It is fine to not plan to do an approach to minima (so called personal minima) but any IR pilot should be able to fly one safely.
I agree, but I set my personal minima much higher, and since I don’t fly IFR enough I see no reason why I should fly in weather that is below my minima. Since I am not interested much in going to places with the airplane where the weather is that bad I will hardly ever become proficient enough.
EDIT: Let me add two things. What does “should be able” exactly mean? I am very sure that a high percentage of pilots who did an IR rating sometime in the past don’t have enough experience or are not trained well enough to safely fly approaches in bad weather
And: Of course, if I was on an ILS in IMC I’d not go around at 1000 ft AGL. I’d fly it down close to the minimum. The “problem” is that i never get int hat situation and always break out at 700 or 800 feet because I don’t fly to places with bad weather.
I could also answer: “All kids should be good pupils” ;-)
I’ve done only a handful back when living in the SF Bay area. I would go out for a training flight on a foggy morning to maintain the FAA currency requirements and do approaches at Napa or Sonoma, then back to Oakland.
To me there is a psychological aspect to going around IMC at 200 ft AGL all by yourself. You just know that you do not want to screw up. I suppose that this goes away with experience. I was a rookie IR pilot back then.
Edit: typo corrected
The “against” argument is that since very few approaches are to minima (or anywhere near) you are greatly reducing safety on those flights.
Where is the loss in safety ?
I too like to fly the approach to minima every time I can. I think that the increased sensitivity of the ILS beyond the OM/4 NM final is the most challenging part of the procedure.
What does “should be able” exactly mean? I am very sure that a high percentage of pilots who did an IR rating sometime in the past don’t have enough experience or are not trained well enough to safely fly approaches in bad weather
You are undoubtedly right. Which means that while they may be technically legal to fly such approaches, in practice they are not instrument rated pilots and should not try to exercise the privileges (certainly on approach). That is also fine so long as they are aware of it. Sadly, some are not.
And should be able to fly means to fly an approach within limits to the IR test standard ie safely.
Well, i am aware of my limitations – and maybe I am also too conservative (which will probably not shorten the rest of my life) – but for myself I made the decision to excercise my privileges – down to my personal limits! What’s wrong with that?
One has to be glad that the national CAAs are not staffed by private pilots!
There would be an LPC every 6 months.
We would then be perfectly safe but nobody would be flying.
Nothing at all wrong with that as you are aware of your currency and adjust for it – apologies if it came across as a personal criticism. I worry about the pilots who aren’t self-aware and go out 11 months after a renewal in bad weather and can’t fly an approach. Actually I don’t worry for them, just their passengers and people on the ground.
It isn’t even really just an IR thing. The same thing happens with VFR pilots.
I think flying is one of those activities where we have a tremendous obligation to be honest with ourselves before and after a flight. We have a lot of freedom, usually we are the only ones in the aircraft who notice if we make a mistake.
Airways I agree with you. But to be honest since Ive been in Europe its hard to stay current and sharp. There are thousands of airfields. The trouble is they are just that, fields. Very few instrumented airports as a ratioto the total. Divide that number by 2 for the ones that a person flying a SEL or MEL piston can afford. So you see the practical use of the plane declines and so less chance of staying on top of ones game. Kinda like the guys who fly scarebus. They might have 10000 hrs of which 9500 are flown with the autopilot.
Good morning!
ILS approaches I would estimate maybe 5 out of 100 are down to minimum, some of them even to “mee ….. neeeeee …. mum”. Non precision (we fly to a lot of smaller airfields with GPS/RNAV approaches) are down to minimum up to 50 percent.
hmmm I’d probably guess around 5% as well.
