IPC or CFII as a safety pilot?

Salty

Salty

Touchdown! Greaser!
PoA Supporter
Joined
Dec 21, 2016
Messages
14,289
Location
FL
Display Name
Display name:
Salty
Unless needed due to lack of recency, is there any reason to do an official IPC rather than just taking an instructor with you as you do your required actions to keep current? Likely we'd do most if not all of an IPC anyway by the time we're done. I know I said safety pilot in the title, but the assumption is that there would be instruction happening also.
 
An IPC with a CFI I may reveal some weaknesses that you didn't know you had that a safety pilot might not notice.

If it's being done with an instructor regardless Insurance might like it if you get an IPC
 
EdFred said:
An IPC with a CFI I may reveal some weaknesses that you didn't know you had that a safety pilot might not notice.
Click to expand...
Maybe read the whole post next time? ;)
 
It's theoretically possible that the mandatory 2-year IPC up here makes Canadian IFR pilots safer, but I've never seen any evidence to back that up, and there's pressure to relax the requirement (at least for private pilots).

The nice thing about going up with an instructor is that you can spend more time on areas that need improvement, rather than wasting most of the flight going through a long rigid list of requirements for an IPC.
 
How would the insurance company care? I don't think they ask for last IPC information, but maybe I just never noticed since last time I re-upped the instrument rating was new for me.
 
David Megginson said:
The nice thing about going up with an instructor is that you can spend more time on areas that need improvement, rather than wasting most of the flight going through a long rigid list of requirements for an IPC.
Click to expand...
That was my thinking. I asked him for an IPC, but I might just change it to regular instruction. On the other hand, without doing all that long rigid list of requirements, we may miss something I don't realize needs improvement. ;)
 
Salty said:
How would the insurance company care? I don't think they ask for last IPC information, but maybe I just never noticed since last time I re-upped the instrument rating was new for me.
Click to expand...

I don't know if it actually makes a difference but I get asked on my renewals or if being put on somebody else's insurance.
 
Salty said:
How would the insurance company care? I don't think they ask for last IPC information, but maybe I just never noticed since last time I re-upped the instrument rating was new for me.
Click to expand...
At least one of the companies I know asks about the last IPC and the type airplane it was accomplished in. Same experience as @EdFred.

I guess they care because it's a proficiency evaluation not bare legal currency.
 
Last edited:
If you are treating it as an instructional flight, maybe not. I guess it depends. I guess if you are going to do everything in an IPC anyway, might as well get the endorsement too. If "almost everything," why not do that one extra task.

Aside from that, I"6-in-6" currency only requires you do them, not that you do them well. It doesn't require any specific level of proficiency. Although you can't fail, an IPC is a proficiency evaluation. For some people, that can make a difference in how you perform the tasks.
 
Salty said:
Unless needed due to lack of recency, is there any reason to do an official IPC rather than just taking an instructor with you as you do your required actions to keep current? Likely we'd do most if not all of an IPC anyway by the time we're done. I know I said safety pilot in the title, but the assumption is that there would be instruction happening also.
Click to expand...

I do an IPC every 6 months regardless of currency. That way I don't need to keep track of which approach counted and which did not. Also, with an IPC, the instructor is certifying that you have demonstrated competence. Just safety piloting or instructing does not make that certification. I can also combine a flight review with the IPC. As a CFI myself, I do not need the 1 hr ground. So I can get a lot accomplished with an IPC.
 
Salty said:
Unless needed due to lack of recency, is there any reason to do an official IPC rather than just taking an instructor with you as you do your required actions to keep current? Likely we'd do most if not all of an IPC anyway by the time we're done. I know I said safety pilot in the title, but the assumption is that there would be instruction happening also.
Click to expand...

