Prague & Erlangen - IFR EURO TOUR (and is an IR worth doing?)

Thanks for all the specific responses. I do think this discussion is finally getting to the real issue, which is what I was hoping when I admittedly hijacked @pilotrobbie’s very nice trip report (sorry!).

There are a few things I see pop up frequently on this forum:

1. IFR touring in Europe is difficult due to any one of a number of factors (IAP availability, unfriendly ATC/routing issues, weather, need for an airplane that is fast or FIKI or has 6 altimeters or whatever)
2. You need to be able to fly high to fly IFR in Europe
3. The IR is useless due to the above issues

The reality is there are specific locations where #1 and #2 above are true, and if you frequent one of those locations then your experience becomes tainted. Like “airport politics”, which is obviously a big issue in some locations but nonexistent elsewhere. But a large majority of Europe isn’t like this.

It’s one thing for us to discuss these challenges, but another when someone draws #3 as a conclusion. Having more people with IRs should definitely be a goal of the European GA community, and the primary reason people will want to do that is because they believe it brings some extra utility to their flying. Especially in northern Europe, having the ability to cut through a low cloud layer is very frequently the difference between making the trip and not. And I personally have no issue flying 2-3 hours straight in IMC, as I’ve had to do many times on long trips. So being able to get to VMC on top has never been a requirement for me to make a flight. I worry that we unnecessarily throw obstacles in our own path sometimes.

I would also point out that while GA is definitely simpler in many respects in the US, the ability to access so many interesting locations within range of a basic small aircraft makes IFR touring way more compelling here. There are also big parts of the country where people just don’t fly in winter or face the constant threat of thunderstorms. And in the vast majority of the US, every airport and city looks the same for hours in every direction. In any case I think we need to be encouraging people to 1) get their IR if they have the time and resources; and 2) plan trips and go fly places with it!

In any case I think we need to be encouraging people to 1) get their IR if they have the time and resources; and 2) plan trips and go fly places with it!

I fully agree, if DA40 does not fit their mission, they can get TBM, if TBM does not fit, they can get Learjet (“based on true story” )

I don’t think anybody said the IR is useless.

We have a “toolbox” and the IR is just another spanner. And a very good one. For the vast majority, this spanner is too expensive / too much hassle, which is also OK.

The others, they vary.

Few people write about their airfield politics because if they do, it comes back and bites them.

I agree with @dutch_flyer.

Peter wrote:

I don’t think anybody said the IR is useless.

Specifically in this thread, this is what tipped me off:

Jujupilote wrote:

My impression is without those (let’s say in a 172 with a family onboard, FL80-FL110 max), your dispatch rate would be much lower, and an IR much less useful.

I’ve seen similar comments in other threads.

Peter wrote:

We have a “toolbox” and the IR is just another spanner. And a very good one. For the vast majority, this spanner is too expensive / too much hassle, which is also OK.

Yes of course, and there’s nothing wrong with choosing to remain a VFR pilot. The problem is that it is a lot of work to get your IR, but the gain in capability and skill is undeniably huge. Further developing that skill into actual proficiency dramatically increases the safety and utility of flying, and more IR pilots helps improve the culture of GA in Europe. I like reading trip reports like this because @pilotrobbie really went for it and showed the capability of GA when you fill your toolbox with the right tools. People who haven’t yet taken the IR plunge can find plenty of obstacles in the cost, theory, and training, and we should be inspiring them to overcome these and pursue a worthy goal.

Few people write about their airfield politics because if they do, it comes back and bites them.

I won’t get too sucked into this hole, but really this is a nonissue for me personally. I have plenty of other frustrations, like bad project management and poor communication from maintenance shops, but politics isn’t one of my concerns. Obviously for you and for some others it is, but it’s definitely a localised phenomenon.

I would also point out that while GA is definitely simpler in many respects in the US, the ability to access so many interesting locations within range of a basic small aircraft makes IFR touring way more compelling here. There are also big parts of the country where people just don’t fly in winter or face the constant threat of thunderstorms. And in the vast majority of the US, every airport and city looks the same for hours in every direction.

Whatever part of the US you’re from sounds like a great place to be from, as they say

In any case I think we need to be encouraging people to 1) get their IR if they have the time and resources; and 2) plan trips and go fly places with it!

Awesome post @dutch_flyer and I fully agree.

With the BIR it has never been easier as well for europilots to get an IR.

Thank you to everyone who plugged in, especially Robbie and dutch_flyer.

Hard to reconcile all the posts above
From watching Robbie’s videos, most of his flights (except the 2 to EBKT) could have taken place VFR, maybe with less comfort or ease.
But his base is VFR only so maybe that explains why.

Indeed, the BIR/IR is a big investment and I wondering if it’s worth it.

I also guess long distance flights (like Peter trips or Robbie trips to Girona and Prague) are more weather sensitive than shorter ones.
My goal is just to visit family, friends or events (not job-related) within France. Anything farther would be the summer big trip.