Instrument rating in a week

[Jerry 5TJ]

Another approach to answering this question is to look for research on the outcomes of concentrated flight training.   There are several useful studies on the results of rapid training, mainly in the training of military pilots and on training airline pilots in new type ratings.   Most of these are either neutral or negative on the impact of accelerated training on skill learning and retention.  

 

A typical comment:

 

"Regarding training delivery, pilots cited the issue of being time compressed in training courses that do not provide sufficient opportunity to assimilate, think, and reflect on what they are learning."

 

from Airline Pilot Perceptions of Training Effectiveness published by Boeing   (see http://iaftp.org/wp-content/uploads/posts/Airline_Pilot_Perceptions_Of_Training_Effectiveness.pdf ).

 

 

 

[201er]

Yes Mike. What's nuts is regarding instrument training as a "burden" and rushing through it for the sole purpose of getting the ticket. I'm not saying totally disregard basic training. I'm saying, at some early point of pilot training, the focus needs to shift to where it belongs, instrument training with all pilots graduating with an instrument ticket. We need to eliminate the vfr vs ifr pilot distinction. All will be instrument rated pilots.

What's nuts is the status quo. We allow this notion that jumping in the airplane is like jumping in a car. We allow vfr only with what, three hours hood time as protection against inadvertent imc? As if some standard rate turns and some unusual attitudes is protection enough! Now that's nuts if you ask me!

Even though we tend to pay a lot of attention to inadvertent flight into IMC (as intermediate to advanced pilots, this plays a greater role in our circle for non-instrument rated pilots), when compared to loss of control due to inadequate stick and rudder skills, it is a minor issue. Teaching guys how to safely make it around the pattern and telling them to stay away from clouds is far more practical for their first 100-500 hours of flying experience than overloading them with all of the instrument requirements when they haven't even mastered the basic flying.

 

If you're talking about an instrument rating being a "graduation" requirement for getting a Private Pilot rating, that would mean at least 100 hours to get a rating at all!!!! Between the required time for private, required time for instrument, required xcountry time... And even then, at 100 hours the graduating pilot would be less experienced than a 100 hour VFR pilot who got the rating in 70 hours and got 30 hours of private flying in the system.

 

I do agree that an instrument rating is very important for airplane pilots, particularly pilots of fast airplanes that can go far. However, I don't see how mandating thousands of VFR only weekend pilots who've barely ever flown further than a hundred dollar hamburger every other weekend to get instrument ratings would greatly improve safety. Virtually every (actually I'd say every) VFR flight into IMC that I've read about, the conditions were forecast as such, the pilot was flying cross country, and the pilot knowingly chose to violate FARs and proceed into actual instrument conditions. I don't recall any innocent cases where the pilot was doing everything by the book, got a briefing, flew in proper conditions, and unexpectedly they closed around him and that led to his demise. Every case I've read, the VFR pilot CHOSE to be there and CHOSE to continue! With that kind of attitude, an instrument rating is no savior. Just instead of the killer being IMC, it'll be icing or thunderstorms.

[Jamie]

First, thanks! Thanks to everyone for their input. I was not looking for confirmation of a decision I had already made and was very much interested in both sides. And I got it.

 

 

My thoughts are that you should get your IFR certs ASAP, but keep *very* conservative minimums. 3000ft ceilings, punch through a cloud here or there, continue to shoot approaches and execute holds to stay current. I had my IFR rating for 3 years and around 400 hours before shooting my first approach down to minimums in actual. The training is invaluable if, say, you're flying and you get a sprinkle of rain that ends up with the sky descending onto you and you find yourself in inadvertent IMC.

 

This. I want to be "in the system" and have the option to file IFR. I also think I'll really like the mental challenge that is IFR flying. 

 

 

Imo instruments should not and cannot be rushed.

 

What I would do is I'd rearrange my schedule and find some time, a few hours each week to dedicate to instruments. Find a competent instructor who can work with you and most importantly will fly with you in actual. I wouldn't rush this just to get the ticket.

