How many have no intent on IFR rating?

SixPapaCharlie

SixPapaCharlie

May the force be with you
Joined
Aug 8, 2013
Messages
16,414
Display Name
Display name:
Sixer
I have been going back and forth since getting PPL on the IFR rating.
Initially I wanted to do it because everyone kept saying "It will make you a safer pilot" Then it was "If I had the rating I could get above this layer and fly"

I got to thinking, for me flying was sort of a dream I had since I was a kid and mission accomplished. I get to do that now. I am loving every minute of it.

I am not a mission driven pilot that needs a plane to get places by a certain time. I just like flying. I kind of also like that I can look out the window and Say "I'm not flying today" versus saying "I can fly in this junk" I feel like that limitation makes me safe too.

I have officially flown 200 hours in 4 different seasons and never gotten stranded because the weather keeps me at home when it is unpleasant and also haven't felt like I have missed out on anything.

I am thinking IFR seems like a lot more work and that was never part of the dream of flying. For me personally it does not seem like there is a great ROI on spending another 10k to be able to fly in weather that I would not otherwise want to mess with. I think I would get more fun out of a tailwheel rating, or possibly glider training.

Just curious how many have flown for years with only VFR and no plans of getting IFR. Have you regretted not getting it?
 
I don't know...I keep thinking eventually I will do it, but Ive only got about 110 hrs so I still have a lot of VFR flying to do yet.
 
I prefer IFR flying if I'm going somewhere. But then, I fly for work/travel.

I'm always VFR if I'm going to have fun or go on the $100 hamburger. I like not talking to people when I don't have to talk to them.
 
Sounds like OP doesn't need it. But for me, airplanes, while fun to putt around in, are really of value when you go places. After being weathered in a few times in the first couple hundred hours as a newbie pilot I was easily talked into getting my instrument rating...then I just kept going with the additional ratings because it was fun. Hoping the ATP ride is fun next month!
 
For me it was half as much work as primary training. I often say "I can totally fly in this but I'm not going to."

Also flying over a layer is beautiful.

Finally, at least get some approach and attitude flying training so in a real emergency you aren't descending inverted! :)

Edit that this thread wasn't for me and I wasn't supposed to reply. I'm a rebel!
 
My father was VFR-only for years. Only time it became an issue was quick weekend getaways and later when I was away at college where public transit was too unreliable and the drive was too long for trips home outside of break.

For myself, one aborted flight due to a thin layer was enough after a pleasant 30 min flight became a 3.5 hour slog across LA- I signed up for the IR written the next day.
 
Sounds like you don't need it/want it. If you're fine with staying on the ground for weather and waiting it out then that's fine. It does lower your insurance costs and can help out if unforecasted weather pops up.
 
When I first got my PPL when I was in my late 20s I had money and no kids and IR was just the next thing to do I started doing it but then stopped flying all together. Now on the second time around 20 years later money is a little tighter (doesn't seem like it should be that way the nature of our current economy I guess)

Now I just want to fly. Go up on the really nice days and enjoy the view, go to a few air shows or enjoy a pancake breakfast every now and then. Oh don't get me wrong I could see the occasional longish cross country when I don't have to be anywhere or don't have to be back at a certain time but for now I am content to just drill holes in the sky the few times a month I can afford it when the weather is really nice.

When you are just flying for the fun of it why not do it on the really great days. Not saying that might not change but the economics for me using a plane to travel right now just are not there.
 
I've completed most of the training and that has been absolutely worth doing, no question there. That said, I'm not so sure I'll actually finish it up or if I do, that I'll stay current.

Reasons:
* I have an infant, so my free time (and money) have both gone down dramatically. Because of that, I just don't feel like I can fly enough to stay proficient at it these days.

* I don't fly at night in my single engine plane due to visibility issues..just my personal minimums. Not much difference between that and IFR, depending on the weather.

* Neither I nor my wife enjoy flying in poor weather. I don't fly for business, just to take odd trips and because I enjoy it, so there's usually not much reason for me to go up when the weather isn't to my liking.

* Lack of good equipment. My plane has no auto-pilot or certified WAAS GPS or certified synthetic vision. I don't see $30,000 falling from the sky anytime soon for these upgrades. Maybe if the certification rewrite allows the installation of some cheaper options one day.
 
If you're thinking you're going to use it OFTEN then it's a good idea and will make you a better pilot

If you don't use it, let it get rusty and seldom use it, it very well may make you LESS safe compared to being bound to VFR.

What fits your realistic mission profile?


For me, I'm a career pilot in the north, I'm IFR 80% of the time depending on the season and destination.
 
