IFR equipment and capability

[EricJ]

It's like taking off under Part 91 in zero-zero conditions.    Perfectly legal, just not very bright.

[midlifeflyer]

Somehow the direction the discussion is taking on the lack of minimum equipment for IFR flight reminds me of a flight I took years ago. Between high density altitudes, mountains, 320+ VFR days a year, clouds you wouldn't want to fly in (except for a few days during a 6-week period in May-June), an prevailing 80-100 mile visibilities, I rarely used my instrument rating during the 20 years I lived in Colorado.

We were planning a Florida vacation and decided to rent an airplane for a few days to visit friends a family around the state. Decided IFR, even on VFR days, would be a good choice. Realizing that I had not even filed IFR for a long while, I figured I'd do an IFR flight in my home area. I filed KAPA-KFNL. Clearance was the DENVER SID (pure vector SID) FNL. Once I was no longer a traffic factor, about 30nm from FNL, TRACON asked, "do you want an approach at FNL?" Since my only goal was to file and pick up a clearance, I said the visual would be fine. "Proceed direct FNL when able" was my instruction. I looked out the window, saw it, and headed there using my installed Mark 2020 Eyeballs.

 

[amillet]

On 10/6/2023 at 3:04 PM, wombat said:

“They don't call W28 Sunny Sequim for nothing!”

Also sometimes called the “banana belt”.  Rainfall increases on average an inch a mile to the west out to the Pacific coast.

[PeteMc]

On 10/7/2023 at 5:56 AM, wombat said:

One thing I've noticed as I've watched pilots move from less capable to more capable aircraft is that they tend to think of the equipment in the aircraft they currently fly as the 'minimum required equipment' for flight. 

Not at all what I'm thinking.  I just don't think today you'd be able to launch for more than a very short flight without some sort of Nav Radios.  If shit hit the fan am I going to point the noise down and end it right there, of course not.  With my map and compass I'm going to go someplace.  (In reality I'm going to turn on my various backups because that MUCH safer and just stupid not to use and have tools with you for emergencies.) 

Biggest NO on the conversation for me is that the Reg was written when so many planes stayed lower and scud running was a norm, so it was up to you to pick how high and which way.  That was even true back then of the larger planes, but as planes got larger and flew higher...  GEE people, including PILOTS, decided it wasn't a good idea to go up high stuck in the clouds without having something other than a compass.  And again, for the most part the pilot decided how high and if they wanted to go Right, Left or do a 180.   

Now we talk about doing it in modern day in busy airspace where it's not up to you to pick your altitude or heading.  Following a RV is no different than following a magenta line, you need to follow the line you were Cleared to follow, be in on a electronic map or in your head and on your compass.  Sure you can ask for up, down, left, right, etc.  But now days with the airspace in a LOT of the country, you're going to possibly NOT get what you asked for. 

Quick hops in airspace where the Controllers know you (..."oh, here's that RV Only guy again...") sure, they'll give you a Clearance if they can.  But I wonder how many times they've said no.  And if something did happen, radio failure and and maybe an airspace incursion because of radio failure... Gee, did someone say Reckless and Careless for pushing the envelope with an older Reg written for different airspace and aircraft capabilities?  

And I'm all for blasting off not talking to anyone if you don't need to.   Also few for a LOT of years in some very busy airspace and reckless and careless came to mind a lot of times even in VMC when you got people that did not do their homework before they came blasting in and causing major issues. 

(Excuse me while I go put my soapbox away...  )

 

[Sue Bon]

On 10/4/2023 at 4:42 PM, midlifeflyer said:

I think "most proficient at the checkride" is a myth.

It certainly is for me! At my last IR check flight, I was so nervous that I made a couple of really stupid mistakes that I would never make flying solo. For example, I didn't read the part of the SID chart which said to contact XYZ immediately after takeoff. I passed, but I honestly didn't feel like I deserved to, given my performance.

