Still confused with the new instruments renewal requirements

[AuxBatOn]

I think it would be impossible to look outside of the front window of an aircraft in VMC and not subconsciously mentally integrate the sight picture one is presented with, with the information from the instruments - and thereby no longer be flying only by reference to the instruments. At least, I am not Zen-master enough both to see the horizon and not see the horizon at the same time.

I do it all the time. Looking out for traffic but inside for flying. In fact, by not looking outside the majority of the time, my brain likely has no idea what a proper outside attitude for straight and level flight is in the current conditions. I use solely the AI to maintain a proper attitude that will result in desired performance.

The flight test guide for instrument rating flight tests (which is adopted for IPCs) requires the candidate to provide a "view-limiting device" as a prerequisite for entry to the test.

Not quite true. The Instrument Rating Flight Test Guide says the following:

An Instrument Proficiency Check (IPC) is to be conducted in accordance with Advisory Circular (AC) 401-004 - Second Edition

There is no mention of the vision limiting device in the aforementionned AC with regards to the conduct of the test itself (although it is mentionned for proficiency flights in preparation for the IPC

[B208]

From the IFR flt test guide.

Other Equipment

The candidate will supply the following publications and ancillary equipment:

Where the test is conducted in an aircraft, an effective means of excluding outside visual reference to simulate instrument flight conditions, while maintaining a safe level of visibility for the examiner or safety pilot.

[CpnCrunch]

From the IFR flt test guide.

Other Equipment

The candidate will supply the following publications and ancillary equipment:

Where the test is conducted in an aircraft, an effective means of excluding outside visual reference to simulate instrument flight conditions, while maintaining a safe level of visibility for the examiner or safety pilot.

It says you have to have it, but not that you need to actually use it. The CPL flight test guide does say "Items 24A, B, C and D will require the candidate to wear a suitable view-limiting device."

[AuxBatOn]

From the IFR flt test guide.

Other Equipment

The candidate will supply the following publications and ancillary equipment:

Where the test is conducted in an aircraft, an effective means of excluding outside visual reference to simulate instrument flight conditions, while maintaining a safe level of visibility for the examiner or safety pilot.

The IPC is to be conducted IAW the mentionned AC, not the IR Flight Test Guie.

[B208]

Are you guys lawyers or pilots? The purpose of an IPC or an IFR flight test is to determine whether or not a candidate can fly without outside references. It stands to reason that some method of denying the candidate said references will be used, be that actual IMC conditions, a hood, or setting the wx conditions to IMC in an simulator. Expecting to be able to look out the window while having your ability to fly IFR assessed is not reasonable.

[CpnCrunch]

It stands to reason that some method of denying the candidate said references will be used, be that actual IMC conditions, a hood, or setting the wx conditions to IMC in an simulator.

No, it doesn't. I did my initial test with no view limiting device in VMC. You can fly in VMC solely with reference to the instruments, which is what I did.

Expecting to be able to look out the window while having your ability to fly IFR assessed is not reasonable.

You're confused. Just because you're not using a view limiting device doesn't mean you're going to be looking out the window. My examiner said I could fly without a hood if I didn't look out the window, and I said that was ok.

[B208]

No, it doesn't. I did my initial test with no view limiting device in VMC. You can fly in VMC solely with reference to the instruments, which is what I did.

Your examiner that day was Santa Clausesque. The examiner is not obligated to let you fly it that way

Expecting to be able to look out the window while having your ability to fly IFR assessed is not reasonable.

You're confused. Just because you're not using a view limiting device doesn't mean you're going to be looking out the window. My examiner said I could fly without a hood if I didn't look out the window, and I said that was ok.

No confusion at all. If your examiner wants to trust that you won't look out the window that is their business. If the examiner wants to put you under the hood to ensure that you don't look out the window that is also their choice. You would wise to be ready for either. I would submit that flying without outside visual references is a much better assessment of your IFR skills than flying with them available.

[CpnCrunch]

Your examiner that day was Santa Clausesque. The examiner is not obligated to let you fly it that way

Do you have a reference for that?

If the examiner wants to put you under the hood to ensure that you don't look out the window that is also their choice. You would wise to be ready for either.

I was, of course. It would be very unwise not to be.

I would submit that flying without outside visual references is a much better assessment of your IFR skills than flying with them available.

In my experience, there isn't really much difference flying a late model 172 with foggles vs just looking at the instruments without any view limiting device. With both of them you see only the instruments and the ground out the side windows. Foggles and hoods are a pretty poor substitute for actual IMC.

[C.W.E.]

Two stage amber is the answer it allows you normal vision inside the airplane with zero outside vision.

[Zaibatsu]

It's overkill.

If you're looking outside, you're just cheating yourself.

If you're doing something like a partial panel unusual attitude recovery, it's going to be really obvious to a good instructor if you aren't doing the correct actions in the correct order referencing the correct instruments.

[B208]

Two stage amber is the answer it allows you normal vision inside the airplane with zero outside vision.

Bingo

[C.W.E.]

It's overkill.

What is overkill?

Can you elaborate on what you are referring to?

[C.W.E.]

Of all the subjects we discuss here I consider flight instruction the most important because good instruction techniques will make for better results than poor techniques, which will result in overall better piloting skills in the flying industry.

The subject of teaching flight by reference only to flight instruments is a prime example and I really do not understand why any instructor would choose having the student wear a hood or foggles to simulate zero outside visual clues.

To the best of my recall there are only two ways to properly remove any outside visual clues when training, first is teaching in IMC conditions and second is using two stage amber to prevent the student from getting any outside visual clues.

Having them wear a hood or foggles is lazy teaching because these devices are unorthodox and interfere with the normal visual field of the student.

Flight by reference to instruments only is a normal part of commercial flying and thus the skill should be taught properly from the start.

One of the most difficult take off's and climb outs I ever encountered was on a perfectly clear sunny day with no wind and I was thankful that I was able to do it by reference to instruments only without having a serious or fatal crash.

How many instructors teach take off's and landings without any outside visual clues?