Hard IFR

[RLCarter]

@Fred₂O you can change the settings in X-Plane to keep a solid layer to what ever altitude you want. I also think you can have go on the net and get the actual conditions

[DXB]

35 minutes ago, RLCarter said:

Yep, you can always pull the foggles off if needed. I’ve also heard if you get nervous during actual IMC to put the foggles on to keep you from looking up and seeing the soup

Yeah the instructor who taught me for the IR said that if someone flew well under the foggles but badly in IMC, the first thing he would try is making them put the foggles on, and often it seemed to help.  It didn't help me :/

[Marauder]

Yep, you can always pull the foggles off if needed. I’ve also heard if you get nervous during actual IMC to put the foggles on to keep you from looking up and seeing the soup

When I first got my IFR rating years ago, I actually flew this way for several months after getting my rating. Getting accustomed to transitioning from VMC to IMC took a little while for me to get comfortable with.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[LANCECASPER]

On 4/5/2019 at 10:31 AM, jasona900 said:

My definition includes the potential for imbedded thunderstorms, other convective activity, or icing forecasted along my route..  Like most people, that weather keeps me on the ground. 

I wouldn't call that hard ifr, that's easy ifr, since I wouldn't be in it, I'd be on the ground also.

[gsxrpilot]

8 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

I wouldn't call that hard ifr, that's easy ifr, since I wouldn't be in it, I'd be on the ground also.

Like they say, if the weather's bad to IFR, but if it's really bad go VFR.

I never noticed a difference between foggles and actual IMC. But that might have been testament to my instructor. 

One tip I've learned as I've worked towards having my personal minimums equal what's printed on the chart, is when on the autopilot, don't disconnect immediately on breaking out. Let the autopilot keep flying while you adjust from IMC to VMC. For example, breaking out right at minimums on the ILS at 200 ft. I'll let the autopilot take me down another 100 ft while I get a good look around. Then disconnect and land the plane. 

I've seen someone I was riding with, hit the autopilot disconnect immediately on breaking out of the clouds. But the action of pushing the red button, evidently included a slight tug on the yoke and back into the clouds we went. Now we're going missed. So go ahead and wait a couple of extra seconds after breaking out and get your bearings.

[RLCarter]

2 minutes ago, gsxrpilot said:

So go ahead and wait a couple of extra seconds after breaking out and get your bearings.

I seem to get my bearings a lot quicker coming out of IMC or from under the hood, takes me 10~15 minutes to settle in going into IMC, no A/P or wing leveler just hand flying 

[0TreeLemur]

2 hours ago, RLCarter said:

@Fred₂O you can change the settings in X-Plane to keep a solid layer to what ever altitude you want. I also think you can have go on the net and get the actual conditions

Thanks, I'll give that a shot next time I fire up the sim.

[Hank]

2 hours ago, Marauder said:

When I first got my IFR rating years ago, I actually flew this way for several months after getting my rating. Getting accustomed to transitioning from VMC to IMC took a little while for me to get comfortable with.

 

I've never worn foggles in the clouds, except when practicing and have been going in and out but needed to be "in." 

My CFII took me out purposely on a day with ragged ceilings and virga, so that I could practice looking for the field, losing it, going back on instruments and looking again. It really helped.

[carusoam]

Let’s look at this from an other way...

Soft IFR, or easy IFR...  take away the APs and DPs... and it’s mostly like cruise in the system... pretty easy, and no approximation to the ground...

Ceilings above 1k’ AGL... usually qualifies for soft IFR...

So when somebody say I fly hard IFR all the time... I am expecting he is up on all the procedures as well as the skills and 3D nav stuff...

 

As for hard IFR being related to icing and thunderstorms... that pilot was ill advised... that is not IFR flying that anyone would say I fly hard IFR into ice all the time...

That would be more like I fly a FIKI Mooney, and fly hard IFR all the time... that would be measured in dozens of pilots... not enough to coin a term like FIKI’n Hard IFR...  

I think we may have solved this one... how’d we do Jason?

Best regards,

-a-

 

[Marauder]

I've never worn foggles in the clouds, except when practicing and have been going in and out but needed to be "in." 
My CFII took me out purposely on a day with ragged ceilings and virga, so that I could practice looking for the field, losing it, going back on instruments and looking again. It really helped.

