IFR Pilots, what are your personal minimums?

[201er]

I'm curious what IFR flying Mooney pilots personal IFR minimums are. If you are not instrument rated, not instrument current (unless briefly but you do fly a lot of IFR), are instrument rated and current but don't actually fly IFR, or are a cheater and fly in the soup without an IFR clearance, then you are not flying IFR so please mark the first option and not what you think your minimums would have been. Let's discuss our personal minimums, what they are based on, how they change, and whether or not they are safe.

[M016576]

If its just me, 200-1/2. I need a viable alternate though.

With passengers- i'll penetrate a layer down to something easy (depends on terrain, etc, but typically 500 or so feet and 1-2nm). I don't fly hard IFR with Pax and only fly at night with Pax on special occasions.

Then again, I only file IFR if I absolutely have to. I get more than enough IFR at work to make me want to go that route when it's not necessary (VMC). I do use flight following to the max extent practical.

[aaronk25]

I typically will go with mins and in the soup the whole way. The only time I want more is if I have to shoot through layer of icing on approach. If that's the case I want 800ft so I darn well know im not going to go missed so I don't have to climb back up though the crap.

I also am meticulous with engine maintenance. Bore scopes, oil analysis, cutting filters ECT so im pretty sure the spinny thing on the front of the plane won't stop spinning.

Also fly 250 hours a year in my bird so I know it well. If I flew less or in a different bird I'd say 1000ft min

[AmigOne]

I think that what may be missing in this questionnaire is what kind of autopilot do you have.  In all honesty when I had my KFC 200 going to minimums with a suitable alternate did not bother me. In those days for every hour of actual IMC/approaches I practiced at least four times as many under the hood.  Today without a/p, the cost of fuel, etc, I no longer train as much and my minimums are higher.  And I have read the articles of those who scorn pilots with "higher minimums".  Today careful consideration of the weather for the flight is my best strategy to compensate for what I no longer have in equipment of ability.  If I have any misgivings I stay home because I do not have to be anywhere.  

[BorealOne]

I file just about all of my flights IFR, irrespective of wx. I simply prefer being 'in the system' for a whole range of reasons, safety being #1. A typical winter mission has me departing through a stratus or fog layer, climbing on top or between layers, and then shooting an RNAV approach, often through an icing layer. Given the prevalence of ice, flying around in the soup isn't something that I'll normally choose to do this time of year - there's only so much TKS in the tank. In daylight, I'll go to minimums, but at night I much prefer having field visual by the time I hit the FAF, especially if icing is a factor.

[AndyFromCB]

daytime, 800/2 is what this pilot likes, I train about 15 hours a year, about 3 approaches down to minimums each month to a full landing, but in actual, with only one engine spinning, I'd rather wait if the conditions are 800/2 or better. My giant fear is losing an engine, hence why I don't fly at night. It would be different in a lightly loaded turbo twin, but that's few years down the line for me.

 

Heading to Fargo tomorrow, it should be a fun snowy flight. Hope the tops will be below 18,000, I hate the mask.

[Bob_Belville]

I answered the survey on the basis of how I used to fly in the '80s when I was flying 250 hrs per year, take off in 0/0, ILS to 200&1/2 at night in the rain, let down through ice, etc. Now @ 70, with a much better equipped panel, I probably could, but do not need to be anywhere that badly. I file IFR for almost every flight to stay current with ATC procedures, and do not mind enroute IMC. I do several practice approaches per month. I have GPSS with a GTN750/Aspen/Stec50, a Stormscope, a GDC 88 and a 696 with XM weather. The plane is very capable, the pilot is old, not bold. 

[DrBill]

My home airport does not have an Instrument Approach.  SO... Takeoff.. If I can see 2/3 of the 3000 ft runway I'm good to go and my local alternate (20 mi away) is at or above min. I've never had the situation when I takeoff like this, I cannot get on top in 30 min or less.