Last edited:
Been flying since 1985 without an IFR rating. Mostly fly for fun but have flown for food in the past(helicopters.) If you aren't a geek gadget driven towards getting your IR and the weather doesn't hold you back where you fly don't bother. The only difference between flying IFR and driving a submarine is an extra digit of groundspeed, why bother? Little airplanes are noisy and uncomfortable if you can't look out the window and fly it is an annoying experience being in one. Just ain't fun and it ain't flying the way kids dream of flying.
 
ClimbnSink said:
Been flying since 1985 without an IFR rating. Mostly fly for fun but have flown for food in the past(helicopters.) If you aren't a geek gadget driven towards getting your IR and the weather doesn't hold you back where you fly don't bother. The only difference between flying IFR and driving a submarine is an extra digit of groundspeed, why bother? Little airplanes are noisy and uncomfortable if you can't look out the window and fly it is an annoying experience being in one. Just ain't fun and it ain't flying the way kids dream of flying.
Click to expand...

You got a flying job without a IFR ticket??
 
The biggest argument against IFR is having to get proficient with ancient VOR/DME tech. ILS is worthwhile. GPS utterly superior to the old radio nav. But they won't let you get the ticket just based on GPS departures, enroutes or approaches.

I am still gonna do it because I am retired and have the time to do it, but like the PP written which had VOR questions on it, its senseless to be forced to learn it for the sake of the rating.
 
CTLSi said:
The biggest argument against IFR is having to get proficient with ancient VOR/DME tech. ILS is worthwhile. GPS utterly superior to the old radio nav. But they won't let you get the ticket just based on GPS departures, enroutes or approaches.

I am still gonna do it because I am retired and have the time to do it, but like the PP written which had VOR questions on it, its senseless to be forced to learn it for the sake of the rating.
Click to expand...
When we go to war with Russia or China and the satellites get shot out of the sky, vor is going to be looking awfully good.
 
The instrument rating is really about using your airplane as a traveling machine to get places on a schedule.

If you have no need for that, then there's no need to get the instrument rating.
 
A discussion the wife and I had several times over my 225 ish hours! I started training for it, but never finished it. We travel for fun and neither of us think flying IFR is fun. Now, if I had a business use for the plane, or if I had to travel on a set schedule I would absolutely get it. But, that type of flying never interest me.

I do think you should learning the capabilities of the instruments in your plane. As many times I would fly an ILS approach at night. Or if I was going into an unfamilar airport at night, I would fly its NAV approach. That way, I knew I would be in the clear.
 
You have to stay current and have to keep all your IFR equipment in repair. If you have it there will be times when you can't fly anyway. It's less useful in the west, since it's usually VFR more often and when its not there is ice and/or thunderstorms.

Easiest way to get it would be to sign up for one of those intensive 2 week schools and just get it done.
 
James331 said:
You got a flying job without a IFR ticket??
Click to expand...
As a helicopter pilot, mostly instructing. IR is not very useful in helicopters until you get to the very top of the helicopter foodchain.
 
CTLSi said:
The biggest argument against IFR is having to get proficient with ancient VOR/DME tech. ILS is worthwhile. GPS utterly superior to the old radio nav. But they won't let you get the ticket just based on GPS departures, enroutes or approaches.

I am still gonna do it because I am retired and have the time to do it, but like the PP written which had VOR questions on it, its senseless to be forced to learn it for the sake of the rating.
Click to expand...
There is a reason why 99% of airways in the U.S. are based off of VOR radials. The technology is still reliable no matter how old it is
 
I have an elderly friend who has something like 20k hours, all vfr. I asked him why he didn't get his IA, he just said "I never had to be anywhere."

I have my IA, use it often. Takes the edge off those trips I might have pulled off vfr, but with the rating makes it easy-squeezy.:D
 
frcabot said:
When we go to war with Russia or China and the satellites get shot out of the sky, vor is going to be looking awfully good.
Click to expand...

I doubt our "friends" at homeless security will allow any of us to fly if that happens!:mad2: But if they do, I am a master of the VOR and other antiques, like carburetors! :D
 
Dan H said:
I have an elderly friend who has something like 20k hours, all vfr. I asked him why he didn't get his IA, he just said "I never had to be anywhere."
Click to expand...
20K all VFR:eek:. I think the last sentence is really important. If the OP doesn't mind sitting a few hours or days for weather, doesn't NEED to get anywhere, or isn't following a strict schedule then the IR might not be for him
 
jordane93 said:
There is a reason why 99% of airways in the U.S. are based off of VOR radials. The technology is still reliable no matter how old it is
Click to expand...

And tracking a VOR station builds the skills you need to fly an ILS, VOR, LPV, LOC approach.

If you fly day VFR locally in slow planes no real need to get the instrument rating. Flying in 5 miles or better visibility daytime under a 1500 foot ceiling in a 172 is no sweat, and the weather is rarely worse than that for long periods of time.

If you want to fly at night and/or travel the instrument rating makes a lot of sense. It does not take any more than an hour per month to stay proficient.

