[joe-fbs]

I have had an IR(R) for six years and don't use it a lot as it is boring for passengers and I rarely fly alone. Last week, I did make full use of it so maybe this story will help. BTW, helpful comments from the more experienced would be welcomed. ("Get a full IR" or "Stay below low level cloud" are not want I want to hear )

So, I was at Doncaster visiting family using a rented PA28-181. It has a full conventional navaid fit but no installed sat' nav'. I had elected to spend the money of going to Doncaster rather than the massively cheaper Sandtoft because I was on my own and wanted to use the ILS on the way in for practice. Being in Class D for departure proved most useful as we will see. Between my arrival on Friday afternoon and my departure on Saturday morning, the weather (not unexpectedly) deteriorated from perfect to marginal (for me) with cloud as low as 1200 feet AGL and rain showers. Watching the rainfall radar and forecast, I delayed my departure a couple of hours and took off under a recent METAR saying that the cloud was above 3000 feet and having observed a King Air take-off and not enter cloud until plenty high enough. However, I am not entirely stupid and was mentally prepared for IMC and had the plates to hand for Cranfield and Cambridge (the nearest instrument airfields to my destination, Henlow). NOTAMs showed Cranfield having no approaches on 03 but nothing notified wrong with 21.

My departure clearance from Doncaster was on track VFR not above 2000 feet. On climb-out, I found cloud at 1200 feet so quickly converted that with ATC to an IFR clearance to 4000 feet. At 4000 I was still in IMC, the forecast had suggested that it might be clear higher. At that point I left Doncaster CAS and that dropped me like a hot brick with "free-call East Midlands". Climbing, I found a gap between layers at 5000, also the correct semi-circular for my track (a radial from GAM to CIT). East Midlands gave me a traffic service and occasionally would call "traffic unknown level" but being solid IMC a lot of the time, it was academic. I continued happily until East Midlands could no longer cover me. Then I had a small difficulty, how to get a radar service for me to descend solid IMC to the CIT for the Cranfield procedure. London Information tried Farnborough who reported that they could see me on radar but unable to provide a service because I was out of area. London Information arranged for Luton (not of course a LARS unit) to cover my descent, Luton frequency was busy as ever but the controller was able to advise me on contact and just before I left the frequency that he could see nothing to affect in Cranfield's visual or instrument patterns. So, I was now over the beacon at 2500 feet and called Cranfiled. His first reaction was to ask for my booking. I soon explained the situation and was cleared for the NDB 21. I started to fly (messily) the outbound leg and asked why no ILS. Glideslope unserviceable came the reply. You can use the localiser he added. So I was able to acquire the localiser and use that with the DME to cloud break at 1200 and proceed safely to Henlow. Thinking about the accuracy of my flying in the procedure and reviewing the SkyDemon track, an instructor would not have been impressed but I never felt overwhelmed (although I did ask the Cranfield controller to standby a couple of times because of workload) nor that I was in danger.

Lessons:
1. I should have called Cranfield by telephone before departure.
2. I should have asked London Information to warn Cranfield that I was inbound.

Anyway, to answer the OP, above is a practical use of the IR(R). Without it I would either have been at Doncaster for a second night or have been marginal VMC at low level for an hour, far more dangerous than 5000 feet in cloud with a radar service. Oh, and it was a great flight, I am still very satisfied with it a week later. Hard work but not dangerous.

[johnm]

A couple of points for the future.

If you haven't got an IFR certified GPS, do not despair. There is nothing to prevent you using Skydemon for situational awareness and to help follow track when flying an approach, use the needles to confirm what Skydemon says and watch your altitude.

Second I think you were unfortunate. IMHO the controller at Cranfield should have asked what approach you wanted and then negotiated down from ILS, with NDB as the lowest option.

Third if there's any autopilot even just a wing leveller, use it.

You did well with London Info and Luton, you could have asked either to notify Cranfield, but your workload would have probably stopped that.

[Bathman]

I'll second Skydemon for being excellent for situatinal awareness. I also find it pretty reassuring when I'm too low to pick up VOR's to

[Andrew Sinclair]

It seems strange to me that the IR(R) allows you do do complex high workload things such as approaches in IMC but doesn't allow you to to simple things such as flying straight and level.

It's also a puzzle why high level airways are class A while complex low level CTRs and CTAs are class D.

The temptation to accept a transit through class A must be difficult to resist, after all who's to know?

The reality is that flying iFR in airways means being part of a system which is populated by CAT and requires a far higher level of training and proficiency to make sure that the planning, navigating and communicating is of a sufficient standard so as not to mess up it up for everyone else. This is not difgicult but is than flying an IAP which is just a part of a complete flight in airways under IFR.

There is nothing wrong with the IR(R) for flying in IMC under IFR OCAS, I flew many many hours using my IR(R) like this all the way down to 1500m take off/landing viz and to system minima before I did my IRI course. You have to be taught correctly and current....like er...most flying.

[johnm]

Actually Allan Armadale it's all about currency. I learned precisely nothing of use that I didn't already know when I did my IR, but I was in the habit of using my IMCR in anger a lot. Airways is not exactly rocket science but approaches are pretty complicated and holds can get messy.

In France I can fly airways VFR separated from IFR by 500 ft.

[flyingyod]

A load of really useful and interesting stuff

This is good stuff, thanks. I'm planning a trip from Norfolk to Newquay in a couple of weeks, staying down there for a couple of days. This is the sort of situation that I can imagine finding the IR(R) useful for, as with the current weather it doesn't seem like we can string together more than a couple of decent days at a time...