Landing.  Approach min at my local alternate.  If I can get in there, I can gauge the ceiling. If the ceiling is 1800 ft msl (1000AGL) or more, I can make it to my home airport.  I've left my plane there more times than I"ve continued on to my home airport.  Thanks to my wife and friends for picking me up when socked in.

BILL

[Bob_Belville]

Dr. Bill's home field is a challenge for transients. Runway < 3000 w trees and towers all around with CLT TCA a few feet over the traffic pattern a mile to the west.

[Gone]

I just voted and my minima are slightly more conservative than the majority of our gang here.  That makes me feel good.  Keeping current is a problem, when I am in Asia for four months out of 12.  Not hard to keep up with 6/6/6 but I normally need to do more than that to be comfortable.

 

I will normally only fly IFR when I an in North America.  I don't mind the soup, but I am dead scared of CBs and icing.  They can cause me to not fly when all else is OK.  In-cockpit weather is looming big in my future but only as an aid to the strategic decision - not the tactical one.  No dodging buildups for me.

 

I have done 200' and 1/2 mile, but I will only plan for such an approach if the winds are calm and the runway is really long (6000' or more).  Otherwise, I want at least 400' and 1/2 mile.  My time in the Redbird in prep for my last ticket ride showed me that a VOR approach in gusty conditions can have me off the centreline by 400' or more by the time I break out.  I know, I know, it was a non-precision approach with an 800' minimum, but still....

 

As for departures, I want RVR 2600 or better (1/2 mile) for all IFR departures.  If I cannot turn my Mooney around and safely conduct an approach to mimima, I am not departing from that field that day.  If I had more time to burn holes in the sky these days, I might modify that, but for now....

[Awful_Charlie]

I'll take a trip with minima on the limit, as long as all the other items aren't stacking up against me - accidents are rarely the outcome of a single thing, so I try to avoid letting the holes in the cheese line up.  That means if I'm tired, not current in the last week or two (for flying, VFR or IFR, or approaches), if time or stress is against me, then it's time to bump up the minimums.  I don't like being put into a corner either, so if minimums are involved anywhere, I'll be carrying lots of reserve fuel, or breaking the tip up so I can carry enough fuel to get me somewhere where it should be easy.  The one minima I don't like is 550m (about 1/4mile) vis but the 200' DA is not so bad, so I'll probably make my own limits 800m/200' (or even more) if I've not flown an ILS to mins. well in the last month

[FloridaMan]

I guess I'm funny about this. I'm more concerned with they type of IMC than anything else. If it's stable and overcast, it means the air's nice and smooth. Here in FL, I will usually file IFR, but if there are any storms out and about, I will not pick up the IFR until I need an approach. I'd rather stay in the clear and dodge buildups on my own than risk getting vectored into one. I don't mind shooting an approach down to minimums if the cloud tops are low enough that I'll be riding the beam by the time I go into them. I've never experienced icing and I get more nervous than a whore in church when I'm in clouds that have any sort of turbulence in them.  

[N201MKTurbo]

I guess I'm funny about this. I'm more concerned with they type of IMC than anything else. If it's stable and overcast, it means the air's nice and smooth. Here in FL, I will usually file IFR, but if there are any storms out and about, I will not pick up the IFR until I need an approach. I'd rather stay in the clear and dodge buildups on my own than risk getting vectored into one. I don't mind shooting an approach down to minimums if the cloud tops are low enough that I'll be riding the beam by the time I go into them. I've never experienced icing and I get more nervous than a whore in church when I'm in clouds that have any sort of turbulence in them.  

I couldn't agree more, the scariness of the IFR has nothing to do with the ceilings and visibility of the destination. Until you have been inside a level 5 storm on the Gages you don't know what scared is.

[FloridaMan]

I couldn't agree more, the scariness of the IFR has nothing to do with the ceilings and visibility of the destination. Until you have been inside a level 5 storm on the Gages you don't know what scared is.

