Is this normal?

[Z06_Mir]

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.

I think I had a whopping 5 hours post PPL before the guy checking me out in my plane had me fly into IMC. My first instinct was to turn around but he said just keep going the layer is thin. After about 5 seconds I got my bearings and climbed out of it.

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.

I don't think anyone plans on getting iced up or going down to 100 and 1/4 in severe turbulence and freezing rain. But I would like to go over to California and not worry about getting home for a week because a layer won't lift. I won't be flying IMC when there are icing levels at the mountain tops. One of the trips I am going to make this year is a ski trip, but it most certainly won't be flown in IMC even if I do file and go IFR. No way. I don't have a death wish. Someday I do want an airplane with FIKI that's pressurized, turbine and capable of going into the flight levels so I can make some regular trips shorter. But as it stands I'm still a <200 hour private pilot. I live in Phoenix and I'll primarily be flying within a 500 mile radius except maybe a couple times a year. I've flown my butt off this year (180ish hours) and with the instrument rating I hope to increase my flying.

 

[tmyers]

If I knew that my instructor had only a few hours of flight in IMC, then I wouldn't even ask him to take me up in actual. Not to be dramatic but instrument flight is the real deal and if you screw the pooch someone else is getting to enjoy your insurance money.

 

[Jaybird180]

If I knew that my instructor had only a few hours of flight in IMC, then I wouldn't even ask him to take me up in actual teach me instrument flying. Not to be dramatic but instrument flight is the real deal and if you screw the pooch someone else is getting to enjoy your insurance money.

Thank me later

 

[tmyers]

I concur with the re-write.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Apologies to the OP for drift:

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.

Vehemently disagree. What you get from PPL hood training is just enough confidence to think you can get out of it if you get into it. But, when you get actual IMC instead of being under the hood, you no longer have the external cues from the spots that aren't blocked by the hood, shadows from the sun, etc and it is MUCH more disorienting.

You shouldn't "scare the bejeezus" out of a "new" PPL trainee, but IMO every student pilot should get some actual before their checkride. And yes, they should be a little scared. Actual IMC encounters are frequently fatal, and it's one of the biggest accident categories there is.

As I mentioned recently, I participated in a study whose purpose was to determine whether the current PP training was sufficient in terms of instrument skills and how to fix the problem of VFR into IMC accidents. It placed the pilot in a get-there-itis type scenario in marginal VFR weather. *EVERY SINGLE ONE* of the rated private pilots who hadn't gotten an instrument rating crashed. So, clearly the current training is inadequate. We need to do more, and part of that is to give student pilots a much healthier respect for weather.

 

[tmyers]

My CFI for my primary training found some clouds on a VFR day and air filed with ATC. He had me fly into and out of the clouds and then had me look down while he put me in a cloud and had me fly out of it.

On a night flight less than six months later I flew into the bottom of the overcast. Even with the limited exposure he had given me to actual, I very calmly reduced power and descended out of the overcast in complete control. I did not panic but that was because I knew if I stayed calm I could get out of it just fine.

 

[Alexb2000]

My CFI for my primary training found some clouds on a VFR day and air filed with ATC. He had me fly into and out of the clouds and then had me look down while he put me in a cloud and had me fly out of it.

On a night flight less than six months later I flew into the bottom of the overcast. Even with the limited exposure he had given me to actual, I very calmly reduced power and descended out of the overcast in complete control. I did not panic but that was because I knew if I stayed calm I could get out of it just fine.

Perfect example of the importance of actual. Well done.

Sadly others perish in these exact situations all the time (VFR into IMC). This and fuel starvation are the two things that should be exceedingly rare, but are not.

 

[wabower]

Depending on the view-limiting device used for IR training, actual IFR can be a piece of cake and a huge relief to a trainee who has been dreading the "up there flying around in real clouds" that is sometimes mentioned in hushed tones as though special powers must be invoked to survive.

Being rid of the blinders and having normal peripheral vision for gages and stuff that requires more neck bending than should be necessary when hooded is a wonderful change for the better. I still remember thinking how easy actual IFR turned out to be with normal range of vision. IMO students who don't get a good dose of actual are being cheated out of a great learning and confidence-building opportunity.

