Accelerated Instrument Training

[bdavis171]

Any recommendations on who to go through for accelerated instrument training.  I'm looking for a 2 week or less program and ideally would like to do it in my M20F.  I've found old threads on this, but they are 6 years old.  Thanks guys! 

[MBDiagMan]

I have struggled with this problem.

It seems that instructors shuffle around so much that the flight school where someone had tremendous success a year ago or five years ago, now has a totally different faculty.  It’s a tough problem sometimes.  I have a nothing short of magnificent instructor on the field, but between his corporate flying and helping his elderly Dad with the ranch, he has hardly any time for instructing.  Frustrating.

[RLCarter]

The Instrument Rating in my opinion isn’t something you want to blow through in a couple of weeks. Find a local instructor and stretch it out a little farther... just my $0.02

[Austintatious]

I agree with RLC.

You can certainly bang it out, but I can imagine it may be hard to find someone that is willing to spend all day every day with you to get it done in 2 weeks in your mooney.

If you went to some place like American flyers, they can do half in a sim and half in a 172.  When I did mine I was there every day for 2 weeks strait, sometimes all day.

Like any training, Lots of self ground study goes a LONG way to reducing the work the instructor has to do.  If you really want to do it in your mooney, I would suggest studying hard, getting the written out of the way.  Then find an instructor that is willing to do it in your Mooney and do it in a quality fashion, not rushed.

 

[toto]

1 hour ago, bdavis171 said:

Any recommendations on who to go through for accelerated instrument training.  I'm looking for a 2 week or less program and ideally would like to do it in my M20F.  I've found old threads on this, but they are 6 years old.  Thanks guys! 

http://www.gatts.org

[Cody Stallings]

Gatts in Kansas is a solid organization.

[Mcstealth]

Doesn't Redbird in San Marcos have a program as described?

[carusoam]

6 hours ago, Austintatious said:

I agree with RLC.

You can certainly bang it out, but I can imagine it may be hard to find someone that is willing to spend all day every day with you to get it done in 2 weeks in your mooney.

If you went to some place like American flyers, they can do half in a sim and half in a 172.  When I did mine I was there every day for 2 weeks strait, sometimes all day.

Like any training, Lots of self ground study goes a LONG way to reducing the work the instructor has to do.  If you really want to do it in your mooney, I would suggest studying hard, getting the written out of the way.  Then find an instructor that is willing to do it in your Mooney and do it in a quality fashion, not rushed.

 

+1 on this description...

10 days seems to be the norm...

American flyers does a great job of training to a well developed syllabus... plus it is so well organized, you can use several different CFIIs to meet your schedule needs... multiple planes available, if yours isn’t working or doesn’t have the hardware required...

It is not like primary training where you can easily get lost in the shuffle between two different CFIs... or shuffled between various hulls...

Banging it out in 10 days is great, but...

It is a still a license to learn... plan on continuing the learning every opportunity you can get... the memory fades quickly over the next few months if it goes unused...

I crammed my training over a Xmas week of vacation... and followed-up with a couple more days afterwards...

It would be better to spread it more evenly, over time... but who has this kind of time?  Unless flying is your primary responsibility...

My experience with AAF is about a decade old now... so go visit, tour, fly the sim, get to know what they have to offer...

I recall testing out the sim... a really low cost way to practice certain things related to the IR... a great way to get to know the CFII before you are in the noisy cockpit. Easy to get hours in without the multiple hassles of driving to the airport and back... less tiring, for the most training...

Best regards,

-a-

[kortopates]

I understand how people would really like to get the instrument rating done and over in a couple weeks. Life gets in the way at times and so we tend to think why not just set aside a couple weeks to get it done. But going that route robs the pilot from learning about ADM skills and different weather hazards as they appear during the course of normal training. Seldom does accelerated training provide much IMC experience unless they just so happen to do their training at the right time and at the right location to get it. IMO taking your time with much greater time and exposure to mentor your ADM skills with your instructor will leave you much better prepared. Giant kudos for learning your instrument rating in your complex Mooney where you are much more likely to learn IFR flying by numbers with different PAC's for different profiles and gain the piloting discipline which will transfer to flying IFR any aircraft.