Here's another fun fact: Due to my extreme test anxiety, I was super nervous before my English proficiency exam. We need those here in Switzerland. I am now Swiss, but I spent the first 29 years of my life in the US and got my PhD from Boston University, so I think my English is ok. When I got into the room, the Swiss guy judging my English learned his English in New Zealand. His accent was so strong and so strange that I couldn't understand him at first. I thought for a second, "I'm actually going to fail this thing!"

[Fly Boomer]

40 minutes ago, Sue Bon said:

Here's another fun fact: Due to my extreme test anxiety, I was super nervous before my English proficiency exam. We need those here in Switzerland. I am now Swiss, but I spent the first 29 years of my life in the US and got my PhD from Boston University, so I think my English is ok. When I got into the room, the Swiss guy judging my English learned his English in New Zealand. His accent was so strong and so strange that I couldn't understand him at first. I thought for a second, "I'm actually going to fail this thing!"

"English" seems to have a large number of variants.  I just watched a little clip of a Brit explaining why she now loves the US so much, after moving here with her American husband (not least because she was surprised she hasn't seen a single person get gunned down in the years she has been here).  I have been to the UK quite a few times, but it was a few minutes into the vid before I started understanding her.  Quite a bit of variation just within the UK, not to mention the rest of the world.

[midlifeflyer]

1 hour ago, Sue Bon said:

It certainly is for me! At my last IR check flight, I was so nervous that I made a couple of really stupid mistakes that I would never make flying solo. For example, I didn't read the part of the SID chart which said to contact XYZ immediately after takeoff. I passed, but I honestly didn't feel like I deserved to, given my performance.

Here's another fun fact: Due to my extreme test anxiety, I was super nervous before my English proficiency exam. We need those here in Switzerland. I am now Swiss, but I spent the first 29 years of my life in the US and got my PhD from Boston University, so I think my English is ok. When I got into the room, the Swiss guy judging my English learned his English in New Zealand. His accent was so strong and so strange that I couldn't understand him at first. I thought for a second, "I'm actually going to fail this thing!"

Checkride and check flight brain freeze is a real thing. Some of it is a lack of proficiency. But I think even more of it may be that we are so focused on not making a mistake, we can't help but make one.

[EricJ]

1 hour ago, Fly Boomer said:

"English" seems to have a large number of variants.  I just watched a little clip of a Brit explaining why she now loves the US so much, after moving here with her American husband (not least because she was surprised she hasn't seen a single person get gunned down in the years she has been here).  I have been to the UK quite a few times, but it was a few minutes into the vid before I started understanding her.  Quite a bit of variation just within the UK, not to mention the rest of the world.

Back when I used to travel globally a lot and work with a lot of non-native English speakers, it wasn't unusual to hear foreigners discuss having difficulty with various American accents, especially deep southern or Boston, etc.   I'm usually pretty good with foreign accents and used to "translate" some of the Asian English speakers for colleagues, etc., but there are some country accents in the UK that are like a foreign language to me.  A guy in a pub in England was trying to ask me questions about something and I was basically a brick.   I think somebody else had to translate for me.

And I think all of my worst flying has been on checkrides.   I'm amazed I passed most of them.   

[larrynimmo]

I failed my private pilot practical the first time…I was devastated…two weeks later I went up again with the DPE and I aced the balance.

two years later i had a “date” with the DPE for instrument….this time, I resigned myself that I would fail, and then retest as necessary.  This made me feel so relaxed and not pressured…not only did I pass, the DPE told me I did the best he had ever seen for upset attitude recovery.   After we landed, and I was cleared to taxi I failed to stop to do the “post landing checklist”…and DPE took exception…I explained that I had covered all of it in the landing roll…(thank goodness I didn’t miss anything)

[wombat]

23 hours ago, PeteMc said:

Not at all what I'm thinking.  I just don't think today you'd be able to launch for more than a very short flight without some sort of Nav Radios.  If shit hit the fan am I going to point the noise down and end it right there, of course not.  With my map and compass I'm going to go someplace.  (In reality I'm going to turn on my various backups because that MUCH safer and just stupid not to use and have tools with you for emergencies.) 

