Jones through in "Entrapment" preparing for the array of laser beams guarding whatever it is they were stealing. Seems to me it took her a while to get it right.
 
If there is a chance to get some actual in an area where it's rare, you MUST take advantage of it. Actually, absent t-storms and ice, you should take advantage of it no matter where you are. There's no substitute for the real thing.

Like many others, I think your CFI(with another wannabe I) is doing you a disservice by giving you the cookie-cutter Arizona "instrument" training. Find a new CFI, find a new school if you have to. Your life may well depend on it.
 
My guess is that he doesn't want to file IFR, preferring the flexibility of VFR for instruction. But at some point you need to start filing and flying IFR, regardless of actual weather conditions. I agree with others here that IMC is a very different experience from hood time and it would be best to have the introduction with an instructor so IMC should not be a go-no-go factor except early in your training, but you say "3/4 through" so you should be ready for the real deal. I was fortunate to have an instructor who did not shy away from IMC. He even had me file and fly a round robin IFR flight plan in IMC once that included an approach and missed at KDAL, a class B. Talk about full spectrum IFR experience for a student! Granted, it was just before the XC phase, so it was his way of determining if I was ready for the phase check. By the time I had to fly in IMC after obtaining the rating, I had lost my fear of IMC but not my respect. So, like others here have already stated, I recommend that you press your instructor to launch into IMC as much as possible, especially if you are now doing XC.
 
Sad to say, I don't think the "cookie-cutter" IR training is that unusual anywhere. It is largely what I had for the last 3 years, until I fired my first II this summer. My first experience in actual in my own plane was earlier this month. In fairness to my other instructor(s), good IFR training days aren't common here either. It's either storms or ice, or below minimums, or thin layers of low clouds that you'd need to file to get above if you wanted to travel somewhere, but aren't any good for training in. A lot of things have to come together for an opportunity like that to present itself. But you do need an instructor who is willing to do it, so I would say to fire anyone who isn't and then carpe diem.

Edit: just to be clear, my first instructor was NOT afraid of IMC, not in the least. We did some during my first year of training, and I know he did a previous student's long IFR XC to MDW in hard IMC. But that was all in club planes. In my airplane, it was all hood work.
 
Last edited:
I can definitely relate to feeling unchallenged. It was always a struggle to get my first CFII to have me fly approaches partial panel, it was never more than one approach per training session, and he resisted failing my HSI for the longest time. I never got to partial panel with my next CFII, and even my current one put it off until after we'd flown maybe 3 times (plus the day we flew in IMC). How is your instructor about that? I'll probably regret saying this on the board but I wonder if it's because I'm female, i.e. the usual male tendency to give women the kid glove treatment (which I'm convinced is ingrained and so unconscious that a lot of guys will even deny it). When I first started getting serious about IFR I wanted a woman CFII for that reason, and had talked to someone I knew about training with her while I was still flying a friend's airplane. Then that plane was sold and the CFII dropped out of aviation (mostly) before I bought my airplane. As of today I don't know of any women CFIIs locally at all.
 
azure said:
I can definitely relate to feeling unchallenged. It was always a struggle to get my first CFII to have me fly approaches partial panel, it was never more than one approach per training session, and he resisted failing my HSI for the longest time. I never got to partial panel with my next CFII, and even my current one put it off until after we'd flown maybe 3 times (plus the day we flew in IMC). How is your instructor about that? I'll probably regret saying this on the board but I wonder if it's because I'm female, i.e. the usual male tendency to give women the kid glove treatment (which I'm convinced is ingrained and so unconscious that a lot of guys will even deny it). When I first started getting serious about IFR I wanted a woman CFII for that reason, and had talked to someone I knew about training with her while I was still flying a friend's airplane. Then that plane was sold and the CFII dropped out of aviation (mostly) before I bought my airplane. As of today I don't know of any women CFIIs locally at all.
Click to expand...

I don't think these issues are exclusively the territory of male/female relationships, not that they don't exist. I fly a lot of IFR, but I still like to do additional training, IPC's, etc. I get really frustrated with CFII's because they don't work me hard enough. They see that I am comfortable flying IFR and they tend to just sit back and enjoy the ride. My attitude is lets fly an approach in actual using only an altimeter and a compass just to see if we can do it. Let's fly one simulated engine out to the runway, etc.

I'm sure at every level we all need to just keep looking for the people that can help us get better.
 
When I did mine we shot an approach into every approached equipped airport in California from the Bay area to both borders including mountain flying in the Sierras, and did most all of them partial panel. We flew in all weather including picking up a bit of ice. Satan was my CFII and was brutal with me. I can count a minimum of three times since that it's saved my life.
 