Even on good weather days, its nice to have the instrument rating here in the southeast. Flying above a broken or solid layer at 8000 feet in smooth air is a lot better than staying under said layer in warm, humid, turbulent air for an hour or more as you cruise to the beach etc...

At night, you are frequently flying around areas with terrain and towers. Going on an IFR flight plan in radar coverage adds safety. You have an extra set of eyes making sure you don't hit anything.
 
Last edited:
jordane93 said:
There is a reason why 99% of airways in the U.S. are based off of VOR radials. The technology is still reliable no matter how old it is
Click to expand...

The reason VOR is still around is because it's there. A vast installed base of equipment built up over decades. But it will be supplanted by GPS, it's just a matter of time.

RNAV is crude by comparison, and needlessly complex.
 
CTLSi said:
The reason VOR is still around is because it's there. A vast installed base of equipment built up over decades. But it will be supplanted by GPS, it's just a matter of time.

RNAV is crude by comparison, and needlessly complex.
Click to expand...
Either way, its still around and as an IR pilot you are required to know how to use just like that yellow arrow we use to hear the ball game;)
 
I nerver thought about the IR. It was not something that I planned on going after. Then can the weekend getaway with another couple. The forcast was for afternoon thunderstorms which is pretty normal for summer in our area. On our return trip, I had the weather close in on me and I had to get approach to guide me through the rapidly building weather to an area where I could continue VFR. That event forced me to understand that if I was going to use the plane as a travel tool, I would have to get the IR. That being said, if you are just going to bore holes in the sky or the weather in your area is always CAVU, then skip it. However, If you want to really use you airplane then you should get the IR.

BTW, there is nothing more wonderful than breaking out on top on an otherwise ugly day and seeing a sun filled day above a cloud deck...:yes: YMMV
 
Hi Bryan.

Based on your post, my advice is don't bother with the IFR rating. Despite what a lot of people say, the ability to fly in IMC does not guarantee you can go whenever/wherever you want. There will still be times when you will have to cancel, just maybe not as much as VFR only. Additionally, after you get the rating, unless you are flying on business, it is very difficult to stay proficient. It is also expensive to keep an capable aircraft up unless you have a lot of money you don't need somewhere else. Better to get the tailwheel sign-off, then maybe some aerobatic training. Good that you are giving this some serious thought before you shell out thousands of dollars.
 
Twin_Flyer said:
I nerver thought about the IR. It was not something that I planned on going after. Then can the weekend getaway with another couple. The forcast was for afternoon thunderstorms which is pretty normal for summer in our area. On our return trip, I had the weather close in on me and I had to get approach to guide me through the rapidly building weather to an area where I could continue VFR. That event forced me to understand that if I was going to use the plane as a travel tool, I would have to get the IR. That being said, if you are just going to bore holes in the sky or the weather in your area is always CAVU, then skip it. However, If you want to really use you airplane then you should get the IR.

BTW, there is nothing more wonderful than breaking out on top on an otherwise ugly day and seeing a sun filled day above a cloud deck...:yes: YMMV
Click to expand...

With modern tools for WX would this have happened to you? I traveled from NC to TX every other month, all over the East Coast and never needed the IFR rating.

However, if you are using the plane as a tool, then yes, I see the need for IFR.
 
jmp470 said:
With modern tools for WX would this have happened to you? I traveled from NC to TX every other month, all over the East Coast and never needed the IFR rating.

However, if you are using the plane as a tool, then yes, I see the need for IFR.
Click to expand...

Those modern tools were just ideas in someone dreams at that time. :yikes: This trip was pre-GPS... :lol:
 
frcabot said:
When we go to war with Russia or China and the satellites get shot out of the sky, vor is going to be looking awfully good.
Click to expand...


Since they use GPS too, I'll take my chances that won't happen


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
Just curious how many have flown for years with only VFR and no plans of getting IFR. Have you regretted not getting it?
Click to expand...
Disclaimer: I have an IR, so I shouldn't be answering. But here's my $0.02 anyway. :)

I would guess that few people who consciously choose not to get an IR miss not having an IR. It's those who find themselves frustrated by the limitations of VFR who go and get the IR.

There are plenty of VFR-only pilots. If you don't feel a strong motivation to get an IR, I don't see any reason to force yourself to do it.

It's also not that big a decision. Just because you decide not to pursue an IR today doesn't mean you can never pursue an IR in the future if you change your mind.
 
Last edited:
Twin_Flyer said:
Those modern tools were just ideas in someone dreams at that time. :yikes: This trip was pre-GPS... :lol:
Click to expand...

I had a Cirrus SR 20 with all the bells and whistles at the time. So I was inidated with WX, and an Ipad for back up.

