FLYER Club Member
[quote='Paul_Sengupta']I seem to recall I did 4 hours flying around in clouds for my pre-JAA PPL and it was reduced to 2 when the JARs were brought in.
[/quote]
usual dumbing down - other JAA countries didn't have much at all in ppl and didn't want to come up to UK standards - pre-warning us about their attitude to our IMC rating I suppose.
The test for this is a bit of a nonesense too - if pupil is trimmed already, has anyone yet been unable to do the 180 level turn required when expecting to have to do this? And of course, before someone says they teach all sorts of unusual attitudes in the PPL course (good!), some instructors teach to what the boss tests rather that what the student might need generally (bad!)
Tue Jul 15, 2008 8:19 am
#630882
Irv Lee - (R/T & Flight Examiner)
Deconfusion & Preflight Aide-Memoire: http://tinyurl.com/pilotpal
UK GA Twittering not Tw@ering: @irvleeuk
Deconfusion & Preflight Aide-Memoire: http://tinyurl.com/pilotpal
UK GA Twittering not Tw@ering: @irvleeuk
Fri Jul 25, 2008 10:18 pm
#635830
I don't often disagree with Timothy on instrument flying matters, but I hope I can do so this time, without vilifying him. I haven't been able to watch the video, but I have read Keith's account of what happened. Timothy said:
" I continue to move towards the view that a VFR only licence is a menace in the UK. It may be OK in France or Italy, but our changeable weather means that UK pilots should be able to deal with weather when they encounter it. "
Continued flight into IMC continues to figure in the fatal accident reports. But the number of such accidents is not high, and the accidents often have other factors associated with them which suggest that the flight was an accident waiting to happen anyway. There have been two such high-profile accidents recently. My guess is pilots such as these were heading for an accident, irrespective of instrument capabilities.
Many pilots are unwilling or unable to comit to a course of instrument training and the currency maintenance that goes with it. It would be a shame to deprive the thousands of VMC only pilots of their hobby based on the small numbers of accident flights.
My experience (based on time in the tower at Duxford talking to many pilots calling in to take a look at the weather), is that most VFR pilots are very cautious when considering the weather impact on their flight. A modest crosswind, vis a bit less than 10k, or few clouds below 1500 feet are all factors that deter many pilots from flying.
So my view is that instrument training beyond a few hours of instrument appreciation is not necessary for pilots who intend to fly day-VFR only.
Another way of avoiding weather-related incidents is to improve met understanding. The met content of the PPL course is pretty basic and not well applied to real-life decision making. Every VFR pilot could benefit from a more advanced or applied chunk of met training; maybe scenario-based and orientated towards how to take good decisions. Instrument flying tends to be very black and white, whereas VFR decisions are much greyer (no pun, sorry
) Weatherman and Irv's efforts here are really great, but only a few pilots take advantage.
Having said all this, I still believe that, for the go-places pilot, as opposed to the local bimbler, instrument training and instrument currency is hugely beneficial. The long legs of a go-places trip means variations and deteriorations in weather are more likely, as is the need to be home at a certain time.
Part of continuous learning is gently pushing the boundaries of your capabilities. You should do this in respect of weather as well as other factors, but only when you have an escape route.
I read Keith's account as several smallish mistakes which nearly had big consequences, and a huge learning opportunity for us all. Thanks for sharing it so openly and honestly.
Alan.
" I continue to move towards the view that a VFR only licence is a menace in the UK. It may be OK in France or Italy, but our changeable weather means that UK pilots should be able to deal with weather when they encounter it. "
Continued flight into IMC continues to figure in the fatal accident reports. But the number of such accidents is not high, and the accidents often have other factors associated with them which suggest that the flight was an accident waiting to happen anyway. There have been two such high-profile accidents recently. My guess is pilots such as these were heading for an accident, irrespective of instrument capabilities.
Many pilots are unwilling or unable to comit to a course of instrument training and the currency maintenance that goes with it. It would be a shame to deprive the thousands of VMC only pilots of their hobby based on the small numbers of accident flights.
My experience (based on time in the tower at Duxford talking to many pilots calling in to take a look at the weather), is that most VFR pilots are very cautious when considering the weather impact on their flight. A modest crosswind, vis a bit less than 10k, or few clouds below 1500 feet are all factors that deter many pilots from flying.
So my view is that instrument training beyond a few hours of instrument appreciation is not necessary for pilots who intend to fly day-VFR only.
Another way of avoiding weather-related incidents is to improve met understanding. The met content of the PPL course is pretty basic and not well applied to real-life decision making. Every VFR pilot could benefit from a more advanced or applied chunk of met training; maybe scenario-based and orientated towards how to take good decisions. Instrument flying tends to be very black and white, whereas VFR decisions are much greyer (no pun, sorry
) Weatherman and Irv's efforts here are really great, but only a few pilots take advantage.
Having said all this, I still believe that, for the go-places pilot, as opposed to the local bimbler, instrument training and instrument currency is hugely beneficial. The long legs of a go-places trip means variations and deteriorations in weather are more likely, as is the need to be home at a certain time.
Part of continuous learning is gently pushing the boundaries of your capabilities. You should do this in respect of weather as well as other factors, but only when you have an escape route.
I read Keith's account as several smallish mistakes which nearly had big consequences, and a huge learning opportunity for us all. Thanks for sharing it so openly and honestly.
Alan.
Sun Sep 07, 2008 9:28 pm
#652467
[. The RAF do it much better, with night, IMC and aerobatics built into the basic flying regime.
No doubt I will be villified as usual, but I will still say what I think.[/quote]
I think you are absolutely spot on. I'm a low hours ppl with a night rating, currently training for my IMC rating, and at least to me it really doesn't matter that my logbook has far more P/UT than P1 entries. I believe that my (limited) money will buy me far more experience training with a good instructor than any local solo flying I can do in an hour.
On that note - I have about 2k spare to burn a hole in the sky with - should I do a PPL plus course, spend it on local solo flying or do an aeros course instead??? Would appreciate your opinion... :?: :lol:
No doubt I will be villified as usual, but I will still say what I think.[/quote]
I think you are absolutely spot on. I'm a low hours ppl with a night rating, currently training for my IMC rating, and at least to me it really doesn't matter that my logbook has far more P/UT than P1 entries. I believe that my (limited) money will buy me far more experience training with a good instructor than any local solo flying I can do in an hour.
On that note - I have about 2k spare to burn a hole in the sky with - should I do a PPL plus course, spend it on local solo flying or do an aeros course instead??? Would appreciate your opinion... :?: :lol:
Mon Sep 08, 2008 8:45 am
#652588
[quote='Pilotstitch']On that note - I have about 2k spare to burn a hole in the sky with - should I do a PPL plus course, spend it on local solo flying or do an aeros course instead??? Would appreciate your opinion... :?: :lol:[/quote]
Buy a share.
Buy a share.
Mon Sep 08, 2008 11:25 am
#652677
This video appears to be private 