 

Have you been in one? What was it like?

[RJBrown]

You don't even have to be inside a storm to get scared. I was IFR in the 20s coming up to Denver from Dallas. I ask for and got a deviation around the back side of a storm.  Still in the clear while going around the south west side of a storm I got caught up in a significant up draft and got hail damage. I thought I was giving the beast a wide berth. Have not gotten that close to a build up in the last 15 years and plan to keep it that way.

[1964-M20E]

&nbsp;

I guess I'm funny about this. I'm more concerned with they type of IMC than anything else. If it's stable and overcast, it means the air's nice and smooth. Here in FL, I will usually file IFR, but if there are any storms out and about, I will not pick up the IFR until I need an approach. I'd rather stay in the clear and dodge buildups on my own than risk getting vectored into one. I don't mind shooting an approach down to minimums if the cloud tops are low enough that I'll be riding the beam by the time I go into them. I've never experienced icing and I get more nervous than a whore in church when I'm in clouds that have any sort of turbulence in them. &nbsp;

&nbsp;

I've filed IFR with TS running about and I have not had any problems with ATC when I ask them if I can divert around buildups. I generally tell them where I want to go and the usually tell me deviations approved or deviations left or right of course approved advise when on course. Sometimes it takes a while before I get back on course but I find ATC is easy to work with. When you are real close to departure or destination get a little tricky. Remember try and help ATC out they cannot see what you can see and the buildup of clouds will be there before the rain that they can see on radar.

[Marauder]

Like Bob mentions above, my perspective has changed a bit over the years. For a number of years I was flying over 200 hours a year. Maintaining proficiency was easier and with it the confidence to take on weather. That said, like it was mentioned also above, the type of weather I was flying had a bearing on what I took on. Flying in upstate NY in the winter you develop a healthy respect for how bad weather can be and what unforecasted surprises await you. Nothing like popping out of an ice laden cloud into blizzard conditions to influence the way you look at weather.

 

The biggest influencing factor that changed my IFR flying was developing an engine problem over low IMC conditions. The reality of that situation put into perspective how dangerous what we do can be. I tend to be more conversative now. I want an out or at a minimum, the odds stacked in my favor.

[aaronk25]

One thing that goes without saying, but I forgot to say it.  I become VERY conservative if any maintenance was just done.  That is a huge factor. 

[WardHolbrook]

For me, it totally depends upon that I'm flying. In the work airplanes (Falcon 900Bs) as long as we can see enough to find the end of the runway we're good to go. However, it the weather is below landing minimums, we're going to want to have a takeoff alternate nearby. That's normally not too much of a problem where we typically fly. In the Falcons, ennroute weather isn't much of a consideration either, we pretty much have the same limitations and considerations as any other transport category airplane. Approaches and landings aren't anything special either, as long as we have landing minimums we're good to go. Also, since we're operating under Part 91, I have no problems with shooting the approach and taking a look to see what's really there" when the weather is reported at near minimums.  I'm comfortable with those minimums as well for any ME turbine-powered airplane. When we go to recurrent training, we usually try to work in at least one 0/0 landing hand-flown to touchdown. It's good practice - you never know when you might run into the "perfect storm" scenario. (Pardon the pun)

 

I'm a lot more conservative when it comes to single-engine aircraft (turbine or piston). No LIFR or night X/C in single engine aircraft for me. I want to have a VFR ceiling underneath me for the entire route. If the airplane is FIKI certified I'd have no problem using the equipment. For piston twins, my comfort level falls somewhere in between. I'd want higher departure minimums - at least good enough to be able to come back to the airport and be able to get back in.

 

When it comes to alternates, anytime we're flying to an airport with only one runway we plan on an alternate regardless of the weather. Over the years, there have been two or three instances where the sole runway was close down due to snow removal operations, disabled aircraft, etc. It's not really limiting, but it is something to consider.