I did spend about 6 hours in an FBO waiting out thunderstorms, but I probably would have done that IFR too... But, don't recall the flight now... but was just thinking about it right now.
 
Nearing 300 hrs and we had to stay 4 days longer in Florida due to TS. I am self employed and we always leave extra days for the return trip. Our -10 is IFR equipped with synthetic vision and AP. I update my 430W every year, EFIS 6 mo, Foreflight monthly. We would not fly in ice or TS, even with the IFR rating and that is 8 months out of the year. We don't fly enough to remain proficient and current IFR. We fly many trips vfr over the top as long as we are within glide distance to a mvfr or better airport. Yes, it is beautiful on top. We would rather spend the initial $7k and yearly avionics updates/currency flights on family trips. My minimums vary depending on terrain, wx stability, familiarization with the area and are very conservative. We almost always get FF from ATC and rarely get dropped. IFR guys die too during approaches, TS and ice. Would I be any safer or fly any smoother? Doubt it. I admire my fellow pilots that get their IFR and understand their need for it. If the money flow was alot better than 30-40 hrs/yr flight time then I'd probably do it. I can see one vfr advantage when looking at my FA tracks...they are usually direct. Either way, enjoy the flying and do it as safe as possible.
 
I don't really want an instrument rating. But I have to get one.

If I were still renting, I wouldn't bother. Didn't miss it. Doing an instrument rating puts me right up close to all the stupid. It's very discouraging to see all the crap on the test, see all the pros on here talk about how it's useless and that I just need to memorize the answers and get on with life.

Then I see people complain about how hard the training is, how hard the check ride is... it's like some sort of hazing ritual. I have zero desire to be in any club that would do that for fun. If it's hard (that hard), there's something wrong. Either the way it's taught, the way it's tested, or both.

The engineer in me looks at the primitive avionics and gets frustrated because it's no damn wonder instrument flying is hard given what we have to use. It could be sooooo much easier.

There is simply NO WAY I'd even bother unless there's significant return on investment.

I think for me, there is. I can list the reasons if you want, but I think everyone has to find their own. For some it's the accomplishment. For others, needed for a job. If you can find yours, get the rating. But don't feel like you're... I dunno... less of a pilot because you look at the cost, the hassle and the resulting capability and decide it aint worth it.
 
jmp470 said:
I had a Cirrus SR 20 with all the bells and whistles at the time. So I was inidated with WX, and an Ipad for back up.

I did spend about 6 hours in an FBO waiting out thunderstorms, but I probably would have done that IFR too... But, don't recall the flight now... but was just thinking about it right now.
Click to expand...


Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that you will never have to sit out weather, but sitting out a low level fog bank becomes a thing of the past.

As for staying current I just see that as another reason to fly.:yesnod:

It's a safety issue for me, I feel I am a better pilot and if I never file and fly IFR I know my flying is better than it ever would have been as a VFR pilot.
 
I always looked at it this way. Single engine VFR, you can fly maybe 75-80% on the day you want to go. Single engine IFR you can fly maybe 85-90% of the time on the days you want to go. You will always have to be flexible with times.;)
A lot of it depends on the area of the country, in Texas, you will get more VFR days than somebody in the northeast, especially in the winter.
But, honestly if you make sure you never HAVE to be somewhere, you can do a lot of traveling VFR. An IR is helpful and I use it, but it doesn't mean you can fly in any weather, just more than you can VFR only. :D
 
The relative cost to "upkeep" avionics may been a non issue for you if you already have a 430 in the plane. The annual cost of $490 or whatever it is now for the updates bites but as I recall you are already paying $200 a year for the spot tracker service. So the incremental spend in terms of upkeep wouldn't be that much more.

The training costs are higher, but that is a one time set of costs that amortize over a future lifetime of flying.

And the currency issue for you may not in fact be that big of a deal. You seem to be up in the air flying/training constantly so I don't think it changes your cost outlay for what you are already paying in fuel and time. Maybe the only difference might be you need to haul one of your buddies up with you (or your father) as safety pilot.

Here is where it matters to me though -

That time you have a vacation planned and you want to maximize the time you have available and waiting at home for the weather to blow through isn't part of that plan. Nor is spending money on hotels stays that you can't actually use.

Surfing the tops of clouds in smooth air while avoiding the harshly bumpy ride below. My wife appreciates this more than anything.

And above all else is that sense of achievement. I think all pilots somewhat appreciate that they are part of a vocation that is rare and hard to accomplish. IFR is another big ticket that makes this all the more rare.
 
definitely going to enjoy vfr for the foreseeable future.
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
I have been going back and forth since getting PPL on the IFR rating.
Click to expand...

I think a large part depends on where you live.

Some parts of the country see IMC just about every day. In some other parts of the country, you could likely fly all year VMC and never really need it.

If you start doing long cross-countries to different regions, I'd submit it's something you'd love having....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top