I spent a lot of time in the clouds during my training. It was different when Papa Bear wasn’t sitting next to me (sort of like that feeling when you soloed and realized it was all on you to get back to the Earth safely).

Fortunately it was a transitional thing and only lasted a few months after I got the rating as build up experience and confidence.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Hank]

53 minutes ago, Marauder said:

I spent a lot of time in the clouds during my training. It was different when Papa Bear wasn’t sitting next to me (sort of like that feeling when you soloed and realized it was all on you to get back to the Earth safely).

Fortunately it was a transitional thing and only lasted a few months after I got the rating as build up experience and confidence.

 

I thought about it a few times, but the desire went away with a little experience. It wouldn't have inspired much confidence in my wife riding shotgun . . .

[Bob_Belville]

I guess foggles vs. IMC is a personal thing. I hate the foggles and do not ever remember being uncomfortable in IMC. IR was earned in the '70s with a older, career CFII who had me flying in IMC most of the 40 hours. 

Embedded CBs? Stormscope! If my memory serves, and that's not a certainty, I paid a lot of money to add a newfangled Ryan SS to my first Mooney in the early '80s - right after I was sent by ATC through a thunderstorm over the Appalachians at night coming back to NC from Meigs. 

[Marauder]

I guess foggles vs. IMC is a personal thing. I hate the foggles and do not ever remember being uncomfortable in IMC. IR was earned in the '70s with a older, career CFII who had me flying in IMC most of the 40 hours. 
Embedded CBs? Stormscope! If my memory serves, and that's not a certainty, I paid a lot of money to add a newfangled Ryan SS to my first Mooney in the early '80s - right after I was sent by ATC through a thunderstorm over the Appalachians at night coming back to NC from Meigs. 

I’m willing to bet that when Jimmy (Doolittle) taught you instrument flying you were wearing one of these:



The newer style flip ups are pretty nice. I really like it on an IPC, easy to flip up for that “ok, land” instead of “do the missed”.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[m20kmooney]

On 4/5/2019 at 11:31 AM, jasona900 said:

what do you consider hard IFR? 

Hard IFR to me refers to IMC conditions for the entire flight. Not hard as in difficult.

Edited April 9, 2019 by m20kmooney

[kortopates]

"Hard IFR" like a few others have said really doesn't have a definition that any two or more pilots discussing it could possibly use the term with the same meaning or understanding. As shown above, everybody has their own interpretation. I hear this so often that I have given this some thought over the years.

Their is certain irony in my opinion in that 90% of those that use this term are typically the pilots who don't fly it; at least not intentionally. This could be my limited sample space, but I am much more likely to hear the term used in the in the following way, "I don't fly hard IFR (anymore)." Since they don't fly it, they're not really defining it but stating they won't go up in anything that might push their comfort level which is a very large undefined broad spectrum. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that - unless they are limiting their training/proficiency work short by not preparing for anything more that what they consider easy IFR or what they might expect to find on any IFR flight that they would launch into.  And that I feel is a training trap. From sitting right seat next to all kinds of pilots, I've seen that for some pilots that threshold might even be as little as a cloud in the sky, or a breezy day or even some fair weather but bumpy CU. So I've seen this mentality lead to some pilot that only intends to use their instrument rating to descend through a relatively thin layer, and consequently their IFR recurrency training is minimal to point of just maintaining legal IFR currency to keep their right to file in the system and get above or below a layer when they need too.

I am not implying we have to train in what might be considered hard IFR conditions - not at all - but that we do have to train for anything (simulated). The problem with this mentality IMO is becomes apparent when the pilot wants to take a long x-ctry IFR trip. The pilot no longer has good control on limiting their exposure to easy IFR on a long trip. Their knowledge of weather and hazards may not even be up to the task of keeping them out of the conditions they don't intend to launch in after departing. On longer trips its isn't hard to see benign weather and become worse than forecasted and then find yourself needing to do an approach in challenging conditions for a pilot that may be little more than just legally current.  

