there are few "perfect training IFR" days that happen in this country where you have just the right ammount of weather, but not too much

Heh - you should try living in the lee of the Great Lakes! Lots of low cloud layers and crappy vis. This is actually a perfect place for IFR in light aircraft - very often there is a layer that you can top without oxygen or turbocharging. It's bright and painfully sunny up there above the puffy white clouds, and very often you can catch one heluva tailwind if you're going the right direction that day!

One just has to be respectful of icing, especially in light trainers. Even with a fancier airplane, you still want to spend minimal time in icing. With the C421B and all it's gizmos, I still refuse to intentionally flight plan through so-called "moderate" icing, which is anything but (Caraven drivers take note).

Trivia: if you fly fast enough, the skin friction will burn off the ice. Really. My father used to drive a T-33 all over Canada, like a pickup truck. No de-icing on it. He just kept the speed up over 300 knots. Probably not an option your trainer, though.

Heh - you should try living in the lee of the Great Lakes! Lots of low cloud layers and crappy vis. This is actually a perfect place for IFR in light aircraft - very often there is a layer that you can top without oxygen or turbocharging.

I guess we could strongly suggest to everyone that they should go to Ontario or the West Coast to train.

Here on the Praries you have one of the two extremes, phenomenally great weather (like today) or really terrible ass stuff. Fortunately its usually the nicer of the two. Bad weather means house wrecking CBs in the spring and summer, howling cold front activity in the fall and winter. An IFR rating isn't a ticket to fly through the former, and pure stupidity to take off or land into the latter. sometimes there's a small period of the type of weather you talk of that occurs in the fall, when the wind blows all the way here off Hudson's bay with but a few moose to block it. That ideal IFR, poor vis, nice and smooth, grounds all the VFR bug smashers that might get in your way.

WELL SAID!!!

I'm a bit late coming into this, but I have an issue with point 2 and point 4

Big Pistons Forever wrote: 2) IFR instructing's fetish with holds...

Although I agree that perhaps too much emphasis is put on holds in initial IFR training, in my experience working overseas, you have to be ready for anything anytime. This includes a hold at the last minute. All too often I've had to hold just prior to getting ready to commence an approach because some President wishes to depart and the whole airport is closed, or we're in a non-radar environment and several aircraft are arriving at the same time, and you had no prior warning to this prior to switching frequencies to the approach frequency. These holds are almost NEVER on the inbound track that you are currently on, and usually on the inbound track to the approach. This means having to use any of the three normal entries.

This being said, going around in circles endlessly is pointless. Getting the entry down pat, the basics on how to ensure you're on the protected side and as you said being able to foresee the need to hold and adjusting speed accordingly is where the emphasis should be placed.

4) The plate briefing as a "short story". There seems to be a propensity in FTU's' to have a huge elaborate protocol for plate briefings with arcane mnemonics and much ritual...

I think this depends on what the student plans to do with the MIRF. If going the commercial route, most operations do require quite an extensive approach briefing particularly in two crew. In my current operation, we fly the same approaches over and over, but our SOPs demand that we brief it in full each and every time. Using something like SALTS is not acceptable (Same As Last Time Stupid) IMO. In our SOPs we have a very detailed "story" to go through where we fill in the blanks. Like most operators we are required to go through this briefing verbatim. The sooner you can expose students to this requirement, the better IMO. It has the added benefit of getting someone ready for a two crew environment.


If I were to add something, I would add that flight schools should teach DME arcs more often. Although rarely used in N. America, overseas they are quite common. I'm not talking about spending hours practicing these time consuming maneuvers, but at least expose the student to what they are and the technique used to fly them.

Shiny Side Up wrote:

Bottom line there is a difference between knowing you can take the hood off if it all goes for sh*t, and knowing that you are in the goo for real.

Agreed. Now how do we turn that into a quantifiable training objective to measure that we've given it to someone?

Find a mentor.
I hinted on this earlier....
Keep your reg IFR instructor (poor bastards gatta eat
But find someone who'll just take you up right seat for some legs in a private corporate plane (multiple legs in a day). Even if you don't get to "fly" you can see the procedures.