 

[azure]

Being rid of the blinders and having normal peripheral vision for gages and stuff that requires more neck bending than should be necessary when hooded is a wonderful change for the better. I still remember thinking how easy actual IFR turned out to be with normal range of vision. IMO students who don't get a good dose of actual are being cheated out of a great learning and confidence-building opportunity.

I absolutely HATED the Francis hood for this reason, and had one session of utter torture trying to wear foggles over the granny glasses I usually wear in the plane. The Francis did a better job of restricting my peripheral vision than foggles, but no matter what I used I had to move my head constantly to keep the entire panel in my scan. The ASA Jiffy hood I'm using now seems to allow better peripheral vision for the gauges, but the price for that is it doesn't completely block the view out the side window. And taking any of them off to go visual is a real pain, and IMO potentially unsafe if the VLD is worn under the headset (and I haven't found any other way that works with either the Francis or the ASA) and only way is to prop the thing up on the head, where it can get caught on the Rosen visor.

But yes, 100% agree, actual is much more pleasant. It's still disorienting of course, but being free of the distracting piece of plastic on my head was sheer HEAVEN, and having the full range of peripheral vision for my scan was a liberating experience. Can't wait to do it on my own -- on a carefully chosen day, of course.

 

[Jaybird180]

Vehemently disagree. What you get from PPL hood training is just enough confidence to think you can get out of it if you get into it. But, when you get actual IMC instead of being under the hood, you no longer have the external cues from the spots that aren't blocked by the hood, shadows from the sun, etc and it is MUCH more disorienting.

You shouldn't "scare the bejeezus" out of a "new" PPL trainee, but IMO every student pilot should get some actual before their checkride. And yes, they should be a little scared. Actual IMC encounters are frequently fatal, and it's one of the biggest accident categories there is.

As I mentioned recently, I participated in a study whose purpose was to determine whether the current PP training was sufficient in terms of instrument skills and how to fix the problem of VFR into IMC accidents. It placed the pilot in a get-there-itis type scenario in marginal VFR weather. *EVERY SINGLE ONE* of the rated private pilots who hadn't gotten an instrument rating crashed. So, clearly the current training is inadequate. We need to do more, and part of that is to give student pilots a much healthier respect for weather.

I respect the fact that you have experience with your study but there is no way that you can have comprehensive knowledge enough to say FREQUENTLY. You only hear about the ones that turn bad, never the ones where the pilot in Class G gets himself out of the situation.

 

[douglas393]

Apologies to the OP for drift:



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.

I understand where you are coming from, but I would hope that the CFI would hopefully prepare the student prior to entering IMC enough so that it does not scare the Beejeezus out of the student. In some ways is it any different that demonstrating stalls. Personally, the important part of learning to fly is being prepared, and I can tell you that prior to doing IFR training if I had inadvertantly entered a cloud, which can happen without you realizing it, I may have became disoriented prior to getting the plane under control. I felt very comfortable with my hood training during PPL, but the way the body senses true IMC versus simulated IMC is two completely different things.

I agree that there are risks either way, but from my experience it is usually the knowledge of the ignorant that is more dangerous, than the knowledge of the slightly experienced. In other words it is better to know what you do not know, then to think that you know it.

Doug

 

[azure]

I understand where you are coming from, but I would hope that the CFI would hopefully prepare the student prior to entering IMC enough so that it does not scare the Beejeezus out of the student. In some ways is it any different that demonstrating stalls. Personally, the important part of learning to fly is being prepared, and I can tell you that prior to doing IFR training if I had inadvertantly entered a cloud, which can happen without you realizing it, I may have became disoriented prior to getting the plane under control. I felt very comfortable with my hood training during PPL, but the way the body senses true IMC versus simulated IMC is two completely different things.

I think a LOT of what happens when VFR into IMC incidents turn out bad is because of the tendency to panic when you're somewhere you know you don't have the training to be, and aren't there legally. Panic => impaired reactions, impaired ability to execute a plan, impaired everything. When I blundered into a cloud bank while VFR a few years ago, I managed to do pretty much what tmeyers wrote, reduced power and descended out of it, without losing my grip.

In 20/20 hindsight I was lucky, and pretty stupid for trying that trip.

I also had enough instrument experience to know that if I did what I knew how to do, I would survive as long as I didn't hit a tower or another aircraft. I was shaking in my shoes when I climbed out of the plane, but I never lost it in the air.