Last edited:
I'm a female also. I don't think that's the issue at all. I think he wants to look good for his boss which is fine but I'm really capable and I know he knows that. I've heard from other students that I'm talked about for how well I fly ifr. My cfi doesn't say that to me but when he's silent for entire approaches I know things are going well. I don't really give a crap if I have a male or female cfi ill fly the same way regardless. I know I'll put my IFR ticket to good use once I get it because I'll need to time build a bui before my commercial can get done. I really think ill be a good ifr pilot from the experiences I've already had and the more learning I do. I just don't want to waste all this money to shoot the same ils approach every day. Can't even go to kiwa because their runway with the ils is closed for another 2 weeks.

I really do like my school and cfi. I just want to be more challenged and to do more new things. I don't feel like I'm in control of my training like I want to be. I've gotten used to calling the shots with my own airplane and I know he's not used to it.
 
you need a new instructor, s/he should be bald or white haired and deaf. S/he will not waste your time on too many gps and ils approcahes, and will spend a lot of time on partial panel. NDB approaches will be practiced not so much because they will be frequent needs, but because they make use of basic skills without buttonology distractions. S/He should go far out of their way to find real clouds for you to fly in. As you finish up your training s/he will set you up to ride shotgun with some local freight dogs to see how things work in the real world.
 
JHW said:
you need a new instructor, s/he should be bald or white haired and deaf. S/he will not waste your time on too many gps and ils approcahes, and will spend a lot of time on partial panel. NDB approaches will be practiced not so much because they will be frequent needs, but because they make use of basic skills without buttonology distractions. S/He should go far out of their way to find real clouds for you to fly in. As you finish up your training s/he will set you up to ride shotgun with some local freight dogs to see how things work in the real world.
Click to expand...


I have no ADF in my plane, so no NDB's. I should add that I do a lot of partial panel it certainly hasn't been left out at all. And most of the time when I'm partial panel my HSI is gone (worst thing for me) GPS is gone and I'm working with 1 VOR, an altimeter and an airspeed indicator. Yippie. I think those bases are covered well.

As I've mentioned previously I also flew with some other CFIIs while getting insurance qualified in my plane. One of them is a 15,000+ hour charter/bush/freight/everything pilot who has more real world experience in everything than everyone I've ever met combined. The other is a 7,000 freight dog who has been flying in the Midwest for 6000 of his hours in a 310 year round. He knows his stuff too and he's the one I did a bunch of IFR XC's with and he's the one that has given me confidence in my abilities to fly in IMC well.. and this was before I started official regimented training.

My mom was somewhere around 16,000+ hours when she quit flying and she partially agrees with me. She knows that I need to be worked hard and that I'm getting bored but I don't think she sees the whole picture of how I'm sort of stagnated at not fault of my own. She also really likes my flight school and she knows that they did a really great job of doing my primary training. She also knows that it's a regimented 141 school (even for their 61 students like I am) and that perhaps there are some real-world gaps in my training that have been filled by the other two CFI's I mentioned.

I feel like I should certainly defend my school because they have done a great job of everything for me. Their MXs are awesome, owners are great (mom & pop place), I enjoy being around all their CFIs and their other students but I just don't think they have a sense of reality in their instrument program. Likely because they just don't see the need there. When I started my PPL I made it clear I wanted to jump into my instrument rating and they thought I was crazy because it was so "unnecessary" and "not fun". Really I think that the instrument rating is a blast and IS necessary because I don't want to be limited to the sunny skies of AZ.
 
Z06_Mir said:
I feel like I should certainly defend my school because they have done a great job of everything for me.
Click to expand...
ok, but earlier you're complaining about high cost and lack of value provided. If the local ford dealer rips you off on a repair do you complain about it but then immediately recommend the same shop to your friends ?

go to the chalkboard and write this 10 times: "I am the customer. The CFI works for me."
 
JHW said:
ok, but earlier you're complaining about high cost and lack of value provided. If the local ford dealer rips you off on a repair do you complain about it but then immediately recommend the same shop to your friends ?

go to the chalkboard and write this 10 times: "I am the customer. The CFI works for me."
Click to expand...

I should have put everything else, not everything.

How can I stick up for myself then? It seriously took like 3 lessons to get him to let me us TWO COMM RADIOS at once. I'm not kidding.
 
I reccomend the Jesse Angell accelerated instrument course. I think I flew for 11 days (the plane kept breaking though so it took a lot longer than that)
 
Z06_Mir said:
I should have put everything else, not everything.

How can I stick up for myself then? It seriously took like 3 lessons to get him to let me us TWO COMM RADIOS at once. I'm not kidding.
Click to expand...
I don't get the "let me do" end of it.

You are the customer. You set the ground rules. If you have specific things in a lesson you want to accomplish then lay that out in the briefing before takeoff. If some piece of the puzzle is incompatible with your goals (aircraft, environment, or cfi) then replace that piece with another piece that fulfills your needs.

Not to read too much into it, but it sounds to me that perhaps instead of approaching each lesson with your own goals and requirements, you are waiting for the cfi to suggest what tasks to work on. That's fine for a relationship where you do not have the ability to hold up your end of the conversation (for example, arguing with your dentist) but that clearly isn't the case here. You know what you want, so go get it.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Is the ILS OTS as well? You can shoot an approach without landing...
Click to expand...

