VFR into IMC

[RescueMunchkin]

On 11/19/2023 at 3:10 PM, N201MKTurbo said:

I was taught how to do a 180 under the hood during private pilot training. Do they still teach that?

I wasn't taught this specifically. We did hood training with unusual attitude recovery, but a 180 to simulate a return to VMC wasn't part of the lesson.

I have not gone into actual IMC yet, but I am pretty confident it's a totally different beast than simulated hood/foggle flying. I can imagine that I'd be much more susceptible to disorientation in true IMC and have to focus a lot harder on ignoring my body's sensations and put full trust into the instruments.

[N201MKTurbo]

1 hour ago, RescueMunchkin said:

I wasn't taught this specifically. We did hood training with unusual attitude recovery, but a 180 to simulate a return to VMC wasn't part of the lesson.

I have not gone into actual IMC yet, but I am pretty confident it's a totally different beast than simulated hood/foggle flying. I can imagine that I'd be much more susceptible to disorientation in true IMC and have to focus a lot harder on ignoring my body's sensations and put full trust into the instruments.

I was flying back from Albuquerque to Phoenix one night with a bunch of friends. It was about 11:00 PM and we were at 10500 feet. My friend Fred was in the right seat driving the plane (not a pilot). He flys very well and knows how to navigate. He makes a good autopilot. Earlier in the flight, I told him that he was flying with reference to the outside world and he said he was only looking at the instruments. I said you are using outside clues weather you know it or not. It takes a lot of practice to fly by instruments only. He swore he was flying only by the instruments.

When we were about 60 miles east of Phoenix, he elbows me in the side and says there is something wrong with the plane. He said it won't fly straight anymore. I had my head turned towards the back seat and was chatting with the guys back there. I looked out the window and saw nothing... I said "Fred, you flew into a cloud. I told you, you couldn't fly by instruments alone." I took over and 10 seconds later we flew out the other side to the lights of Phoenix filling the windshield.

[N201MKTurbo]

I think what gets most fresh pilots is that they don't want to make the transition from flying visually to flying on instruments. They know that they are not certified to fly on instruments, so they don't want to break the rules and they are desperately looking out the window for some visual clues.

I think most non-instrument rated pilots can probably hold altitude and heading and make simple turns under the hood, if they put their mind to it, but that's the problem, they don't switch gears into that mode.

[RescueMunchkin]

8 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

I said "Fred, you flew into a cloud. I told you, you couldn't fly by instruments alone."

Exactly! I just got my instrument rating, but only have around .3 hours logged as actual IMC..those .3 hours also happened to be under the hood. I think it's important for everyone to be aware of the fact that actual IMC with full view out the window is going to be a lot more difficult than simulated IMC. I'm looking forward to my first true IMC experience, but I plan to do it with an instructor.

[N201MKTurbo]

6 minutes ago, RescueMunchkin said:

Exactly! I just got my instrument rating, but only have around .3 hours logged as actual IMC..those .3 hours also happened to be under the hood. I think it's important for everyone to be aware of the fact that actual IMC with full view out the window is going to be a lot more difficult than simulated IMC. I'm looking forward to my first true IMC experience, but I plan to do it with an instructor.

I would suggest a cross country in the clouds to start with. And do it with fairly high ceilings so you don't have to do an instrument departure or approach. You will be surprised that it is actually easier than flying under the hood. You will get comfortable with it sooner than you think.

Also remember that the instrument flying isn't what will get you, the weather is what will get you. Be careful out there.

[hammdo]

I do this all the time when there are clouds around. I look for days when this happens. Best way to get comfortable. I just did 3 approaches all in the clouds last week. Broke out @ 800 feet. ATC kept me in the clouds the entire time. Great training…

30 hours actual, 78 simulated. I need more actual…

-Don

[Pinecone]

23 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said:

I was flying back from Albuquerque to Phoenix one night with a bunch of friends. It was about 11:00 PM and we were at 10500 feet. My friend Fred was in the right seat driving the plane (not a pilot). He flys very well and knows how to navigate. He makes a good autopilot. Earlier in the flight, I told him that he was flying with reference to the outside world and he said he was only looking at the instruments. I said you are using outside clues weather you know it or not. It takes a lot of practice to fly by instruments only. He swore he was flying only by the instruments.

