File IFR when not rated

azure said:
And I once met an instrument student who bragged about filing and flying IFR on CAVU days just to get experience in the system.
Click to expand...
Why would anyone need that when flight following fills that requirement just fine? Seems like a case of learning from bad examples.
 
Last edited:
Headspace said:
Why would anyone need that when flight following fills that requirement just fine? Seems like a case of learning from bad examples.
Click to expand...
Who learned from a bad example? The guy was clearly doing something illegal and no one that I know of copied his bad example. I have no idea where HE learned to do that, probably just figured he could get away with it. (And chances are, he did.)

But as to FF experience being of equal value to IFR, I disagree. Until I flew IFR I had no idea, for example, that filing direct to KVLL from anywhere within AZO airspace would get me routed through CRATR. And FF is workload permitting, many facilities will just tell you to squawk 1200 at the edge of their airspace. IIRC we were discussing that at the time, and it was one of the reasons he did that.
 
azure said:
Who learned from a bad example? The guy was clearly doing something illegal and no one that I know of copied his bad example. I have no idea where HE learned to do that, probably just figured he could get away with it. (And chances are, he did.)

But as to FF experience being of equal value to IFR, I disagree. Until I flew IFR I had no idea, for example, that filing direct to KVLL from anywhere within AZO airspace would get me routed through CRATR. And FF is workload permitting, many facilities will just tell you to squawk 1200 at the edge of their airspace. IIRC we were discussing that at the time, and it was one of the reasons he did that.
Click to expand...

It's more valuable than picking up the bad habit of doing something illegal, I'd argue. While it's true that you don't get the routing that ATC is used to providing for a given area (since VFR is a make-your-own-routing affair outside of positive control) the best "practice" I could find when doing cross countries in preparation for the instrument rating was FF enroute and then ask for practice approaches at each endpoint (in the case of there being a rated safety pilot for hood work).

It's true that the routing you get, and responding to it, is part of actually flying IFR; you can't simulate that unless you have a CFII making it up for you or something. It's your CFII's job to teach you how that works when you do the required IFR cross countries.

Anyway, my comment was prompted by the thought that this guy must have seen someone in an authority position do it before and therefore figured it was "ok" if he did it. That's often how these things happen. NASA calls it the normalization of deviance. It's how normal people end up doing illegal stuff in this business--they have a mentor who did it and therefore it's okay, in their own ADM, to do it.
 
Headspace said:
It's more valuable than picking up the bad habit of doing something illegal, I'd argue. While it's true that you don't get the routing that ATC is used to providing for a given area (since VFR is a make-your-own-routing affair outside of positive control) the best "practice" I could find when doing cross countries in preparation for the instrument rating was FF enroute and then ask for practice approaches at each endpoint (in the case of there being a rated safety pilot for hood work).
Click to expand...
Even without the safety pilot, just working through the procedures while still maintaining visual separation and obstacle clearance is good practice. I did that a lot, and still do when flying IFR in good VFR weather.

Anyway, my comment was prompted by the thought that this guy must have seen someone in an authority position do it before and therefore figured it was "ok" if he did it. That's often how these things happen. NASA calls it the normalization of deviance. It's how normal people end up doing illegal stuff in this business--they have a mentor who did it and therefore it's okay, in their own ADM, to do it.
Click to expand...
Or who suggested it in one way or another as something he MIGHT have done -- I had an instructor once who said something like that. But I had done my HP endorsement with his CFII and doubt he would have planted that idea in his head. The student was advanced and close to his checkride. Most likely he passed the ride, but who knows whether he's doing the same thing now when out of currency? :dunno:

Personally, I worry more about the guys who fly off into the clouds in controlled airspace without bothering with filing or talking to ATC. I suspect there are more of those than I really want to know about. :mad:
 
azure said:
Even without the safety pilot, just working through the procedures while still maintaining visual separation and obstacle clearance is good practice. I did that a lot, and still do when flying IFR in good VFR weather.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I often do it as well. And I'll ask for instrument approaches on IFR flights in CAVU when things aren't busy. Stepping through the procedures while flying is half the battle. You're going to be looking outside a lot of the time anyway.
The student was advanced and close to his checkride. Most likely he passed the ride, but who knows whether he's doing the same thing now when out of currency? :dunno:
Click to expand...
He would've gone back again had he failed, so you can assume he's out there flying.
Personally, I worry more about the guys who fly off into the clouds in controlled airspace without bothering with filing or talking to ATC. I suspect there are more of those than I really want to know about. :mad:
Click to expand...
I fly out of an airport that happens to have a university flight school (I'm not in the flight department though). There is a significant amount of new pilot traffic, both inside and outside of the flight program. Over the years I've run into a couple of people (not always young) who treat their certificate as a license to steal. No doubt a similar statistic applies to the pilot population as a whole. The majority of pilots are responsible.