I would much rather see CFIs give their private students enough instrument training that they can confidently get themselves out of situations like that. There are also lots of places and times where you need to fly instruments or not fly at all, even though it's perfectly legal to be VFR. I even think recurrent hoodwork for PPLs is a good idea since those skills tend to decay pretty quickly. I'm not worried about people having so much false confidence that they up and take off into the clouds by themselves (or worse, with passengers) -- anyone who would do that without getting an IFR clearance shouldn't even be a pilot.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I absolutely HATED the Francis hood for this reason, and had one session of utter torture trying to wear foggles over the granny glasses I usually wear in the plane. The Francis did a better job of restricting my peripheral vision than foggles, but no matter what I used I had to move my head constantly to keep the entire panel in my scan.

The Francis hood is the only one that doesn't allow you to see anything outside the plane. Unfortunately, it requires a meeting with a Dremel tool to be able to see what you need to see *inside* the airplane without getting a neck-ache!

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I respect the fact that you have experience with your study but there is no way that you can have comprehensive knowledge enough to say FREQUENTLY. You only hear about the ones that turn bad, never the ones where the pilot in Class G gets himself out of the situation.

By "frequently" I mean there are many of them on an ongoing basis. I'm not talking percentages, I'm talking airplanes falling out of the sky. It's one of the biggest accident categories there is. Sure, some people get out of it. But, many don't.

 

[douglas393]

I think a LOT of what happens when VFR into IMC incidents turn out bad is because of the tendency to panic when you're somewhere you know you don't have the training to be, and aren't there legally. Panic => impaired reactions, impaired ability to execute a plan, impaired everything. When I blundered into a cloud bank while VFR a few years ago, I managed to do pretty much what tmeyers wrote, reduced power and descended out of it, without losing my grip.

In 20/20 hindsight I was lucky, and pretty stupid for trying that trip.

I also had enough instrument experience to know that if I did what I knew how to do, I would survive as long as I didn't hit a tower or another aircraft. I was shaking in my shoes when I climbed out of the plane, but I never lost it in the air.

I would much rather see CFIs give their private students enough instrument training that they can confidently get themselves out of situations like that. There are also lots of places and times where you need to fly instruments or not fly at all, even though it's perfectly legal to be VFR. I even think recurrent hoodwork for PPLs is a good idea since those skills tend to decay pretty quickly. I'm not worried about people having so much false confidence that they up and take off into the clouds by themselves (or worse, with passengers) -- anyone who would do that without getting an IFR clearance shouldn't even be a pilot.

I think you and I are saying the same thing.

 

[DrMack]

Transportation or thrill? Flying in most IMC is a non-event if the pilot is prepared for it. By that I mean IFR. Even instrument rated pilots who VFR into IMC fare badly. When IFR, I find myself naturally flying way ahead of the airplane. Sure, it's extremely regimented and some argue that it spoils many of the joys of the free flight experience but flying for my family is the enabler of a lifestyle that few in the world can enjoy, i.e, for us it is primarily a mode of transportation. So the fact that IFR flying is so minutely choreographed is fine with me and I find it to be the best way to manage the high risk inherent in the act of hurling ourselves into the atmosphere in our flying contraptions. That is why, even in CAVU, I always, always, always fly IFR. It keeps me comfortably proficient and when I do fly in IMC, the encounter is on my terms and when the surprises do occur, and they will, I am better prepared to deal with them.

We try to simulate IMC as well as technology allows but there really is no substitute for the real deal. The best thing we can do is prepare for it with practice, practice, practice. Master BAI, perfect the detailed mechanics of procedure execution to the point of excruciating ennui, and then become a permanent and familiar denizen of the IFR system in which you may rightfully enjoy the privilege of joining the grandest dance on Earth from every point A to every point B that you are want to traverse in your own private flying machine.

 

[nosehair]

Even with the limited exposure he had given me to actual, I very calmly reduced power and descended out of the overcast in complete control. I did not panic but that was because I knew if I stayed calm I could get out of it just fine.

This. Panic.
Doesn't matter how many times you have "simulated" an event, when the real thing happens, it may cause a total temporary block of all skills you may think you have developed. Training without the sudden rush of adrenaline, you don't know what you will do.

Entering actual clouds is akin to the first deep stall, or spin. Some folks take right to it, and others will freeze up. You don't know who you are, until you do it.