When we were about 60 miles east of Phoenix, he elbows me in the side and says there is something wrong with the plane. He said it won't fly straight anymore. I had my head turned towards the back seat and was chatting with the guys back there. I looked out the window and saw nothing... I said "Fred, you flew into a cloud. I told you, you couldn't fly by instruments alone." I took over and 10 seconds later we flew out the other side to the lights of Phoenix filling the windshield.

A peek beats a thousand cross checks.

Even with hood/foggles, you get tiny peeks, which help a LOT.

Even worse though is flying wing in formation IMC.

[201er]

 

[Pasturepilot]

With all this talk about VFR into IMC, the same applies when you fly a true approach to minimums. It ain’t like when your CFI would holler “ok, you can look now,” and then your view is clear and a million as you swat away your view-limiting device.

The transition from IFR to visual cues is a challenge. I’ve logged right at 10,000 hours, about 90 percent of that on IFR flight plans. Of that time, you usually get a visual approach, or break out well above minimums. 

I’ve been in the simulator a lot lately, because of reasons, and almost every approach has been to minimums. When you’re at minimums and pick up the approach lights, the transition to visual, even for someone who does this for a living, ain’t a straightforward switchover. Peek at the lights, then back to the instruments. Stay on the flight directors. Peek out - lights are still there. Back to the FD. Peek out - there’s the runway end lights. Back to the FD for a moment, then peek longer at the runway as it really does come into sight. 

I peeked too long at the approach lights on a single-engine approach during checking event, before I really had all the visual cues I needed and came back into the cockpit to find none of the needles where I’d left them. The maneuver was a pass, but I was racing up against a metaphorical and regulatory wall tighter than Ricky Bobby at Daytona. 

“Getting a peek” is great… but man, you can shoot yourself in the foot real quick trying to fly that way if what you’re seeing isn’t enough to stay well-oriented. 

Sorry for that tangent.

Back to the original post. 21 year old kid bought a time builder, wanting to be an airline pilot. He died as a lot of those pilots he wished to join cheered him on, hoping for a better outcome. Two of my friends were above, monitoring guard, unable to help. 
 

Heartbreaking. A lesson to be learned, that just keeps repeating. 

[Schllc]

I firmly believe that things like hard IMC, icing, and hypoxia are scenarios that, unfortunately for most people, have to be experienced first hand to truly appreciate the level of stress and respect one experiences.  
The human condition tends to rationalize or frame it in a way that is less severe, it’s natural. 
I have had an icing and hypoxia experience that shaped the way I will fly forever.  While I have never had a vfr into IMC emergency, I do understand that pucker factor when it happens, and the first time you swear you are level and see your horizon tilting… the slow panic as you frantically look at your backup to make sure you aren’t crazy…I have also had enough real IMC approaches with and without help for me to understand how quickly things can go south. 
What we do, as pilots, while it has its fun, is a very serious business, with the highest stakes you can wager, our lives. 
Confidence is great until it turns to hubris, and flight is not a situation where ignorance is bliss. 
I asked a question not long ago here about ifr rated pilots helping ppl’s refresh their early training, and whether or not that would build false confidence or earn respect.  
I suppose it is always up to the individual, but it’s our responsibility to try and impart our lessons to the new pilots, hopefully they are more often than not willing to learn from our mistakes. 

[Tim-37419]

26 minutes ago, Schllc said:

I have had an icing and hypoxia experience that shaped the way I will fly forever.  While I have never had a vfr into IMC emergency, I do understand that pucker factor when it happens, and the first time you swear you are level and see your horizon tilting…

I remember, like it was yesterday, being intentionally flown into IMC as a student. The disorientation was immediate and has stuck with me for many years. I am convinced that memory and experience prevented me from making bad decisions.

[Utah20Gflyer]

I think the difference between real IMC and flying under the hood is that when it is simulated you know if things are going badly you can take off the foggles and everything will be ok.  In real IMC there is no plan B.   This creates fear and anxiety which reduces a persons ability to think rationally.  The process of saving your life is very simple but requires being rational.  
 

I wonder if the current attitude towards inadvertent IMC that if you end up in a cloud you are going to die for sure might actually be making the problem worse.  Kind of like a self fulfilling prophecy that creates the fear that prevents them from thinking rationally and then kills them.  
 