Agreed. Totally. There's a reply below I quote that I think will become my blueprint for this. Me finding time isn't the problem... it's trying to find time when I can go, my instructor can go and the weather allows. In this respect, owning hasn't been much better than renting. I'm still finding it difficult to schedule (my instructor is very good, which means very popular, so he's not always available when I am).

But yes, I do NOT want to rush this so much as I just want to avoid dragging it out.

 

Most of the accelerated courses I've seen advertise themselves as "finish up" courses, and I think that may be a better, safer use than trying to knock out the whole thing from scratch in a couple of weeks.

Also This. It's starting to look like there's a LOT I can do to get ready for concentrated training that essentially makes the training course into mostly check ride prep. The important skills have already been learned either solo, or with an instructor / safety pilot.

 

 

 

You say you are still working on the 10hrs to solo your Mooney.  Know your plane well before you start the instrument training.  This was my path and I had owned my Mooney for a little more than 1 year before I officially started and prior to that I had been out of flying for about 15 years.

• ....lots of good stuff deleted....
• After several months with the above 7 steps find an instructor and start training

This sounds like a plan. I want to get as close as I can without having to have an instructor, and THEN I think I want an instructor available to me 24x7 to finish up. I agree that it's probably a lot harder to go into a course like this "cold". But as a way to satisfy the flight time requirements and prepare for the check ride? It seems useful.

Thanks y'all.

[bnicolette]

Jamie,

 

I know a couple folks that went through the "quick" class to get their IFR ticket and it was shortly after getting their private license.  There is nothing wrong with this and for some folks it is a very viable option.  Most of my students that went this route were people with busy or unpredictable schedules (business folks/doctors/etc).  Flying with them after they have went through fast paced course I could tell that they have consumed the information and were able to handle the airplane in a way that I would feel comfortable with them flying in "the soup".  Hours in your log book are sometimes meaningless!!!  I have flown professionally with folks that have had thousands of hours and yet they still couldn't handle the airplane properly.  As far as basic flying skills there are people out there that still kill themselves on the base to final turn in the professional pilot world.  Doesn't get anymore basic than that and it is one of the first things were taught.  

Everybody is different and what works for one is not going to work for the other.  Always fly within your limits and comfort zone.  Getting the rating is easy.  Utilizing the rating is a different story.  Get the rating out of the way if you like through the fast pace course but then use your local instructor to fly along with you if you're not feeling proficient.

I also liked what one poster wrote about keeping your minimums high in the beginning with easy "outs" if you start to feel overwhelmed.  Baby steps.

 

Have fun and be safe!

 

B~

[bnicolette]

Jamie just one more note on this subject.  Keep in mind that folks like PIC have very advanced instructors that come to you.  It is by no means cheap but the quality of instruction is generally over the top.  Most local flight schools or instructors are kids that are there trying to build time and barely know more than you.  Looking back when I started my own flight school and started instructing, I had little over 200 hours.  And after flying over 700 hours during my first year of instruction It's amazing that I'm still alive!  Well not really but one thing I did before I started instructing was I took a 20 hour aerobatic course in a Super Decathlon.  I highly recommend a course like that for everybody.  It boosted my confidence exponentially and I knew no matter what position the plane was in, I could get it back to where it should be.  The only maneuver I would be nervous about getting myself into would be an inverted spin and it's one that I have never done.  Yet!   Come on Seth, we need to buy that aerobatic plane!!

 

I also remember when I was doing my instrument training we were taxiing out in our little 152 about to fly some actual IMC for the first time and I was really nervous.  I turned to my instructor and said please keep a close eye on me as I am a bit nervous and he looked at me and said "me too"  "how often do you think I do this?"   Well that surely didn't instill a lot of confidence in the flight we were about to take but it all worked out.

[PTK]

If you're talking about an instrument rating being a "graduation" requirement for getting a Private Pilot rating, that would mean at least 100 hours to get a rating at all!!!! Between the required time for private, required time for instrument, required xcountry time...

And your point Mike is...?

...an instrument rating is no savior. Just instead of the killer being IMC, it'll be icing or thunderstorms.

