Hm. There are enough VFR into IMC crashes to convince me that the IR isn't just about procedures, you do actually need to acquire the skill of instrument scan and general flying with your senses possibly screaming conflicting information at you.
Also from personal experience. When I used to fly IFR in the US, if I went with a substantial break in getting time in "actual" conditions, I would note that my instrument scan was the first thing to suffer, and quite often I'd end up turning too far, or inadvertently beginning climbs or descents. I've seen this plenty of times with pilots I've sat with as safety pilot, too - if they are rusty on basic flying by instruments, they will be sloppy.
We also know what happened to JFK Jr. who was flying a fairly slick plane in conditions that were legally VMC but functionally equivalent to IMC - he crashed out of control despite being three quarters of the way to finishing his IR because he wasn't flying on instruments and let it get out of shape. Also one of the few aircraft that have gone into the Irish Sea from the IOM, one notable one was a Beech Baron where he lost it on an instrument takeoff and hit the sea hard enough to smash the plane into a million pieces.
Sure, in certain aircraft it's not hard to fly instruments. Even so, I listened to an ATC recording a while back of a VFR Cessna 172 pilot who got into IMC and managed to exceed Vne (fortunately, the outcome was good and he did recover in the end and lived to tell the tale), and a C172 is about as easy as they come for instrument flying (slow and stable).
On the other hand, I think the screens that the CAA require(d) are dangerous and asinine. The US has shown over many years that instrument training with foggles or the Hoodlamb or a hood works fine and they don't dangerously obscure the view of your safety pilot.
This was about the exam, not the training, right? Of course one has to learn to fly by instruments but I think it is fairly easy to learn, a VFR pilot can learn it all by himself (not legal though). When I started my IR I was totally convinced that the hardest thing will be to fly the aircraft by instruments and in my whole VFR career I stayed away from clouds and would probably have panicked like all the other VFR in IMC pilots if I ever ended up in IMC. It's misinformation either by clueless CFIs (who in most cases do not have an IR in Europe) or the usual skygods that are convinced mere mortals cannot survive for long in IMC. The typical thing you see is that a VFR pilot enters IMC and then tries to descend to get to VMC and thereby collides with terrain. All because he thinks that leaving IMC is the top priority.
For the IR exam, IMC is not relevant IMO. You don't have much time to look outside anyway and you will have learned how to fly the aircraft more than 30 hours before taking the exam.
Flying an aircraft based on instruments is fairly trivial and I am convinced most of these VFR in IMC accidents happen because the poor VFR pilots get told by (non instrument rated) FIs and other pilots that they will die in IMC. If you know where the AI is and you have a bit of confidence, it's easy. I know VFR pilots that have more experience and routine in IMC than I do...
Hmmm........ Like this guy?
Or, for that matter, like JFK junior?
[URL fixed up - no need for /URL etc attributes - Peter]
I never said it's easy for somebody that has never practised it or is scared of it. I said it is fairly easy once you get comfortable with it. My feeling is that 80% of the accidents are because pilots panic and that is because everybody tells them they should panic. Self fulfilling prophecy.
Well, the other example I would quote is Albert Ball VC, arguably a better stick and rudder pilot than any of us, who died like this as well. Nobody told him to to panic: he just wasn't equipped, and didn't know how to deal with it.
The problem is a lack of training, and it is a huge argument for the IMC rating which is under threat from EASA or, even better, for a full IR.
IMHO the issue is not people being told to panic if they are threatened with IMC, but a system that doesn't encourage them to train for it properly.
Of course one has to learn to fly by instruments but I think it is fairly easy to learn, a VFR pilot can learn it all by himself (not legal though).
I hope VFR pilots reading this don't take this advice too serious... Flying in IMC without the proper training is a real risk.
Its true that it is not terrible hard to fly on instruments, but the problem starts when you need to multitask. ATC that gives you another frequency, you need to look at the map... That's when you get distracted and things get worse. It takes a lot of training to get used to this situation.
In the IFR system, one get separation and you have a controller who is watching over your back. If you just follow the procedures, you have guaranteed obstacle clearance all the time.
VFR there is none of this. That's why I do not enter clouds when flying VFR.
If you want to fly in IMC, get an IR...
+1
Yes, and for years they've been telling us that flying in IMC is so incredibly difficult and an IR is worth more than a PhD. In reality the actual IMC flying is easy to learn, doesn't need a lot of hours.
How is that Albert Ball reference helpful? He didn't have any instruments that would show him his orientation in space. How should he have done instrument flying? All you need is the right instruments, the knowledge that you have to resort to them when you lose your visual references and the confidence that you can do it. The actual flying is not difficult. I'm all for an easily accessible mini-IFR and I'm glad that it's coming very soon.
I hope VFR pilots reading this don't take this advice too serious... Flying in IMC without the proper training is a real risk.
I never claimed the opposite. However, every VFR pilot will at some point get near or in IMC unless he's a pattern flying CAVOK pilot. So better be prepared and I do know several VFR pilots that are very proficient in IMC, some are VIFR cowboys, others just want to be prepared for when it happens.
Its true that it is not terrible hard to fly on instruments, but the problem starts when you need to multitask. ATC that gives you another frequency, you need to look at the map... That's when you get distracted and things get worse. It takes a lot of training to get used to this situation.
If I get in IMC as a VFR pilot, I couldn't care less about about ATC, separation, frequencies, the map etc. All I need is to be prepared and handle the situation. IFR training is hard but the hard part is what you mentioned, not keeping the aircraft straight and level in a cloud.
A lot of VFR pilots get in IMC one day -- by accident. None of them should have to die because of that. They die because they have been told they are going to die and nobody has shown them how to not die. Although it is easy. That's my point.
Firstly I don't think anything is ever going to change, because in Europe there is only one initial IR test and it is the same one for PPLs as for CPLs, and the ATPL "doesn't really exist" because you are given one when you have logged 500hrs multi pilot...
In the USA, the ATPL involves an IR flying test to tighter tolerances.
It is important that we do not have a lower standard "private IR" test because it would enable some anally retarded aviation regulators to ban pilots with such an IR from their airspace. Whether this is a real risk, nobody knows, but IFR GA has loads of enemies everywhere.
VFR GA is safe because ATC needs only to say the magic phrase "remain outside controlled airspace" (in fact ATC doesn't have to say anything; without a clearance you cannot enter CAS anyway) and the problem is off their hands. This is why VFR GA has a relatively easy life in terms of FCL, with the LAPL and other stuff, which did not encounter significant political resistance. But anything in IFR GA is an uphill battle, all the way.
Secondly I think it is vital that people can fly by hand. You don't have to be great at it but you need to be OK, and after the IRT it is down to your currency on type anyway, which will be as good as you make it... till the revalidation a year later. Loads of people fly nice planes with autopilots, but they barely know how the stuff works, and with a bit of "finger trouble" or an autopilot failure you could so easily lose the plane...
I think VFR and IFR training should be rolled up into one qualification. Clouds are not going away anytime soon. Are air force pilots taught VFR only? The USA experimented successfully with a combined "PPL/IR" done fully dual (no solo) in about 50hrs TT. Obviously it would be sub-ICAO. But this won't happen either because a PPL would be 3x the cost and the private flight training industry would go bust.