The fact that these handful of guys are out there shouldn't come as a surprise though. Look at page 18 of the Oct 2012 issue of FAA safety.
 
Headspace said:
The fact that these handful of guys are out there shouldn't come as a surprise though. Look at page 18 of the Oct 2012 issue of FAA safety.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's the kind of story that sends shivers up my spine. Yesterday someone who was VFR told me about being advised by ATC of unknown VFR traffic at an altitude that would have been in the clouds. That would have been about 30nm west of where I was. The student I mentioned doesn't bother me at all, he could be a perfectly safe pilot even though not legal. If he gets caught, it's between him and the FAA. Rogue pilots in the clouds endanger all of us.
 
TangoWhiskey said:
If we had EVERY pilot in the USA file an IFR flight plan for the same day and ETA from their home airport to JFK, would we crash the Traffic Management system?
Click to expand...

You might want to watch this video on YouTube, it discusses some of what you're talking about:

Defcon 17 - Air Traffic Control: Insecurity and ADS-B
 
No. You have to have an IFR rating and currency to file an IFR flight plan regardless of weather. In addition, you must also have an instrument rating (and an instrument equipped aircraft) to operate Special VFR at night.
 
The instrument-rated and current instructor/pilot would have to be listed as the pilot for the flight.
 
Had that happen to me once flying out to the OBX. It was a couple of guys and a girl mucking about in IMC not on a flight plan and likely not rated either. Indeed, idiots like that put us at risk.
 
SbestCFII said:
No. You have to have an IFR rating and currency to file an IFR flight plan regardless of weather.
Click to expand...

Wrong. Anyone can FILE. You have to be rated to FLY under IFR.

At least now I know where NOT to send people for instruction.
 
Luckypants said:
So then that answers my other question.. There is no solo time required for the IFR ticket like there is for the PPL, correct?
Click to expand...
That's correct, but I for one .....think there should be. Perhaps if there was we wouldn't have so many instrument rated pilots without the confidence to use the rating.
 
EdFred said:
Wrong. Anyone can FILE. You have to be rated to FLY under IFR.

At least now I know where NOT to send people for instruction.
Click to expand...

Correct. My 5 year old can log into FLTPLAN.COM and file N12345 B744 from KSDL to KASE and it will appear on Flight Aware. So what.

To operate/fly, you need to be instrument rated. See FAR 61.3(e)

IFR is a legal condition/status (as is VFR) regarding the HANDLING of the flight by ATC. Actually, think of it as YOUR RELATIONSHIP with ATC/FAA.

Intimate, they watch you closely, they protect you, you talk to them frequently ? IFR

Not so intimate, they don't care as much about you, you talk to them occasionally ? VFR

Think of it that way next time you are landing at an unfamiliar airport at night and think about how you should file.
 
Ron Levy said:
Perfectly fine as long as the instructor is named as PIC on the flight plan.
Click to expand...

The warning is that the PIC field on DUATS is pre filled in with the account holders name and can't be changed. Some suggest putting the real PIC in the remarks.
 
Actually the strict requirement is to be IFR rated and current to be pilot in command under IFR. This includes accepting IFR clearances as well as operating in less-than-VFR conditions whether a clearance is required or not.
 
To draw upon this analogy:
If Pilot Bob, operating his owned aircraft in the DC-FRZ and has only a VFR permit and lets his legal currency lapse, he'd better ensure the CFI conducting his 61.56 Flight Review to get him legal again is assigned as PIC while operating.

OTOH, if said CFI doesn't have a FRZ clearance (PIN) he'd better choose another CFI.

See how ridiculous this sounds???
 
flyingron said:
Originally Posted by Ron Levy
Perfectly fine as long as the instructor is named as PIC on the flight plan.
Click to expand...
The warning is that the PIC field on DUATS is pre filled in with the account holders name and can't be changed. Some suggest putting the real PIC in the remarks.
Click to expand...
That suggestion came from the FAA, and it works just fine.
 
Luckypants said:
Can I legally file and fly IFR solo when in VMC if I don't have the rating?
Click to expand...
If you want to practice approaches, missed approaches, or holds...use VFR flight following. They keep eyes on you, great radio work/practice, and you can practice IFR flying in VMC. They will "kind of" treat you like you filed an IFR flight plan.
 
Rgbeard said:
^^ SRSLY? Your first post, you resurrect a 10 year old thread, and add zero value.
Click to expand...