I’m not saying the current fear culture around IMC isn’t warranted and I don’t have any real answers, but maybe displaying some confidence in young pilots while also preaching the dangers of IMC could produce some positive results.  
 

Maybe we should say “hey there bob, flying into IMC is very dangerous but if that happens here is what you are going to do.  I have full faith in you, you are going to control your fear, do what you were trained to do and I fully expect you to get yourself out of that situation in one piece.”  Compare this to “If you fly into a cloud 178 seconds later you’ll be a smoking hole in the ground.”   People are bound to believe what you tell them.  
 

Another idea is during a dual cross country with an instructor, maybe half way through the flight the instructor hands the student a pair of foggles and and says “put these on, you just flew into a cloud by accident, what are you going to do now?”  I think scenario based training for real life situations could be very useful versus generic- today we are going to do basic attitude flying by instruments.  Now fly this heading, now fly this heading etc.  

 

 

[midlifeflyer]

20 minutes ago, Utah20Gflyer said:

I think the difference between real IMC and flying under the hood is that when it is simulated you know if things are going badly you can take off the foggles and everything will be ok.  In real IMC there is no plan B.   This creates fear and anxiety which reduces a persons ability to think rationally.  The process of saving your life is very simple but requires being rational.  
 

I wonder if the current attitude towards inadvertent IMC that if you end up in a cloud you are going to die for sure might actually be making the problem worse.  Kind of like a self fulfilling prophecy that creates the fear that prevents them from thinking rationally and then kills them.  
 

I’m not saying the current fear culture around IMC isn’t warranted and I don’t have any real answers, but maybe displaying some confidence in young pilots while also preaching the dangers of IMC could produce some positive results.  
 

Maybe we should say “hey there bob, flying into IMC is very dangerous but if that happens here is what you are going to do.  I have full faith in you, you are going to control your fear, do what you were trained to do and I fully expect you to get yourself out of that situation in one piece.”  Compare this to “If you fly into a cloud 178 seconds later you’ll be a smoking hole in the ground.”   People are bound to believe what you tell them.  
 

Another idea is during a dual cross country with an instructor, maybe half way through the flight the instructor hands the student a pair of foggles and and says “put these on, you just flew into a cloud by accident, what are you going to do now?”  I think scenario based training for real life situations could be very useful versus generic- today we are going to do basic attitude flying by instruments.  Now fly this heading, now fly this heading etc.  

I agree with you completely about the psychological difference between actual conditions and simulated where you know all you have to do is remove the hood and, besides, there's an eyes-wide-open safety pilot or CFI sitting next to you.

But I think VFR into IMC accidents are far more nuanced than self-fulfilling "you are going to die" prophecies. I've seen numbers as low as 20% and as high as 33% for VFR into IMC accidents involving instrument rated pilots (the commercial/instrument rated numbers are shocking) who, I hope, are not thinking "I'm going to die if it happens." If anything it might be the opposite - the rating provides a false sense of security so you push on when you should turn around. There's also, however you are rated, a big surprise factor involved. You are not expecting it and are not prepared for it. That's even discounting my suspicion that most are the result of the usual series of bad decisions. When that's at work, it's hard to expect the pilot to suddenly make good ones.

On the non-rated end, it's a monstrous training issue. I lost count of the flight reviews I've done where the pilot told me that the hoodwork I included was the first time they were under the hood since their checkride...years ago.

Here are are some numbers on fatal VFR into IMC accidents.

[UteM20F]

While having never accidentally entered IMC, I have encountered ice in IMC in a plane without deicing capabilities, on three different occasions.  And all these cases I was with a passenger(s) (different each time) that already had a fear of flying.  I calmly explained that I was either climbing or descending to get to ice-free air, but their nervousness was palpable.  Each time I ended up doing a 180, and landing at a nearby VFR field.  On one of those 180's a passenger started puking.  I was telling myself, maybe even out load, "Fly the airplane!".  On that one ATC noticed my turn before I even called to tell them I was turning around.

The point of this is that things can get stressful when you're in IMC and something goes even a little bit wrong, and we should all practice similar situations.  I liked Utah20Gflyers's suggestion:

Another idea is during a dual cross country with an instructor, maybe half way through the flight the instructor hands the student a pair of foggles and and says “put these on, you just flew into a cloud by accident, what are you going to do now?”