Yeah it's OTS too. Only approaches they'll let us do are 1 GPS approach and we have to go missed. Not to mention I hate KIWA anyway because their controllers treat us lil guys like they're a bravo when in reality they're a delta under a bravo just like every other airport in the Phoenix area.
 
Apologies to the OP for drift:

douglas393 said:
I personally think a disservice is done to PPL students by not having them fly at least once during training through a cloud. If you are not prepared for it, I can see how inadvertantly flying into a cloud can kill quickly.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with this statement. I don't think it healthy to scare the bejeezus out of the new PPL trainee. That's not the way to teach respect for VFR-IMC and will more than likely teach panic in preparation for real world or teach over confidence for the 10% that don't muck it up.
 
What I will comment on, is that after your rating and after you have had your couple of I-am-a-macho-pilot flights in hard IFR with a bit of ice, or turbulence that has the passenger barfing, you will spend the rest of your flying career working hard to avoid hard IFR.

Reality is, that for single pilot GA airplanes, real can't-see-the-prop IMC is best avoided and the rating used to get you off the ground up through a thin layer and on top in the bright sunshine, or to shoot the approach when it is just a bit scummy for VFR.
Safe flying is ALL about risk management. When the weather is 200 and a half, and the freezing level and the mountain tops are shaking hands, the best place to be is on the ground. The risk is simply not worth the reward.

You do not want to go into a cloud layer for the first time with only you at the controls. Get some actual IMC, even if you have to travel to some weather to get it, with an instructor or an experienced IFR pilot with you.

Now, once you have the rating you will find that your ability to use the airplane to travel has increased by ten fold. Just be smart and leave the hard IMC to the pros with pro equipment and two pilots.
 
Z06_Mir said:
The whole school is the same way. It's a great school and I do like it there. Just getting kind of bored shelling out this kind of money and never leaving the area except for the XC that's next weekend. And the number of approaches is definitely not an issue. I'm in a huge metropolitan area with like 7 airports a half hour flight or less away. I understand he wants me ready for a stage check that's on Friday with his boss, but I don't understand restricting our flights to primarily these 2 airports. He also has me to T&G's at the untowered field that has the ILS which I don't particularly like but that's for another thread.
Click to expand...

Perhaps he thinks the stage check will be flown using approaches at those two airports
 
Jaybird180 said:
I don't agree with this statement. I don't think it healthy to scare the bejeezus out of the new PPL trainee. That's not the way to teach respect for VFR-IMC and will more than likely teach panic in preparation for real world or teach over confidence for the 10% that don't muck it up.
Click to expand...

How is flying through a cloud scary if you have a CFI at the controls?
 
Dr. O said:
What I will comment on, is that after your rating and after you have had your couple of I-am-a-macho-pilot flights in hard IFR with a bit of ice, or turbulence that has the passenger barfing, you will spend the rest of your flying career working hard to avoid hard IFR.

Reality is, that for single pilot GA airplanes, real can't-see-the-prop IMC is best avoided and the rating used to get you off the ground up through a thin layer and on top in the bright sunshine, or to shoot the approach when it is just a bit scummy for VFR.
Safe flying is ALL about risk management. When the weather is 200 and a half, and the freezing level and the mountain tops are shaking hands, the best place to be is on the ground. The risk is simply not worth the reward.

You do not want to go into a cloud layer for the first time with only you at the controls. Get some actual IMC, even if you have to travel to some weather to get it, with an instructor or an experienced IFR pilot with you.

Now, once you have the rating you will find that your ability to use the airplane to travel has increased by ten fold. Just be smart and leave the hard IMC to the pros with pro equipment and two pilots.
Click to expand...

I couldn't disagree more. IMO there are two types of pilots, those that fly VFR and those that fly IFR. IF you are someone that flies IFR (not just having the rating) then you must embrace it. You have to take yourself to an operational level where shooting an approach to minimums is like waiting for the bus to come. Sooner or later you will also have to learn the capabilities of your aircraft in any weather situation (icing, turbulence, strong winds, etc), there really is no other way to develop judgement. Your passengers will see and appreciate this experience when it counts and you as a pilot owe any passenger the sharpest most comprehensive set of skills you can muster.

This isn't in any way macho, just prepared. Lack of this kind of experience is why we end up with so many VFR into IMC accidents, or improper IMC procedures accidents. Someone decides they don't want to do IFR flying, let their skills atrophy, and then one day when they're trying to go somewhere.... they get into it and tragedy sometimes follows.

Every real IFR day I hear low altitude alerts, course deviation alerts, navigation errors, etc. from GA aircraft. I don't want anyone here to be one of those guys.
 
In the way it was written, it was to be used as a deterrent for VFR-IMC. I think scenario based discussion (the way training is now on VFR-IMC) is better.

Now, if a newly gradulated PPL wants IMC time, I think it's a great idea.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top