Even worse, the OP's post was 11 years ago, and the OP hasn't been seen on here in 10 years. For all we know, the OP is a Captain at the majors by now.

I really do often wonder if new posters on zombie threads don't even bother to read the warning that comes up about old posts, or if they just choose to ignore it. Probably will never know.
 
RussR said:
Even worse, the OP's post was 11 years ago, and the OP hasn't been seen on here in 10 years. For all we know, the OP is a Captain at the majors by now.

I really do often wonder if new posters on zombie threads don't even bother to read the warning that comes up about old posts, or if they just choose to ignore it. Probably will never know.
Click to expand...
Probably just have their screen in night mode and never see the warning box.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
Probably just have their screen in night mode and never see the warning box.
Click to expand...

What does that look like? They still have to check the box saying "yes, post anyway".

1707487846778.png

I do see, though, that the "time since last reply" maxes out at 365 days (I took this screenshot from a 19-year old thread). Maybe that could be increased. 365 days might not seem so old. I'll start a thread in the appropriate forum for that.
 
JGoodish said:
That's a nice thought, but it's impossible for the FAA to write clarity into all of the regulations. And let's be honest, do we REALLY want them to do that?

In my letter to the Chief Counsel requesting the interpretation back in 2008, I specifically asked about the "IFR/VFR" technique, and the response was the same as I've noted here. How ATC sees the strip is really immaterial to how the FAA sees the intent of filing an IFR flight plan by a non-qualified pilot.

Again, I'm just the messenger. I'm not telling anyone what to do, but I am opining that claiming yourself as qualified to conduct a certain type of operation when you're not qualified to do so likely carries with it some type of unnecessary risk.


JKG
Click to expand...


So this begs a question... I constantly use the TEC routing (which from what I understand IFR routes) for a VFR flight plan when flying around Southern CA, especially with the complex LAX Class Bravo airspace. In my mind, I am helping ATC with a predictable flight.

Are you saying here that what I have been doing for years is illegal?
 
Ventucky Red said:
So this begs a question... I constantly use the TEC routing (which from what I understand IFR routes) for a VFR flight plan when flying around Southern CA, especially with the complex LAX Class Bravo airspace. In my mind, I am helping ATC with a predictable flight.

Are you saying here that what I have been doing for years is illegal?
Click to expand...
So when you depart, is ATC giving you a clearance (CRAFT), as in N12345 is cleared to airport ABD, as filed, climb and maintain a specific altitude, departure freq, squawk 1234? I ask to understand how this works when you say you filed a VFR flight plan. I've never used a TEC route IFR or otherwise so I'm clueless about them other than knowing they exist.
 
Last edited:
Ventucky Red said:
So this begs a question... I constantly use the TEC routing (which from what I understand IFR routes) for a VFR flight plan when flying around Southern CA, especially with the complex LAX Class Bravo airspace. In my mind, I am helping ATC with a predictable flight.

Are you saying here that what I have been doing for years is illegal?
Click to expand...
My understanding is that intent is not in itself a violation, but it can be a problem if you do something that is a violation, such as accepting an IFR clearance when you're not IFR-qualified.
 
tsts4 said:
So when you depart, is ATC giving you a clearance (CRAFT), as in N12345 is cleared to airport ABD, as filed, climb and maintain a specific altitude, departure freq, squawk 1234? I ask to understand how this works when you say you filed a VFR flight plan. I've never used a TEC route IFR or otherwise so I'm clueless about them other than knowing they exist.
Click to expand...

No.. I call ATC up and ask for VFR flight following to XXX via the Blah Blah Blah route at my chosen altitude.
 
Ventucky Red said:
No.. I call ATC up and ask for VFR flight following to XXX via the Blah Blah Blah route at my chosen altitude.
Click to expand...
Ok then you haven’t been doing anything wrong as far as I can tell. You threw me when you said VFR flight plan and TEC together. It’s important distinction that flight following, even if you get it on the ground, isn’t filing a flight plan, VFR or IFR, nor is it an IFR clearance despite using a route nominally designed for streamlining IFR operations. And for those that might not know, ATC has no visibility of a VFR flight plan that someone would file with flight service and there’s no connection between that flight plan and any subsequent flight following provided by ATC. IOW there’s no relationship between flight following and a VFR flight plan.
 
Last edited:
ZeroPapaGolf said:
FAR 61.65

(d) Aeronautical experience for the instrument-airplane rating. A person who applies for an instrument-airplane rating must have logged:

(1) Except as provided in paragraph (g) of this section, 50 hours of cross-country flight time as pilot in command, of which 10 hours must have been in an airplane; and

(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.
Click to expand...
That is what I'm grinding on
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top