So what makes it hard IFR in my opinion for all of us, is when we encounter the unexpected along the way which is much more likely on the longer x-ctry flight. It could be unexpected weather or it could be unexpected equipment failure. It could be the AP that all of sudden takes a dive when we engage in altitude mode and can no longer rely on for the approach. If we haven't been practicing diligently without the AP on approaches we're going to find it really"hard" to fly the unexpected IMC approach. If we're having a really bad day and we have an unexpected vacuum failure flying our legacy 6 pack without backup AI. We could be on the verge of becoming a statistic because we never intended to fly hard IFR, we didn't need that fancy stuff and certainly never practiced for it. But now we can find ourselves flying unexpected hard partial panel IFR without any recent partial panel instrument experience since we would never intentionally launch into such conditions with inop equipment. 

So for me, from sitting next to lots of pilots, the "hard" part of instrument flying isn't weather or even down to minimums providing this was no surprise; especially for proficient instrument pilots. Its the unexpected issues, whether it be an equipment malfunction or unexpected weather that the pilot wouldn't have launched knowingly into that is what makes it "hard". "Hard" in the context that it leads to us reading about the aftermath or preferably hearing about it in one of those "never again" stories. Those that push their instrument training i) to minimums (as actually required to log sim IFR proficiency flights)  and ii) train for equipment failures and iii) build in panel redundancy for the unexpected failures since they know it can and will likely happen someday as well as  iv) train to better interpret and avoid weather hazards make up the proficient pilot that will either complete their trips with minimum exposure to hard IFR condition (whatever they maybe) as well as survive the unexpected "hard" IFR issues that just happen.

I know from reading above we have many such diligent pilots in this category that like to use their planes for long IFR x-ctry travel and correspondingly train for the worst as well as unexpected while never intending to knowingly launch in conditions they're not prepared for. And that's one reason why I admire Mooney pilot community.  

So in summary, down to minimums and IMC shouldn't be hard for those that train for it.  IMO from my observations, "hard" = is the unexpected and unplanned for.

 

Edited April 9, 2019 by kortopates

[M016576]

7 hours ago, kortopates said:

So in summary, down to minimums and IMC shouldn't be hard for those that train for it.  IMO from my observations, "hard" = is the unexpected and unplanned for.

 

I’ve always thought of “hard ifr” as “I’m IMC from 200’ on climb to 200’ on descent, and all of my divert fields and territory between is likely to be at alternate minimums or lower.”  Basically, like you’re crossing a hard line in the sand into imc... and know you won’t be exiting to VMC until shortly before touchdown.  Hard as in- Not so much as difficulty- but as in unrelenting.

I think it’s interesting that a pilot would alter their training to accommodate a “relaxed ifr standard.”  I had never even contemplated that as a possibility... probably because I’m flying IFR every day, and IMC for extended periods during my day job. 

I certainly don’t agree with that mentality, by the way (that one would only want to train to some watered down standard), because we all know that 800-2 can quickly become 300-1... and having an Instrument rating means in part being ready for that scenario.  As does partial panel work.  I take all the proficiency tasks and training as a “given”- to published minimums. 

Now when it comes to actually flying the mooney, though- while I train for the worst- I don’t necessarily have to put myself, or my passengers, in those situations.  And a long trip that is solid IMC, with 100’s if miles of imc or fog or mountains within 200-300’ of the cloud bases.. while achievable in a mooney, may not be the most prudent flight planning- as it accepts a new level of risk, should a mechanical issue arise, or should un-forecast (or heavier than forecast) icing occur, or should the weather become convective.  

I guess what I’m getting at, and I think the point you’re making as well, is- that one’s training should never be sacrificed or watered down- the standard should be to train like it’s the worst case scenario.  That way, when a flight goes smoothly- you can be pleasantly surprised.

but just because one trains for the worst case scenario, doesn’t mean an instrument rated pilot , in a mooney, should head out and seek those conditions “in real life.”  

Maybe that’s where this nebulous term “hard ifr” comes from?  I don’t know.  I agree though: there’s nothing inherently “hard” about ifr flight so long as one is trained.  It’s just a different skill set than vfr flight.