I have no doubt many pilots can get through the accelerated training and then use their license to learn slowly in gradual baby steps as they learn different kinds of weather. But what one has to guard themselves against is the same strong drive of accomplishment to complete such an arduous task in a couple weeks, can also translate into an attitude of invincibility when it comes to setting personal minimums. At such an early stage such pilots are still learning what the weather risks really are and may not even consider things like  strong winds aloft at altitude even hazardous since it never came up in their brief training.

A sad but great example of this was a Mooney pilot some years ago that got his instrument in 10 days because he just had to fly his Mooney J to a wedding in Jackson, WY in a few more weeks and didn't want to be deterred by clouds. He ended up killing himself and 2 of his young kids because he lacked the experience to conduct such a flight and then accepted clearances, like direct over the highest terrain, that he really didn't have the equipment to fly. 

I am not saying everyone that does the accelerated training is going to go down the same path. What I am trying to convey is perhaps you'll get a far better education by adopting the same attitude you need to survive from the get go, by taking your time to get as much varied weather and IMC experience as you can with a good instructor that will not only pass along the technical aspects of flying instruments partial panel etc but also spend time with you to learn more about the hazards of instrument flying and ADM. IMO it will build a much stronger foundation for you to build on. 

But regardless of what route you go, you and anyone pursing an instrument rating is to be commended simply because its a lot of hard work, much like the private was if not harder, and for me it was the most rewarding rating. So get it and use it often  Because proficiency is everything in instrument flying.

Edited July 26, 2019 by kortopates

[carusoam]

Pick the east coast in December for a great mix of weather... icing, IMC, cold, frost/snow on the wings, down drafts in the hilly terrain that exceed the climb rate of a C172... That was some memorable fun...

As Paul described... there are definitely better ways to do the rating if your schedule allows to spread it out...

Some people’s reaction to first time entering IMC is different than others...

Some people get their IR without seeing an actual cloud...

The coolest part about training in actual conditions... foggles and hoods don’t do it any justice...

Flying in IMC without the hassle of funny view limiting devices on your head can be very comfortable...

Easily scanning the entire instrument panel without accidentally getting references to the outside...

Basic flight training is targeted to a high school science level... challenging, but not too deep.

IR training is more like a college level science... More challenging, and more detailed to a deeper level.

Even the books are similar in size to those references...

 

+1 on training in your own Mooney... I was between Mooneys at the time of my IR training... transition training in the O was helpful, but didn’t cover all the gaps...

Best regards,

-a-

[bdavis171]

Thanks guys!  I definitely understand it isn't something to rush through.  I have a friend thats a CFI, airline + military pilot that would be prepping/flying with me prior to the course so I could at least go in with some sort of practical knowledge other than having the written done.  For me its simply a time issue, an accelerated program allows me to take off work the least amount of days possible.  My college education was through an accelerated program, so that style of learning suits me best.  

[carusoam]

Get to studying the written...

It is a specialized test to throw you off from easy answers... it can take some time to get through every variation of the trickery that is included with each question...

They don’t seem to have any relationship to the realities of IR flight... but they do cover everything that could go wrong in every type of plane you may not ever fly...  

PP thoughts only, not a CFII...

Best regards,

-a-

[Danb]

9 minutes ago, carusoam said:

Get to studying the written...

It is a specialized test to throw you off from easy answers... it can take some time to get through every variation of the trickery that is included with each question...

They don’t seem to have any relationship to the realities of IR flight... but they do cover everything that could go wrong in every type of plane you may not ever fly...  

PP thoughts only, not a CFII...

Best regards,

-a-

Agreed. Spend countless hours going over and over the written past actual questions, learn a predictive manner in answering the questions even if you don’t know the answers test taking is a virtue in and of itself. I used the same manner of studying for the written ppl as well as the IFR written as I did for theCPA exam. I got a high mark on the exam of which I’d most likely botch up now 30+ years later. It will prepare you for the interview which wasn’t stressed years ago, if you do well on the exam and interview the flying part becomes quite easy.