We agree.

[N33GG]

I note that all of the nay-sayers on the immersion-type courses appear to people who haven't taken one.  I'd suggest the OP take that into account when considering their remarks about such courses.

 

Correction please...

 

I have used conventional training as well as the accelerated training for my various ratings.  My comments are from flying as an experienced CFII with many pilots that have come from various training and experience backgrounds. 

 

How about some credit where credit is due?

[danb35]

How about some credit where credit is due?

Certainly, and if you'd stated that upthread, I apologize for missing it.  I'll amend my statement to "most of the nay-sayers".

 

I have no personal experience with a planned, structured accelerated IFR course like PICs, but it's been my observation that most who do think very highly of the curriculum and the instructors (one recent student posted a lengthy account of his training on the flight training forum over on the AOPA boards; another student posted his account to AvWeb some years back, also very favorable).  It's also been my observation that a lot of people don't think much of such programs, and most of those who post about it indicate that their feelings are based on preconceived beliefs on how training should be done, rather than on actual experience with the programs in question.

[Oscar Avalle]

Certainly, and if you'd stated that upthread, I apologize for missing it.  I'll amend my statement to "most of the nay-sayers".

 

I have no personal experience with a planned, structured accelerated IFR course like PICs, but it's been my observation that most who do think very highly of the curriculum and the instructors (one recent student posted a lengthy account of his training on the flight training forum over on the AOPA boards; another student posted his account to AvWeb some years back, also very favorable).  It's also been my observation that a lot of people don't think much of such programs, and most of those who post about it indicate that their feelings are based on preconceived beliefs on how training should be done, rather than on actual experience with the programs in question.

 

I also heard excellent things about these courses. My only concern would be to make sure that after you finish the course, you understand that you have to continue learning and gaining experience in different kinds of weather systems and different seasons... In other words your instrument rating is just another ticket to learn...and have fun doing it.

[rainman]

Oscar, point well made. I did conventional training and then finished with an accelerated course. It is just a license to learn . Ray

[bnicolette]

I also heard excellent things about these courses. My only concern would be to make sure that after you finish the course, you understand that you have to continue learning and gaining experience in different kinds of weather systems and different seasons... In other words your instrument rating is just another ticket to learn...and have fun doing it.

 

I think everyone would agree that no matter what they stamp on our license that aviation is always a realm in which we're always learning.  An ATP can be had @ 1500 hours and by all means it is just another "license to learn".  Continuing education, limits and self assessment should be an ongoing thing with aviation.

[TonyPynes]

Interesting discussion. I started my IR flight training 6-7 months ago and have completed all requirements for the IR, I have also used simulators (Redbird) which I found very useful if not touchy on maintaining altitude. Written completed a year and half ago and need to finish IR this summer or will have to retake it. Which would be fine as I feel confident I can improve the score considerably.

 

I have come very close and even scheduled the checkride but something always gets in my way....weather the week preceding allowing no practice, work trips dropped on my calendar last minute, plane maintenance and ADs that I needed to address....Plane is now ready with all systems go.

 

Finally ready to restart prep for the checkride....I have been flying...I fly for work about 75% of the time and in the last 3 months have flown to Atlanta, Austin, and Peoria from Greensboro, NC. But as we all know cross country flying especially with an autopilot holding course and altitude is more about watching gauges than flying an approach. My work flying will increase to closer to 90% once I get my rating. I can't wait...from the first time I flew IR with the instructor I fell in love with IFR flying...so while I am very positive and looking forward to the rating it is frustrating balancing life and training so I can see why others go the accelerated path.

 

I will go out today and start flying approaches on my own in VFR so that I can get my scan and basic flying skills sharpened. Next week after flying at least 4-5 times to 1-2 approaches if I feel my airmanship is ready I will reengage my instructor and begin prep again. I continue to read FAR/AIM, study PTS, review study notes and have sat through ground school with two instructors to get as many potential areas covered so I am ready for the oral.