Edited April 10, 2019 by M016576

[RLCarter]

10 hours ago, Marauder said:

I’m willing to bet that when Jimmy (Doolittle) taught you instrument flying you were wearing one of these:
 

 

more likely these

[Hank]

I thought it was "Hard IFR" as opposed to "Soft IFR", climbing through a thousand-foot-thick layer to cruise in VMC, or flying an approach through the thin marine layer. It's hard when you can't see anything out the windows for an extended time. When it's smooth, it's kind of relaxing, cruising along inside the milk bottle, watching the panel and occasionally peeking outside for that glimpse of a far-off cloud a mile or two away. When it's turbulent, bouncy or you're watching the Scope for embedded buildups, it's more stressful than fun and can lead to distracting thoughts about "why am I here?" that can make it even harder . . . . .

[jaylw314]

1 hour ago, Hank said:

I thought it was "Hard IFR" as opposed to "Soft IFR", climbing through a thousand-foot-thick layer to cruise in VMC, or flying an approach through the thin marine layer. It's hard when you can't see anything out the windows for an extended time. When it's smooth, it's kind of relaxing, cruising along inside the milk bottle, watching the panel and occasionally peeking outside for that glimpse of a far-off cloud a mile or two away. When it's turbulent, bouncy or you're watching the Scope for embedded buildups, it's more stressful than fun and can lead to distracting thoughts about "why am I here?" that can make it even harder . . . . .

Among the homebuilders, they use the terms "hard IFR" vs "light IFR"  it's apparently all semantics...

[Jerry 5TJ]

Recently an experienced but non-instrument pilot asked me about flying in the clouds & I realized that I do not draw a sharp distinction between VMC and IMC.  There’s a wide range from severe clear to totally obscured with no single dividing line.   

Hard IFR isn’t a single minimum figure to delineate go from no-go.  

Sometimes 200 overcast but 10 miles visibility on a warm morning may be Soft IFR.   A 2,000 ceiling but in freezing rain at night could be impossibly Hard IFR.   

We focus on arrivals but a departure into a 200’ overcast can be more challenging.  It’s certainly a  less practiced operation.  

[kmyfm20s]

To me it is how well stabilized the plane is during the flight in IMC. Trimmed and flying hands free, easy IFR. Bouncing all over requiring a lot of input and concentration, hard IFR. 

[0TreeLemur]

Late yesterday afternoon I experienced what I would suggest is an example of "hard" IFR.   In a turbulent, warm, humid atmosphere, under a clamp-on hood because I misplaced the overcasters, AND with the assistance of vector-happy BHM approach controllers- I passed the IFR practical test!  

 

[carusoam]

Departure into a 200’ ceiling has a few critical challenges.... dissimilar to landing in the same 200’ ceiling.

• High engine stresses related to high power output
• Engine heating in a non-steady state
• potential For engine failure occurring in IMC
• Engine out in IMC, landing straight ahead... into whatever is there...
• Human factors, transitioning to climb in IMC... while cleaning up gear and flaps...
• Distractions from inner ear challenges, acceleration confused for attitude... confirm you are actually climbing...
• Even a door popping open on rotation takes more thought and planning....  loading the local approach plate and executing it...

No room for not paying full attention, while getting away from the ground....

Expect a very high level of multi-tasking.  The brain can be expected to Transition from a state similar to a gentle morning at the coffee table... to a highly loaded multi-tasking environment in about 30 seconds after pushing the throttle in...

Things happen quickly just prior to comitting going into the clouds... get as stable as possible? 

Protected airspace at my home drome is just over 600’ agl... So getting back in with a 200’ ceiling won’t be possible....nearest ILS is about 35nm away...

PP thoughts only, not a CFI...

Best regards,

-a-

[Andy95W]

8 hours ago, jaylw314 said:

  it's apparently all semantics...

And we've been talking about it non-stop for 5 days.

I'm not sure if this is better or worse than a heated discussion about ROP/LOP, flaps on takeoff, or touch-n-goes.

[Andy95W]

On 4/5/2019 at 5:30 PM, Jim Peace said:

I have heard of low IFR and you will see that on some weather apps.....but hard IFR is a term that came straight out of Kentucky inbreading...there is no meaning...

Holy crap, I think Jim and I agree on something.