[Jerry 5TJ]

I suggest a hybrid approach to the Instrument Rating:

First, study for the written.  Then take a weekend cram course or on-line equivalent as a review and take the test.  You want a high score because (a) the material is of practical use and (b) questions you miss will be topics stressed on the oral.  

Get some IFR dual instruction and cover the basics of “blind flying” and IFR operations.  10-15 hours should get you to the point where you can basically fly the plane and twist the knobs simultaneously.  Then go to a school like Gatts and take the 7 day course, followed by the checkride.  

Do it all in your airplane as that’s what you want to learn to fly in IMC. 

 

[bdavis171]

1 hour ago, Jerry 5TJ said:

I suggest a hybrid approach to the Instrument Rating:

First, study for the written.  Then take a weekend cram course or on-line equivalent as a review and take the test.  You want a high score because (a) the material is of practical use and (b) questions you miss will be topics stressed on the oral.  

Get some IFR dual instruction and cover the basics of “blind flying” and IFR operations.  10-15 hours should get you to the point where you can basically fly the plane and twist the knobs simultaneously.  Then go to a school like Gatts and take the 7 day course, followed by the checkride.  

Do it all in your airplane as that’s what you want to learn to fly in IMC. 

 

That's exactly what I am planning on doing.  

[donkaye]

A few of my thoughts from my experience;

Take the test and pass it first.  The weekend courses are fine, but what goes in fast goes out faster.  I've found the Gleim Course to be good because it gives you the reason for the wrong answers as well as the right one.  It does just prepare you for the test, not the practical reality of actual instrument flying.  The big Jeppesen book is like a reference manual, but provides really good information.

If you have a glass panel, the instrument rating is almost too easy;  Holding patterns, glideslopes for flying approaches makes life easy.  Of course you should get some "dive and drive" experience, but with the modern GPSs step down situational awareness is easy.  Even flying VOR approaches is easy with a WAAS GPS since you can now fly the whole approach with GPS and just monitor the VOR during the final approach segment.  Gone are the days of ADF approaches that were more difficult and very inaccurate.

From my experience, younger is better for doing accelerated courses.  I had one student do the whole rating  (not including the knowledge test) in 8 days.  We flew 2-3 sessions of 2.5 hours/session each day.  He passed with flying colors.  He was technically oriented as a software engineer and 26 years old.   In California in the summer you get the marine layer many days.  In the winter you many times get the fog layer in the Valley.  I like a student to have at least 4 hours of actual IMC before taking the practical test.

[201er]

You don’t need a crash course to get it done efficiently. In addition to the written, you are only required 15 hours of instruction. The other 25 out of 40 hours can be performed with a safety pilot. 

So find a friend. Especially one who is time building. Fly him somewhere far away under the hood for lunch, shoot some approaches, log the time, get the practice. You can knock this out pretty quickly and on your schedule if you find the right safety pilot.

 

(2) Forty hours of actual or simulated instrument time in the areas of operation listed in paragraph (c) of this section, of which 15 hours must have been received from an authorized instructor who holds an instrument-airplane rating, and the instrument time includes:

(i) Three hours of instrument flight training from an authorized instructor in an airplane that is appropriate to the instrument-airplane rating within 2 calendar months before the date of the practical test; and

(ii) Instrument flight training on cross country flight procedures, including one cross country flight in an airplane with an authorized instructor, that is performed under instrument flight rules, when a flight plan has been filed with an air traffic control facility, and that involves—

(A) A flight of 250 nautical miles along airways or by directed routing from an air traffic control facility;

(B) An instrument approach at each airport; and

(C) Three different kinds of approaches with the use of navigation systems.

[docjeffry]

4 hours ago, carusoam said:

Get to studying the written...

It is a specialized test to throw you off from easy answers... it can take some time to get through every variation of the trickery that is included with each question...

They don’t seem to have any relationship to the realities of IR flight... but they do cover everything that could go wrong in every type of plane you may not ever fly...  