Hedley,

Except it was May in S. Ontario and night. I'd rather be IMC than 1000' night VFR.

Sunny Side Up,

Actually I ended up renting a C310 with a real instructor and we did a real IFR cross country. I learned more in that flight than in 20 hrs of simulated IFR.

I even try to take PPL students IMC, just for the effect. Pretty soon they realize that if they ever go in cloud, they're toast in about 3 minutes. Simulated IFR (foggles, etc) is useless.

Punkstar..

I tried to take new pilots along on day trips when I was flying corporately. Big problem.
Not even one just went along for the ride. In a few cases I almost had to slap their hands to keep them off the controls. With a full plane of execs in the back I was asked to disengage the autopilot to give them some hands on flying...and, the straw that broke the camels back was when I got a call from an operator to confirm that a certain pilot had time on type...he had bloody logged the time..and multiplied it by 10.!!!

The lesson to be learned here is if you are going to ask to ride right seat on a corporate plane with one pilot..dont touch anything try to be helpful...last thing a pilot needs is when they are taking off and suddenly someone yells "airspeed alive"
Most pilots, myself included are prepared to let a right seat ride fly the plane if the circumstances allow it, and help with the checklists, radios etc.. but keeping to your word to just sit and watch initially is a very good idea , in my opinion.

Maybe if I hear good experiences from some of the corporate guys who occassionally take another stab at allowing this, I will try it again.

Bede,

To be fair, we do not normally train for IFR approaches. We do them when we need to, otherwise we burn all the fuel we can and recover VFR. Training is for the tactical portion of the flight. The rest (domestic part of the flight), you can pretty much count is the same as a an airplane going from A to B. If we only count the domestic part of the flight, the proportion are exactly the same as commercial operations I bet (95% "operational", 5% training).

There is nothing wrong (and it is actually efficient, in my mind) to be ready to fall back on a back up approach.

There is nothing wrong (and it is actually efficient, in my mind) to be ready to fall back on a back up approach.

True enough, but then some of us in the civilian world have to fly the back up approach rather than just reach down and defer to the backup approach we are strapped into,and just float down.
(Damned if I know how to put one of those silly little faces on here)

KK7 wrote:WELL SAID!!!

I'm a bit late coming into this, but I have an issue with point 2 and point 4

Big Pistons Forever wrote: 2) IFR instructing's fetish with holds...

Although I agree that perhaps too much emphasis is put on holds in initial IFR training, in my experience working overseas, you have to be ready for anything anytime. This includes a hold at the last minute. All too often I've had to hold just prior to getting ready to commence an approach because some President wishes to depart and the whole airport is closed, or we're in a non-radar environment and several aircraft are arriving at the same time, and you had no prior warning to this prior to switching frequencies to the approach frequency. These holds are almost NEVER on the inbound track that you are currently on, and usually on the inbound track to the approach. This means having to use any of the three normal entries.

This being said, going around in circles endlessly is pointless. Getting the entry down pat, the basics on how to ensure you're on the protected side and as you said being able to foresee the need to hold and adjusting speed accordingly is where the emphasis should be placed.

4) The plate briefing as a "short story". There seems to be a propensity in FTU's' to have a huge elaborate protocol for plate briefings with arcane mnemonics and much ritual...

I think this depends on what the student plans to do with the MIRF. If going the commercial route, most operations do require quite an extensive approach briefing particularly in two crew. In my current operation, we fly the same approaches over and over, but our SOPs demand that we brief it in full each and every time. Using something like SALTS is not acceptable (Same As Last Time Stupid) IMO. In our SOPs we have a very detailed "story" to go through where we fill in the blanks. Like most operators we are required to go through this briefing verbatim. The sooner you can expose students to this requirement, the better IMO. It has the added benefit of getting someone ready for a two crew environment.


If I were to add something, I would add that flight schools should teach DME arcs more often. Although rarely used in N. America, overseas they are quite common. I'm not talking about spending hours practicing these time consuming maneuvers, but at least expose the student to what they are and the technique used to fly them.