Biggest NO on the conversation for me is that the Reg was written when so many planes stayed lower and scud running was a norm, so it was up to you to pick how high and which way.  That was even true back then of the larger planes, but as planes got larger and flew higher...  GEE people, including PILOTS, decided it wasn't a good idea to go up high stuck in the clouds without having something other than a compass.  And again, for the most part the pilot decided how high and if they wanted to go Right, Left or do a 180.   

Now we talk about doing it in modern day in busy airspace where it's not up to you to pick your altitude or heading.  Following a RV is no different than following a magenta line, you need to follow the line you were Cleared to follow, be in on a electronic map or in your head and on your compass.  Sure you can ask for up, down, left, right, etc.  But now days with the airspace in a LOT of the country, you're going to possibly NOT get what you asked for. 

Quick hops in airspace where the Controllers know you (..."oh, here's that RV Only guy again...") sure, they'll give you a Clearance if they can.  But I wonder how many times they've said no.  And if something did happen, radio failure and and maybe an airspace incursion because of radio failure... Gee, did someone say Reckless and Careless for pushing the envelope with an older Reg written for different airspace and aircraft capabilities?  

And I'm all for blasting off not talking to anyone if you don't need to.   Also few for a LOT of years in some very busy airspace and reckless and careless came to mind a lot of times even in VMC when you got people that did not do their homework before they came blasting in and causing major issues. 

(Excuse me while I go put my soapbox away...  )

 

Perhaps I wasn't as clear as I had hoped....  I'm not proposing radar vectors as the go-to solution for IFR routing here, just that it would be possible to have a completely legal IFR flight with DG & Compass as your only nav equipment.

[PeteMc]

3 hours ago, wombat said:

I'm not proposing radar vectors as the go-to solution for IFR routing here,

Sorry.  I misunderstood your "...You wouldn't generally do this if the destination is IMC.   We've got Whidbey Naval Air Station nearby, and they'll provide a PAR if you ask, but this 'no-nav' IFR is not useful for that kind of weather.  It's only useful if you can get vectored below the ceiling..." comment that you actually would fly this way.  

 

[wombat]

Sorry, poor phrasing on my earlier statement.. "You wouldn't generally do this if the destination is IMC" should be more like "You would need to ensure that your entire route is flyable with only radar vectors, including any departure procedures, enroute, and approaches as necessary.  Examples of flyable DPs would be the NEEDLE ONE departure at BFI, and an approach example would be a PAR approach at Whidbey NAS. You would not need an approach if you knew the MVA was below any ceilings at your destination."   

 

The point I was trying to make is that there exist situations where flying IFR with only a DG & compass would be legal.   Some specific examples including the Whidbey PAR approach and the NEEDLE ONE departure from BFI.  

Several comments like "how would you land at an IFR destination" and "don't think today you'd be able to launch for more than a very short flight without some sort of Nav Radios"  led me to provide examples.

And I'd like to be very clear here:  I don't propose actually doing this, I have not done this, and I don't intend to do it myself, and I don't recommend anyone else do it.  I am bringing this up as an interesting discussion of what the rules technically allow, and not as a safe flying  practice.

 

 

[MikeOH]

1 hour ago, wombat said:

And I'd like to be very clear here:  I don't propose actually doing this, I have not done this, and I don't intend to do it myself, and I don't recommend anyone else do it.  I am bringing this up as an interesting discussion of what the rules technically allow, and not as a safe flying  practice.

 

 

Aha, so this has just been a 'stump-the-chump' bar bet all along...hope you win lots of money

[wombat]

42 minutes ago, MikeOH said:

Aha, so this has just been a 'stump-the-chump' bar bet all along...hope you win lots of money

Absolutely... My first comment about it in this thread started off with:

 

This always brings up a question I love posing to people about my 182.... It's navigation equipment consists of a single com radio (VAL COM760 TSO) https://www.valavionics.com/com-760-tso.html and a Directional Gyro and a compass.  No GPS.   No VHF nav radio.  No LORAN, no ADF, nothing.

Assuming a current pitot/static and transponder and everything else is in order, can I fly IFR with it?

