Aviathor wrote:
I think doing this under VFR is setting a really bad example for the student by an authority figure. And it is of course completely illegal.
It might be that the particular exercise that MedEwok did was illegal, but in principle nothing prevents you from “self-declaring” IFR in class G airspace.
Completely against all rules for all PPL/VFR flight training, that’s my opinion.
Of course this can be done properly (with an IFR flight plan and by an IFR instructor), and then it can make a lot of sense.
Not long ago i heard, from a friend, about an IR instructor who takes his students into “small” (!) thunderstorms and icing confitions, because “they have to get used to it”. Disgusting and completely stupid.
In my opinion, even if it is against the rules, the benefits really outweigh the harm by a large margin. It’s an extremely valuable exercise preventing a young pilot from panicking and losing orientation in the event of accidental flight into IMC. Obviously, this should be done reasonably and responsibly. My first instructor, a former military pilot, made me do it even before my first solo. It was a bright summer day with small white cumulus clouds here and there, we were doing upper air work, orbiting left and right at 30° and 45° bank, and then he said: “And now fly into that cloud and repeat the same exercise by instruments. Watch your altitude. If anything happens, I’ll take over”.
dylan_22, several countries dictate IMC / Simulated IMC training. And many airspaces don’t require a flight plan to fly IFR. Also, don’t see why a regular instructor qualified to fly (not instructor) in IMC wouldn’t be able to demonstrate these things safely.
(doing IMC in a plane not restricted for VFR only operations is obviously illegal and likely stupid)
And how has this helped you in contrast to my students leaning basic instrument flying under the hood?
Airborne_Again wrote:
… but in principle nothing prevents you from “self-declaring” IFR in class G airspace.
As MedEwok is training in Germany, the German legal situation would prevent one from doing so.
At our FTO we do the basic instrument training required in the PPL syllabus in the procedure trainer. It will not provide you with the actual sensation of flying inside clouds but it can teach you to fly the aircraft on instruments alone (which no IFR hood really can as it allows enough peripherial vision to fly with visual references).
what_next wrote:
As MedEwok is training in Germany, the German legal situation would prevent one from doing so.
What exactly is the legal situation in Germany regarding IFR in class G? I.e. what measures have been put in place to prevent it when it is explicitly permitted by SERA, which is binding for Germany. I recall reading discussions about raising the minimum IFR height to make IFR in class G impossible. Or has Germany invoked the emergency clause in the Basic Regulation?
No. There merely is a circular out from the German ministry of transport which says that IFR in class Golf is not allowed outside of published IFR procedures. Austria has the same thing.
The way it has been written, that circular is clearly illegal.
ATC here also won’t issue clearances to climb into or descend out of controlled airspace. This, i.e. the definition of minimum altitudes for IFR, is allowed by SERA. A complicated subject…
It’s about shifting responisibilities.
boscomantico wrote:
…that circular is clearly illegal.
I guess I you ask for ten opinions you will get ten different answers. Law is not an exact science. Anyway, now matter how that national exception from SERA rules is currently phrased, the intention is clear. Our rule-/lawmakers don’t want to allow IFR flying in airspace G. As an instructor one should stick to rules and not to opinions expressed on the “Pilot und Flugzeug” Forum.
please delete