Agreed but you are talking about 2 crew ops in a more complex than Canadian ATC/ANS environment. Proper CRM means both guys have got to know what the plan is so a full brief is essential, especially in areas where weird stuff may come up. However with two guys and an autopilot it is a lot easier to manage the workload. What I was talking about was MEIFR training, which by definition is single pilot, in Canadian airspace and usually no autopilot. In these circumstances you have to manage the workload carefully and if you use up a lot of time briefing the nice to know stuff the must do stuff is probably not being looked after. But that is what the MEIFR rating is, for better or worse it requires you to demonstrate you can fly single pilot IFR. My beef is that requiring a long detailed brief reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of real world IFR in the single pilot environment. The only way schools can get away with big briefs is if the student memorizes all the data and has already practiced the approach 11 times....that is not preparation for using the rating in the real world

I have all ways thought that the MEIFR should be taught 2 crew from the beginning and the single pilot qualification would be an add on for those who need it, but since todays IFR ride is exactly the same as the one I took in 1987 despite all the changes in IFR equipement and procedures since the 1980's ....I am not holding my breath for
a change anytime soon.

Well you guys have been pretty nice to me so I have obviously not been provocative enough.......well I can fix that little problem I just need to break out the Tequila

Pet Peeves (continued)

8 ) MEIFR training in aircraft which do not have an operating 2 axis autopilot: Except for the simplest fixed gear singles, real world single pilot IFR without an autopilot is extremely foolish. But there is more to using an autopilot than turning it on. Understanding how the autopilot works what its annunciator panel is telling you and the SOP's that deal with how, why and when an autopilot should, and equally important when it should not be, used are basic IFR skills like all the other fundamental IFR skills. Students should be insisting that the MEIFR trainer has an autopilot and if not strongly consider taking their money elsewhere.

9) Takeoff briefing for twins used in training: I thing most T/O's briefing are mindlessly repeated without any thought about what criteria they are actually based on.
In particular you are in fantasy land if you think you have any possibility of flying away from a engine failure right after liftoff if the aircraft does not already have the gear and flaps up, a positive rate of climb established and the airspeed at or above blueline. After that you have some options as all you have to do in the event of an engine failure is pitch down, identify and verify the failed engine and then feather it. At this point it will either start climbing while maintaining airspeed.....or it won't.....in the latter case you have no choice but to close the throttle and take your lumps straight ahead.
Note nowhere in my description is the phrase "with insufficent runway I will".
In big airplanes life is simple; before V1 you stop , after V1 you go. There are no qualitative decisions required because the accident record amply demonstrated that when under the stress of a critical emergency demanding fast actions humans are not very good at making qualitative decisions. This has continued to be borne out by the number of accidents where the takeoff was rejected after V1 because the captain "thought" he had enough runway ahead to stop. The power of the concept of V1 is it allows a set of preprogrammed actions to take place without the requirement of analyzing a series of choices and then picking a course of action. So why don't we use the same concept for pilots which have vastly less experience than a big airplane driver ?

I believe the gear handle in single pilot ME operations should be treated the same as the V1 call. Assuming a flaps up takeoff (the norm for ME light aircraft training) when the aircraft has a positive rate of climb and is accelerating through blueline the pilot raises the gear. If the engine fails before the gear is raised both throttles are automatically closed, at the moment the gear is selected up the pilot makes the mental switch to the identify/verify/feather drill and will automatically continue the takeoff and after the engine is feathered confirm a positive rate of climb. No rate of climb again means closing both throttles. So in other words, just like like big airplanes it is a series of preprogrammed actions, but modified to meet the actual performance of a piston twin.

Well that should get the internet electrons humming

Hedley wrote:

I did all my IFR training VMC and VFR

Not good.

if the weather gets bad, we're cancelling IFR

Well ... actually ... in a little airplane, sometimes that's the best choice. With no de-icing capability, you can get into a world of trouble in cloud above the freezing level. Not the best choice in winter. It can be a LOT more safe to be underneath the cloud, if the ground is flat.

And in summer, in a little airplane, you simply can't top the wx, or at least get on top enough to see what's going on, and drive around them with a fast cruise speed. Many years ago I was IFR in an Apache in Florida, clouds bubbling up enthusiatically everywhere, and ATC wanted me to go someplace the the stormscope didn't like. Right about then, I flew over a beautiful hole. Cancel IFR, spiral down, scoot along the coast a couple miles and landed at Merritt Island to wait the Cbs out. Am I a pussy when it comes to messing with ice and Cbs in little airplanes? You betcha!