[midlifeflyer]

9 hours ago, MikeOH said:

Aha, so this has just been a 'stump-the-chump' bar bet all along...hope you win lots of money

He was pretty clear it was an academic question. But even then people will disagree on the correct answer. @wombat says "yes," and I even understand why, but I  see way too many "but only if" conditions built in for it to be correct. It strikes me as a "jailhouse lawyer" argument. Similar to some others including the old 3 or 4 pilots logging PIC one.

I guess we'll just have to wait for that first pilot to fly some route in instrument conditions, hear "radar contact lost, proceed direct..." (or "join..." or any of a number of every day instructions) and cause a problem to see if the FAA and the NTSB agree they started the flight with suitable navigation equipment. If I were a betting man, my money would be in, "no."

[MikeOH]

1 hour ago, midlifeflyer said:

He was pretty clear it was an academic question.

Yeah, after 4 pages I thought we needed a reminder

[tmo]

On 10/9/2023 at 11:40 AM, larrynimmo said:

After we landed, and I was cleared to taxi I failed to stop to do the “post landing checklist”…and DPE took exception…I explained that I had covered all of it in the landing roll…(thank goodness I didn’t miss anything)

Can you actually fail an IR check ride at that point though? I understood the DPE is to test one's ability to fly under IFR, not taxi around an airport. I guess if you failed to stop at an intersection you were not cleared to cross, yeah, but for a checklist?

[midlifeflyer]

2 hours ago, tmo said:

Can you actually fail an IR check ride at that point though? I understood the DPE is to test one's ability to fly under IFR, not taxi around an airport. I guess if you failed to stop at an intersection you were not cleared to cross, yeah, but for a checklist?

Checklist use is always evaluated. It's in just about every task and generally,

 

[JohnB]

Wow, just wow. very scary to listen to. The only time I would even remotely consider using an iPad to do an instrument approach would be if ALL of my on board navigation failed AND there were no VFR airports within my range AND I would absolutely be declaring an emergency to get all of the assistance possible even if my iPad was running perfectly.

It is scary to think that some pilots are now only navigating using an ipad in IFR conditions. Listening to this, it's probably a very good idea to practice approaches with no iPad available to be familiar with all of the equipment on your plane without an iPad, so that one doesn't become unknowingly dependent on their iPad while flying IFR. That controller though deserves a medal for his patience and willingness to help. I am very glad this worked out without an accident. 

[Ibra]

On 10/10/2023 at 7:41 PM, tmo said:

Can you actually fail an IR check ride at that point though? I understood the DPE is to test one's ability to fly under IFR, not taxi around an airport. I guess if you failed to stop at an intersection you were not cleared to cross, yeah, but for a checklist?

Same in Euro-land, the IRA examiner report require “Use of checklist, airmanship, anti-icing/de-icing procedures, etc. apply in all sections.”, however, there is no landing section in IR exam, the test stops after you finish approach at DA/MDA (land or missed), the taxi/park after landing is not explicitly tested, only taxi checks & briefing before takeoff are explicitly tested…

Nonetheless, there is no requirement for approved checklist or paper format in NCO/91, in the example above, I am guessing it’s failure to stop after landing to do “after landing checks” rather than failure to show a “paper checklist”

[midlifeflyer]

3 hours ago, Ibra said:

Same in Euro-land, the IRA examiner report require “Use of checklist, airmanship, anti-icing/de-icing procedures, etc. apply in all sections.”, however, there is no landing section in IR exam, the test stops after you finish approach at DA/MDA (land or missed), the taxi/park after landing is not explicitly tested, only taxi checks & briefing before takeoff are explicitly tested…

Nonetheless, there is no requirement for approved checklist or paper format in NCO/91, in the example above, I am guessing it’s failure to stop after landing to do “after landing checks” rather than failure to show a “paper checklist”

Ours includes a "landing from an instrument approach" task. And as the excerpt I posted indicates, our standards recognize that a physical checklist might not be appropriate at all times, but should be used for verification at some point. 
 