I'm sure most of us fly with rated friends occasionally, and throwing curveballs like this to them. and vice-versa, when they aren't expecting it would be great practice.

Ute

[Hank]

Unexpected IMC when flying VFR can also mess up an instrument rated pilot. Been there, done that. You can't find clear air by flying towards the lightest-colored patch of cloud.

I eventually stumbled onto an opening and circled down--should have asked for a pop-up IFR clearance and gone smoothly on my way . . . . .

[201er]

2 hours ago, midlifeflyer said:

I've seen numbers as low as 20% and as high as 33% for VFR into IMC accidents involving instrument rated pilots (the commercial/instrument rated numbers are shocking) who, I hope, are not thinking "I'm going to die if it happens."

To be fair, I wonder what proportion of that is not instrument current? Never seen the break down. It is good to remember that being instrument rated but not current is same as not being instrument rated.
 

1 hour ago, Hank said:

Unexpected IMC when flying VFR can also mess up an instrument rated pilot. Been there, done that. You can't find clear air by flying towards the lightest-colored patch of cloud.

I eventually stumbled onto an opening and circled down--should have asked for a pop-up IFR clearance and gone smoothly on my way . . . . .

2 hours ago, midlifeflyer said:

If anything it might be the opposite - the rating provides a false sense of security so you push on when you should turn around. There's also, however you are rated, a big surprise factor involved. You are not expecting it and are not prepared for it.

A good case for flying most cross country flights under instrument flight rules in the first place? Then there isn't a surprise factor, you're in the system, and already have things planned to work when unexpected weather turns up.

Been to Florida from NJ 5 times this year. Out of 10 flights, only 1 was blue start to finish. Maybe 7 could have been done VFR but not without stress, altitude changes, deviations, etc. Why tempt it? Go IFR to begin with!

Except this Sunday from KPOU to KLDJ. Ceilings dropping. Decided to do it IFR. Call for clearance. First time I've been given an EDCT in the US! 5+ hours delay and conditions deteriorating below minimums. Flew high speed following the Hudson river and made it back VFR. An hour later field was IFR and shortly after below approach mins.

[201er]

On 11/18/2023 at 6:39 PM, 0TreeLemur said:

Here's the sad part: On Nov. 14, the new owner of a Piper Cherokee flew it VFR into IMC in Florida.  It didn't end well.  The Flightaware track shows it all.  It looks like the pilot kept it aloft in IMC for 30 minutes of sheer terror, ending with a 6000 fpm 290 knot dive, probably in pieces.   Sad.  Perhaps useful for instruction.

 

NTSB Prelim is out for N7806W:

https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/193387/pdf

 

According to Federal Aviation Administration records, the pilot held a private pilot certificate.
He did not hold an instrument rating. According to the pilot’s logbook, he accumulated about
66 hours of total flight time. Furthermore, he recorded 1 hour of instrument flight time and 2.2
hours of simulated instrument flight time.

[hammdo]

Wow…

[hammdo]

13 minutes ago, 201er said:

A good case for flying most cross country flights under instrument flight rules in the first place? Then there isn't a surprise factor, you're in the system, and already have things planned to work when unexpected weather turns up.

I do this on every flight when I’m outside of my home dome, for the reasons you listed…

-Don

[81X]

On 11/26/2023 at 8:37 AM, Tim-37419 said:

I remember, like it was yesterday, being intentionally flown into IMC as a student. The disorientation was immediate and has stuck with me for many years. I am convinced that memory and experience prevented me from making bad decisions.

I remember the same.   I was training for my PPL out of Republic on Long Island.  It was a starless, moonless night and my instructor had me doing a bunch of hood work.  About 30 minutes in, he said to go ahead and take the hood off and fly straight.   Much to my surprise- we were over the water with no lights anywhere to be seen considering the direction we were pointing.  It was like being inside of a black cloud and was a lot more difficult to control the airplane at first as the tendency without the hood was to look out and fly visually. 
 

I think that also kept me out of trouble until I pursued my instrument rating a couple years later.  
 

 

[midlifeflyer]

1 hour ago, 201er said:

To be fair, I wonder what proportion of that is not instrument current? Never seen the break down. It is good to remember that being instrument rated but not current is same as not being instrument rated.