This is why I tell people, when they want to get their instrument rating, to first get some real world VFR x/c experience, because you had better be a good VFR pilot before you try flying IFR. You have to be flexible, and use whichever works in that situation (wx, airspace, etc).

Also there will probably be situations where you have to fly an approach into airport A then .. VFR underneath to airport B because airport B has minimums that are too high to get in on an approach some days.

Heck, it can even be as simple as CYND (Gatineau, QC) having an approach, and Rockliffe (CYRO) across the river not having one. You want to go to Rockliffe, you file IFR to Gatineau, carefully watching the METARs, and when you break out, cancel IFR and scoot VFR across the river to land at Rockliffe. Wx isn't good enough, you simply land at Gatineau and wait for it to improve long enough to take off and hop across the river VFR.

Doesn't even have to be that complicated. Night circling approach to minimums at an unfamiliar airport (shudder). Perfectly legal, and dangerous as hell. You're serenely driving along IFR and WHAM you're out of the muck, and you're all knees and elbows in the cockpit as you horse it around visually to hopefully put the airplane down on the right cluster of lights. Can get downright sporty. Is essentially legal VFR night .. running.

trey kule wrote:Punkstar..

I tried to take new pilots along on day trips when I was flying corporately. Big problem.
Not even one just went along for the ride. In a few cases I almost had to slap their hands to keep them off the controls. With a full plane of execs in the back I was asked to disengage the autopilot to give them some hands on flying...and, the straw that broke the camels back was when I got a call from an operator to confirm that a certain pilot had time on type...he had bloody logged the time..and multiplied it by 10.!!!

The lesson to be learned here is if you are going to ask to ride right seat on a corporate plane with one pilot..dont touch anything try to be helpful...last thing a pilot needs is when they are taking off and suddenly someone yells "airspeed alive"
Most pilots, myself included are prepared to let a right seat ride fly the plane if the circumstances allow it, and help with the checklists, radios etc.. but keeping to your word to just sit and watch initially is a very good idea , in my opinion.

Maybe if I hear good experiences from some of the corporate guys who occassionally take another stab at allowing this, I will try it again.

"Air Speed Alive!"... classic!
haha

You know - I would have welcome some of those right seat passengers to work to radio for example... but I quickly learned that round robins and flyin' the pattern left them ill prepared to call up delivery and get our clearance. So the workload stayed the same. Luckily I never had a problem in that respect. I ended up having some company up front, they probably picked up something new - and who knows - maybe some day in the future they can pay it forward (or back

Big Pistons Forever wrote:Well you guys have been pretty nice to me so I have obviously not been provocative enough.......well I can fix that little problem I just need to break out the Tequila

Pet Peeves (continued)

8 ) MEIFR training in aircraft which do not have an operating 2 axis autopilot: Except for the simplest fixed gear singles, real world single pilot IFR without an autopilot is extremely foolish. But there is more to using an autopilot than turning it on. Understanding how the autopilot works what its annunciator panel is telling you and the SOP's that deal with how, why and when an autopilot should, and equally important when it should not be, used are basic IFR skills like all the other fundamental IFR skills. Students should be insisting that the MEIFR trainer has an autopilot and if not strongly consider taking their money elsewhere.

Roger that!

I know I have said to myself in the past "Hey - what the hell is the AP doing now?!"... Almost always because I programed something wrong (only once was it an AP problem itself). I don't mind admitting - that sometimes the AP flies smoother than I straight and level. A critical tool that every SPIFR pilot needs to have and know how to use well.

But let's face it - they still need to know how to hand fly it. A while ago I was flying a 182 with a G1000 shuttling someone around (while we were waiting for the purchase of the new company plane). Had a AHRS failure in IMC. No autopilot and a lot of red Xs. Hand to handfly on backup for over an hour. My love affair for the AP blossomed after that day.