PP thoughts only, not a CFII...

Best regards,

-a-

I'm studying for my written right now. I am using the Jeppesen IFR/Commercial kit. I also can recommend a program called Dauntless Found here. I used this for my private as well. I'm scoring in the 80s on my practice tests and will get an endorsement to take the written when I score in the 90s five times in a one week period. Then I will go fly a lot (although I am flying some already). This is not the fastest way to get it. Maybe even the slowest but it will work and I will know the material.  

[Bravoman]

I used PIC for accelerated training years ago. I had had previous instruction but for myself I prefer a condensed time frame and pouring on the coals  to get it done.  My instructor was an Air Force Academy grad and a significantly decorated Vietnam forward air control pilot. Couldn’t have been happier with the experience. As mentioned above by others though, I did not delude myself into thinking that I was anything other than a student with a license to learn after getting my ticket, which I still consider myself to be. Started with very conservative personal  minimums, which gradually became less conservative as I got more experience in the system.

[RobertGary1]

1 hour ago, 201er said:

You don’t need a crash course to get it done efficiently. In addition to the written, you are only required 15 hours of instruction. The other 25 out of 40 hours can be performed with a safety pilot. 

So find a friend. Especially one who is time building. Fly him somewhere far away under the hood for lunch, shoot some approaches, log the time, get the practice. You can knock this out pretty quickly and on your schedule if you find the right safety pilot.

 

 

I would recommend if you do this to mix it up with your instructor. As a CFII I see a lot of buddies flying around under the hood together instilling poor habits or just flying vectors to the same ILS over and over and not really preparing themselves for the IFR environment.

-Robert

[gsxrpilot]

I like what @Bravoman said. Get the ticket any way that works for you. Then, with full realization that you now are signed off to go LEARN, go carefully.

BTW... I plan to use Gatts to knock out the Commercial this Fall.

[Jim Peace]

6 hours ago, bdavis171 said:

My college education was through an accelerated program, so that style of learning suits me best.  

You are not comparing apples and apples here......

hair on back of my neck standing up.......

Instrument rating does not mean you are safe to fly on instruments.........no matter what the check airman or instructor may say or sign you off on.....there are so many gotchas that cant be accounted for in a 2 week course or a checkride.....

do not fly with passengers in IMC for a long time if you do this.....not fair to them.......

[201er]

1 hour ago, RobertGary1 said:

 

I would recommend if you do this to mix it up with your instructor. As a CFII I see a lot of buddies flying around under the hood together instilling poor habits or just flying vectors to the same ILS over and over and not really preparing themselves for the IFR environment.

-Robert

For sure. Basically for every lesson I had with instructor, I would go and practice those skills for some hours with a safety pilot and let instructor evaluate the progress next time. All I’m saying is you don’t have to have an instructor in the right seat while you practice all the time and this can make scheduling work easier and progress quicker. Usually plenty more time building pilots to safety pilot for you any time of day than instructors available.

 

[bdavis171]

9 minutes ago, Jim Peace said:

You are not comparing apples and apples here......

hair on back of my neck standing up.......

Instrument rating does not mean you are safe to fly on instruments.........no matter what the check airman or instructor may say or sign you off on.....there are so many gotchas that cant be accounted for in a 2 week course or a checkride.....

do not fly with passengers in IMC for a long time if you do this.....not fair to them.......

In a way, it is apples to apples based on my career choice.  Completing the course would give me the chance to further my knowledge and hone those skills through practice.  I'm not claiming to be an expert just by checking a box, but checking the box is part of the journey of becoming a safer and better pilot.  That's the end goal.  

[PTK]

2 hours ago, bdavis171 said:

I'm not claiming to be an expert just by checking a box, but checking the box is part of the journey of becoming a safer and better pilot. 

So what’s the rush to check the box? You are not prepared to go fly in IMC from a 7 or 10 day “check that box” course! I don’t care what anyone tells you. I don’t see what the benefit is to go to the check ride before you are ready. You’re going to have to practice anyway so why rush it.