To me, the physical checklist issue has a number of components, but all related to human frailty. On the checkride, the natural nervousness can lead to forgetting a simple item and failing. The stresses of an emergency is very likely to lead to forgetting something important. For the aging among us, the natural process makes verification increasingly important.
 

And finally, lack of checklist use leads to lack of checklist use. Years ago, I did a 172 to 182 transition. As easy as they get. The pilot had used the simple flow for the 172 - fuel & mixture; flaps as needed- no physical checklist since his student pilot days. In the 182, time after time, the pilot forgot the cowl flaps. I took to just saying, "you forgot something." The pilot would look all around with no idea what was missing. All around, that is, except at the paper checklist sitting on top of the panel in his line of sight. We train ourselves and if we train ourselves to ignore the physical checklist, that's exactly what we will do when we actually need one. 

[Ibra]

1 hour ago, midlifeflyer said:

Ours includes a "landing from an instrument approach" task. And as the excerpt I posted indicates, our standards recognize that a physical checklist might not be appropriate at all times, but should be used for verification at some point

I have rechecked the IRA exam syllabus, only landing with one engine in twins from procedure is required, there is nothing about landing singles from procedure or taxi after landing, maybe on purpose for convenience? especially in some European countries: lot of GA IFR tests for private pilots (ones who operate IFR singles) involve flying missed following 2D/3D procedures instead of landing in big IFR airports (3-4 digits landing fee) before landing at some VFR home-base along the visual pattern (affordable landing), having IFR training base in an ATC airport with instrument runway is a luxury 

On checklists, I gather when wheels on the ground (before takeoff & after landing) using memory flow followed by paper checklist is healthy: one has plenty of time, especially on pre-takeoff in challenging instrument conditions where missing some items increase the risk profile dramatically 

While flying mono-pilot, the expectations on checklists goes down: 

* Critical time actions are done by memory (e.g. failure in twins or singles)  

* Non-critical time actions one can skip checklist but the burden on them to do it correctly (missing an item line while reading checklist is probably tolerated on check-ride? missing an item from memory without using checklist is likely a show stopper?)

* Emergencies with complex systems usually require checklists “after the facts” 

I fully agree on changing type (172 to 182R), yes, one need checklist (even V-speed card) on his first flights, I personally, can’t see how one can do without?

 

Edited October 15, 2023 by Ibra

[midlifeflyer]

Yeah, I've heard all the rationalizations, but it only takes seconds to review a physical checklist after completing a flow or memory booster. The only situation in which I can really see things being so time critical as to preclude verification is a low altitude emergency.

A related issue is checklist content. Most have far more than necessary (you really need a checklist to tell you to add power for takeoff or to land mains first?)  The best checklists are the ones we write ourselves. I recall the Chief Pilot if a flight school lamenting about pilots not using checklists. My response was, "that's because most checklists suck." The school had these long complex checklists filled with extra things - school policy items. Those kinds of checklists beg to be ignored.

[wombat]

2 hours ago, midlifeflyer said:

Yeah, I've heard all the rationalizations, but it only takes seconds to review a physical checklist after completing a flow or memory booster. The only situation in which I can really see things being so time critical as to preclude verification is a low altitude emergency.

A related issue is checklist content. Most have far more than necessary (you really need a checklist to tell you to add power for takeoff or to land mains first?)  The best checklists are the ones we write ourselves. I recall the Chief Pilot if a flight school lamenting about pilots not using checklists. My response was, "that's because most checklists suck." The school had these long complex checklists filled with extra things - school policy items. Those kinds of checklists beg to be ignored.

I agree with pretty much everything you are saying here.

[midlifeflyer]

BTW, in the do as I say not as I do department, I've been as bad as anyone in my personal use after takeoff and through descent. Several years ago I attended an aging pilot seminar given by a retired physician who flies a high performance 6-seat retract. He really drove home the point to me and I began a campaign to do better. The primary method was a written post flight self-debrief in which I graded  my checklist performance after every flight (not a bad idea generally).  Took a while but now not using one feels weird.