PunkStarStudios wrote:

Big Pistons Forever wrote:


But let's face it - they still need to know how to hand fly it. A while ago I was flying a 182 with a G1000 shuttling someone around (while we were waiting for the purchase of the new company plane). Had a AHRS failure in IMC. No autopilot and a lot of red Xs. Hand to handfly on backup for over an hour. My love affair for the AP blossomed after that day.

Absolutely, you have to have (and practice) the hand flying skills to be a competant pilot. One skill that gets short thrift is being able to make a smooth transistion from autopilot on to hand flying, that is why autopilot training and SOP's are important. In any flight there will be optimum times to revert to hand flying and other times when turning off the autopilot would be a bad idea. Most pilots get to figure this out by trial and error.......too bad it is almost never taught.

You really earn your pay when you're flying an AP that has the thresholds slightly off - like when you command a pitch up it pitches down for a moment before going up. Love that. Or the only way to level it off is to "forcefully" command level from pitch up. Knowing those short comings blending hand flying and AP becomes art.

Pet peeves (continued)

10) FTU's make a meal out the dreaded "Comm failure". Yes you have to know the procedures but it seems to me the first reaction to a comm failure on a training flight is usually a big complicated recital of altitudes to be flown, routes taken, holding procedures at clearance limit , EFC EAP times blah blah blah. In the real world, there is almost always no immediate safety of flight as for the majority of the flight you will droning along in cruise at an already cleared altitude and route so the first priority is getting the comms back and the most likely cause is you have inadvertently selected the wrong radio on the audio panel or turned down the radio volume. The best way to do a quick check is to disable the squelch while adjusting the volume. If it is quiet but the background hissing becomes audible as you turn the volume knob up then give yourself a slap upside the head and do a radio check with ATC....and you might as well confess to finger trouble....that way ATC gets to feel superior and probably won't CADOR your ass

No hissing at any volume with the squelch off and yup you do have a problem. At this stage I would ask myself if this the first indication of a bigger electrical/avionics problem and have a quick look at the electrical system gauges/indicators. Assuming all is electrically well then the obvious second step is try radio number two, and look for the transmit light. Still no joy then I would suspect a bad PTT or mike, so try the hand mike ( you do know where it is and how to plug it in right ?). Still no luck then your perfect day of flying is in danger of becoming less fun. Time to go to plan B. Squawk 7600 and get your cell phone out. Since you have all the center direct dial phone numbers in your cell phone address book it is easy to give them a ring and check in. When you phone you want to have a plan already worked out that will include your route and altitudes and what approach you are going to fly. Tell them to text you if they want to change the plan and set your phone to vibrate.

In the unlikely event you can't get ATC on the phone then and only then should you roll out the full meal deal TC approved lost comm procedure

Big Pistons Forever wrote:

PunkStarStudios wrote:

Big Pistons Forever wrote:


But let's face it - they still need to know how to hand fly it. A while ago I was flying a 182 with a G1000 shuttling someone around (while we were waiting for the purchase of the new company plane). Had a AHRS failure in IMC. No autopilot and a lot of red Xs. Hand to handfly on backup for over an hour. My love affair for the AP blossomed after that day.

Absolutely, you have to have (and practice) the hand flying skills to be a competant pilot. One skill that gets short thrift is being able to make a smooth transistion from autopilot on to hand flying, that is why autopilot training and SOP's are important. In any flight there will be optimum times to revert to hand flying and other times when turning off the autopilot would be a bad idea. Most pilots get to figure this out by trial and error.......too bad it is almost never taught.

Absolutely this. Did my IFR renew recently, and had a few hours in the alsim beforehand to practice. I'd never flown a plane with a functioning auto pilot before so we went over how to use it and disengaging at first sign of engine failure etc. I was amazed at how simple life was having the plane fly for me so I could brief approaches, holds, set radios etc.

It really took me by surprise how easy it is to fall into the complacency trap. knowing full well all about auto pilots and the need to keep on top of things it was much more difficult than I realized. A couple times in an engine failure I had to disengage and really yank the controls to keep the plane where I wanted. making that transition can be very dificult and I was not very comfortable doing it on a fight test with only a handful of practice runs.

Honestly it was almost a blessing when he failed the AP on my for my non-precision. I would not be very comfortable flying SPIFR without first being very familiar with that transition and every detail of the AP.