 

Maybe I will take some of the advice and take 3 days and just do nothing but think IR training. How many hours of flying do those taking accelerated training fly....I know after 2-3 hours of hood time and flying approaches I am pretty wore out...throw in some turbulence and that last ILS at homebase is all I have left.

[231flyer]

I got my IR from American Flyers in Dupage IL in 10 days. It took me 2 extra long weekends (Wed-Sun) with a couple of days in between to go take care of business.  I continued into my IR training right after I got my private ticket.  My instructor got his dream corporate job with a friend so I was left stranded. The new instructor afforded by the local school wanted me to basically restart my training.  American Flyers has a well defined program that involves flying 4-6 hrs a day with 2-4 hrs ground/SIM time a day and a lot of homework.  You are required to come with the written out of the way (King or Sportys online). The flying was taxing but not overpowering and my instructor was good.  I was brand new to my 231 so I learnt my plane as I got my IR instruction.  IMHO there's nothing like hood time to get to know your plane.....no external distractions.  i highly recommend AF or similar if you are pressed for time and have a busy work schedule.

[Earl]

After many years away from flying I bought a Mooney, got current and shortly thereafter I took the 10-day PIC course to get my IR.  With my business travel schedule I knew that was the only way for me to get it done and get the utility out of the Mooney that I was looking for when I bought it (i.e. replace airline travel within 500nm of Atlanta).  I was very pleased with the PIC course and those that criticize it as a program to get your ticket have never taken the course.  There is no doubt in my mind that my CFII had one goal in mind and that was for me to be a safe, competent instrument rated pilot and that if he accomplished that goal my check ride would not be a problem.  So if business, family life, etc. are going to be a real burden then an accelerated course is the way to go.

 

Having said all that, you will make certain sacrifices with this approach.  First of all, you will only experience IFR flight in the season and with the weather that occurs during your training period.  After 300 hours in the system I have learned a lot.  To compensate for this I had very conservative personal minimums that I held myself to religiously.  Second, even when the weather was CAVU I filed and flew in the IFR system to get more experience with managing all the challenges, dealing with routing changes, being held high as you approach your destination, etc.  All these things were much easier to deal with in IMC because I experienced them in VFR conditions first.  Third, find a good CFII to do regular tuneups to keep your scan relatively proficient and your skills up to snuff.  One thing I will say for sure is that when I heard to expression that an IFR ticket is a license to learn I believed it but now after 300 hours I really believe it.  It seems like on almost every flight I get something new to deal with and to learn about.

 

So have at it with an accelerated course but with one final piece of advice.  Forget the idea that you can do your training during the day and handle business, family, etc. at night.  This is 10 days of intensive training and it is definitely drinking from a fire hose.  You will reach a point of saturation at some period in your training where you think you have plateaued and won't be ready but if you have the energy and the focus you will make it through.  But if you try to do too many things during the training it will be a bigger challenge than it needs to be.

[Earl]

The purpose of instrument training is to learn new skills to safely exercise new privileges. There are no awards for being the fastest to get your instrument rating. While I know the total immersion approach is fast and gets your rating, the process of flying instruments involves a broad array of situations that requires time to cover thoroughly. If you do the accelerated program, you will likely have a few voids that need additional training before you jump in to complex IMC. Getting a rating is great, but it is no substitute for experience.

As one who got my IR with the 10-day PIC course I will say this is definitely on target.  I went that route because I needed my Mooney to be a productive business travel tool sooner rather than later and I would have taken forever otherwise.  But having said that, I had pretty conservative personal minimums for the exact reasons posted above.  You only experience IMC in one season and it is vastly different in other seasons.  It is possible to get no actual IMC in the 10-day training period depending on the weather....or to get a lot if you are lucky.  My early IFR trips were easy IFR and as I stated above even in CAVU I file IFR to gain more experience in the system which was immensely helpful.  But you will have gaps in your experience when you are minted, of that there is no doubt. 

[Hank]

Here is a timely writeup:

 

http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/proficiency/flight-training/expand-your-iceberg.html

 

I have not read this one, just thought it might make good pre-sign-up reading.