[Andrew Sinclair]

Actually Allan Armadale it's all about currency. I learned precisely nothing of use that I didn't already know when I did my IR, but I was in the habit of using my IMCR in anger a lot. Airways is not exactly rocket science but approaches are pretty complicated and holds can get messy...

You must have a very well taught IR(R) or a very badly taught IR; I am sure the former.

The airways to terminal and terminal to approach transition can be complicated but a logical procedure when you understand how they are designed, filing a plan to fly airways is really only getting the entry ticket, what you fly is very often different than the plan and understanding the vagiaries in between needs more training and understanding of the system indeed the IR environment is somewhat different from the IR enviornment, generally at higher Altitudes/FLs and hence the IR(R) syllabus is very different from the EASA IR LOs.

I teach IR(R) not IR but am basing a view to a degree on my pal who is making a fine business on preparing IR(R) and FAA IR pilots before their 10 hrs ATO CB-IR course! The experience he has had over the last 1-2 years is that the procedural flying skills are simply missing. A second hand view I grant you.

[flybymike]

What is the difference between "situational awareness" and "navigation?"

[GolfHotel]

What is the difference between "situational awareness" and "navigation?"

The first one is knowing what's going on around you, the second is knowing where your going.. as I understand it.

[PeteSpencer]

What is the difference between "situational awareness" and "navigation?"

Situational awareness is knowing where the other buggers are: Particularly important if you don't speak French and try to blag your way into a 'Fr Seulement' airfield.

SD in the main will help you with the navigation but not the former without more boxes and cables on the coaming.

Peter

[johnm]

Actually Allan Armadale it's all about currency. I learned precisely nothing of use that I didn't already know when I did my IR, but I was in the habit of using my IMCR in anger a lot. Airways is not exactly rocket science but approaches are pretty complicated and holds can get messy...

You must have a very well taught IR(R) or a very badly taught IR; I am sure the former.

The airways to terminal and terminal to approach transition can be complicated but a logical procedure when you understand how they are designed, filing a plan to fly airways is really only getting the entry ticket, what you fly is very often different than the plan and understanding the vagiaries in between needs more training and understanding of the system indeed the IR environment is somewhat different from the IR enviornment, generally at higher Altitudes/FLs and hence the IR(R) syllabus is very different from the EASA IR LOs.

I teach IR(R) not IR but am basing a view to a degree on my pal who is making a fine business on preparing IR(R) and FAA IR pilots before their 10 hrs ATO CB-IR course! The experience he has had over the last 1-2 years is that the procedural flying skills are simply missing. A second hand view I grant you.

Fair point, the person who trained me for IMCR is now a Flybe captain I've never yet flown the IFR plan I filed especially in the London TMA, as you say it's merely a ritual to get the Eurocontrol computer to accept your flight. The key word is procedural and I'm not good at following procedures in general and Instrument Flying has been a great discipline for me as it's all about repeatable procedures. I too have been slightly surprised by some IR(R) holders who don't get that.

[GrahamB]

I disagree. Situational awareness is a whole lot more than just knowing where the other traffic is.

Good SA is having a complete picture of where you are, where you are going, and what you expect to happen next. At its best, you have the complete picture in your head of your aircraft and its position in relation to the plan or procedure you are on, and the terrain, airspace and traffic around you. You are ahead of the aeroplane and are in a position to adapt readily to an unfolding situation.

I remember my first ever hold and procedural ILS at Coventry when doing my IMC training many years ago. I had set up the kit, and made a reasonably good fist of flying the procedure but I hadn't really got a scoobie of where I was most of the time without constantly referring to the plate to refresh the mental picture. I was navigating OK, but my situational awareness was almost non-existant.

Modern kit has made life considerably easier - a quick glance at the tablet or other moving map screen and you get most of it- but that should be an aid to maintaining the mental picture, not a substitute.

[Paul_Sengupta]

What is the difference between "situational awareness" and "navigation?"

North up and track up.

[flybymike]

Brilliant!

[David Wood]

I think that part of the problem is that neither the IMC/IRR course nor the IR course really teach 'practical IFR'. After all, for the IMC/IRR course there is no requirement to fly a nav segment and when I was taught many moons ago it just wasn't covered. The first time I flew away to somewhere IFR was one of those ILAFFT moments. Doing the CB-IR rather more recently I was surprised to find that that too focussed much more on procedure than on practicality. So, once unleashed into the airways network I also quickly learned a lot that I just hadn't been taught on my CB-IR. NB: I imply no criticism of the teaching: I'm just observing that the training forcus and indeed the testing is not really aligned to 'real world IFR flying' IMHO.

At the end of the day, instrument flying is instrument flying, whether performed under an IMC/IRR or an IR. Likewise, approaches are approaches under whatever rating you hold. To me, the big difference between the two ratings is in the level of interaction with ATC. As an IMC/IRR pilot you generally fly IFR outside of controlled airspace and either performing your own let-downs to VFR in Class G or fly an approach in Class D. In either case the RT environment is relatively benign. But as an IR rated pilot you fly much more within the airways structure and in Class A generally. There the pace and fluency requirements of the RT and the demands of situational awareness are of a quite different order of magnitude to that required outside of controlled airspace or in most Class D. To me that's where the key difference lies.