Dunno. But in theory, even the non-current instrument pilot who has never flown IFR for real has hours and hours of training above and beyond what a VFR-only pilot may see in their flying lifetime. And the Nall report drills down even deeper. I think it even goes into VFR into IMC while on an instrument flight plan.

I've had one VFR into IMC encounter. It came out well but in my case is was sort of expected. We were flying to Vernal UT from Denver CO. Because of MEAs and a general preference to not increase mountain flying risk factors,  especially in a normally aspirated airplane, I started out VFR. But I knew there was a potential, so I planned for it. I flew high enough for flight following (but below MEA) so I would already be talking with ATC. I chose a change over point. If I encountered IMC before it, I would turn around. If past the point, I'd ask for a pop-up clearance. So in my case, I was 100% prepared for it, unlike the typical encounter. And it came and it was a non-event.

But, I will tell you that even on what was otherwise a bright clear VFR day with normal mountain visibility (30-50 miles), it still showed up very, very suddenly. I saw a little haze up ahead, was ready to key the mike to ask for the popup ... and bang! Complete whiteout before I could say a word.

[dzeleski]

On 11/23/2023 at 12:10 PM, N201MKTurbo said:

I think what gets most fresh pilots is that they don't want to make the transition from flying visually to flying on instruments. They know that they are not certified to fly on instruments, so they don't want to break the rules and they are desperately looking out the window for some visual clues.

I think most non-instrument rated pilots can probably hold altitude and heading and make simple turns under the hood, if they put their mind to it, but that's the problem, they don't switch gears into that mode.

I think you are 100% spot on.

When I started my IR my instructor eventually had a conversation with me once I got pretty comfortable in actual conditions that was roughly: "Look, you should plan well and not get yourself into a stupid situation. But... if you do something dumb and get into the clouds for some stupid reason, declare an emergency and tell them you messed up, ask for a pop up, and just fly as if you were an IR pilot. You already broke the law, so just own it and stay alive."

I've got about 40 hours of IMC a little over a year later, and I find transitioning is still the hardest part. Taking off with low ceilings and staying in it until I pop out at mins I find is way easier then being in cruise for 3 hours in VFR conditions and then immediately needing to do an approach to even non precision minimums. It takes significant focus to switch into IMC mode.

[Tim-37419]

@81X I learned to fly at MJX so I know exactly the where and the what you described. 

[EricJ]

5 hours ago, 201er said:

NTSB Prelim is out for N7806W:

https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/193387/pdf

 

According to Federal Aviation Administration records, the pilot held a private pilot certificate.
He did not hold an instrument rating. According to the pilot’s logbook, he accumulated about
66 hours of total flight time. Furthermore, he recorded 1 hour of instrument flight time and 2.2
hours of simulated instrument flight time.

Man, that's sad to read.   :'(

 

[Utah20Gflyer]

9 hours ago, midlifeflyer said:

I agree with you completely about the psychological difference between actual conditions and simulated where you know all you have to do is remove the hood and, besides, there's an eyes-wide-open safety pilot or CFI sitting next to you.

But I think VFR into IMC accidents are far more nuanced than self-fulfilling "you are going to die" prophecies. I've seen numbers as low as 20% and as high as 33% for VFR into IMC accidents involving instrument rated pilots (the commercial/instrument rated numbers are shocking) who, I hope, are not thinking "I'm going to die if it happens." If anything it might be the opposite - the rating provides a false sense of security so you push on when you should turn around. There's also, however you are rated, a big surprise factor involved. You are not expecting it and are not prepared for it. That's even discounting my suspicion that most are the result of the usual series of bad decisions. When that's at work, it's hard to expect the pilot to suddenly make good ones.

On the non-rated end, it's a monstrous training issue. I lost count of the flight reviews I've done where the pilot told me that the hoodwork I included was the first time they were under the hood since their checkride...years ago.

Here are are some numbers on fatal VFR into IMC accidents.

I take your point and don’t know how much validity my hunch has.   There are always going to be positive and negative consequences to any course of action taken to improve a complex problem.  Without doing large controlled experiments we have no real weight behind our opinions, just intuition.  Fatal accidents have been decreasing the last couple decades, so maybe putting the fear into pilots was part of that.