 

And there's this at AOPA Forum:

 

http://forums.aopa.org/showthread.php?t=86562

 

[look in Left Seat/Right Seat forum, there are three parts:  Instrument Training Part I, II and III]. A nicely detailed writeup of one person's experience going through an accelerated program.

 

Whatever route you take, your first flight afterwards will be very similar to your initial solo--there's no one to help you if you botch it, there's no safety net to catch you, and you can't just pull off the magic glasses and resume VFR flight. Once you go into a cloud, you are there for the duration, be it three seconds or three hours [i've had both], and the only easy out is to stay on the ground instead.

 

Sometimes I really wish the big red "EASY" button actually worked!

[chrisk]

I'm just curious if anyone else had their check ride in IMC?

[Hank]

I'm just curious if anyone else had their check ride in IMC?

 

Unlikely, as that would require the DPE to be PIC since you won't be qualified to fly in IMC until after the checkride. Anything goes bad and it's his certificate on the line. I would not want to take that chance, but I'm neither CFI nor DPE.

[Wistarmo]

I obtained my IFR rating in eight days twenty years ago at an accelerated flight school course. It worked very well for me and I was immediately able to go out and put my training into practice while it was still fresh. I used higher personal minimums at first but felt comfortable going to published minimums within a few months.

[danb35]

I'm just curious if anyone else had their check ride in IMC?

I did.  Really a non-event, and I was still under the Foggles, as there were some breaks in the clouds.  Examiners are discouraged, but not prohibited, from acting as PIC during a checkride, and mine stated before we took off that he'd be fine with doing that.

 

Didn't have to wait to get my ticket wet, either--I filed for the trip back to my home field.

[PTK]

It is strongly discouraged.The PTS states that if the examiner has to take the airplane, for any reason, it's an automatic failure. Also in IMC he/she is putting their certificate and neck on the line if something happens.

Therefore it's not very smart for neither the applicant nor the examiner. In VFR the applicant can be asked to repeat something without requiring an automatic failure.

[1964-M20E]

When I did my check ride it was MVFR at my home airport and better where I was going of the check ride.  With my instructor he filed IFR and I flew under the hood as well as some actual.  For the return flight I filed the IFR plan and flew home in scattered to broken clouds.   I forgot for a second when I entered some clouds to looked at the panel and do my scan.  I was amazed at flying though the clouds for the first time with my IR even though we had been in IMC during training several times before.

[Hank]

Be careful looking out the windshield. In-and-out is very tempting to watch, since it gives you a feel for your speed. I just collected 15 whole minutes of actual on a 2.9 hr flight dragging through bottoms and climbing through one cloud to get on top. Total of seven recorded instances [1-4 minutes each; you never know how long you'll be when you enter a cloud], plus a few others that were too brief to bother with.

 

It can be fun [and calming] to look around when you pop out, especially when you know you'll be going back in soon. It's even nicer when you can see the ground beneath you for a few seconds. I generally watch the cloud get close and go on the gauges just before or at penetration unless I know it will be just a couple of seconds.

[carusoam]

Hank,

Which came first for you?

Your instrument training or your plastics training?

I had run machinery on their instruments for several years prior to flying. Instrument scan seemed to be similar....process temperature, pressure, and machine rpm were the three important things to watch.

Anyone else have similar instrument scans at work? Did it help to make IFR training less daunting?

Best regards,

-a-

[danb35]

The PTS states that if the examiner has to take the airplane, for any reason, it's an automatic failure.

(emphasis added) This is simply incorrect, as is obvious on a moment's reflection--the examinee has to be under the hood/foggles except for takeoff and landing.  The examiner will need to take the controls, at a minimum, to allow the examinee to don the hood.  Further, the examiner will have to take the controls to induce an unusual attitude.

 

The actual wording in the PTS is "any action or lack of action by the applicant that requires corrective intervention by the examiner to maintain safe flight."  That said, you're correct that the examiner is putting his certificate on the line if he conducts the checkride in IMC, which is no doubt why it's discouraged--but it remains a legitimate option for the examiner.