Depending on how far out of currency you are, an IPC might be shorter (3 approaches vs. 6).
 
dmspilot said:
Depending on how far out of currency you are, an IPC might be shorter (3 approaches vs. 6).
Click to expand...
Depending on how far out of proficiency you are, an IPC might be much. much longer. (Sorry, resistance was futile :D)

More seriously, a number have mentioned the structure of an IPC as a downside to an IPC. Those two nonprecision approaches can be difficult to select properly. The ACS requirement is to select nonprecision approaches "representative of the type that the applicant is likely to use. The choices must use at least two different types of navigational aids." So, basically you need a VOR or LOC approach in addition. VOR approaches are disappearing. The ACS permits us to use an LPV approach with a DA above 300 AGL and pretend to ignore the glideslope on an ILS or LOC, and leaving aside the circle to land issue, are those realistic and representative of what the pilot is likely to use? Some could argue that is not a very productive use of either training or evaluation time. I'm on the fence on the question so I'm just tossing it out there.
 
I have also been asked for IPC information on insurance applications, anywhere up to the point of "you must have a current IPC in THIS airplane". I have also conducted IPCs for these situations. So an IPC is never a BAD thing.

Also, two thoughts:
- Treating it as an IPC requires you to be proficient. It's basically a checkride, after all. I shouldn't have to be prompting you to do anything. If you can pass an IPC, you are at least a somewhat proficient instrument pilot.
- As a currency-gaining instructional flight, you just need to get the approaches done. You can be really sloppy, and they still count. But on the flip side, if one type of approach is giving you trouble, we can literally focus on just that, and not worry about the IPC requirements - custom-tailored to fit.

I also agree that selecting appropriate, realistic approaches can be a challenge for an IPC in some areas, since we have to choose a VOR or a LOC. Flying a LOC by "pretending" to ignore the GS is not a great, realistic scenario, but yet the likelihood the pilot is ever going to fly a VOR is also pretty low. So what to do?
 
Good stuff guys, thanks. Of course, I’m further from a decision now than when I started. Lol
 
midlifeflyer said:
Depending on how far out of proficiency you are, an IPC might be much. much longer. (Sorry, resistance was futile :D)
Click to expand...

Ah true, but if you'd rather do 6 approaches because you don't think you could pass an IPC in 3 then perhaps you need an IPC :D
 
dmspilot said:
Ah true, but if you'd rather do 6 approaches because you don't think you could pass an IPC in 3 then perhaps you need an IPC :D
Click to expand...
Actually no, I don’t think spending the time testing is as useful as spending the time practicing. Maybe I just answered my question.
 
Salty said:
Unless needed due to lack of recency, is there any reason to do an official IPC rather than just taking an instructor with you as you do your required actions to keep current? Likely we'd do most if not all of an IPC anyway by the time we're done. I know I said safety pilot in the title, but the assumption is that there would be instruction happening also.
Click to expand...

I don't know, can you log the approach if you're being carried as a passenger? :devil:
 
Salty said:
That was my thinking. I asked him for an IPC, but I might just change it to regular instruction. On the other hand, without doing all that long rigid list of requirements, we may miss something I don't realize needs improvement. ;)
Click to expand...

What long list? Rigid yes, but not long. 1.3 hrs. max if you are proficient and efficient not including time to get to a suitable airport. Vectors to a precision approach (ILS or LPV <300'). Fly the published miss. Two times around the hold with unusual attitudes while holding. Non-precision to the airport from the hold - partial panel. Full LOC approach (if needed) where you began. Break out at mins. circle to land.

If you are proficient it is done. If not proficient you'll know right away and - lather, rinse, repeat.
 
Salty said:
Actually no, I don’t think spending the time testing is as useful as spending the time practicing. Maybe I just answered my question.
Click to expand...

I don't see how you can consider performing approaches as part of an IPC as "not practice".
 
Do it as an IPC Salty, get wings credit, lol. Seriously though, if you are paying the guy, ask him to do it as an IPC. I do one once a year as part of the requirement to rent the plane I use. It's fun, quite a workout and I always learn something. It's not a check ride, it's a proficiency check, if the instructor doesn't want to sign you off, you can still fly IFR as long as you are current, but obviously you would want to address any deficiencies first.

If you are just flying for currency, a safety pilot will work just as well and not cost anything.
 
The question is are you getting a LODA so you can carry your instructor as a passenger for hire?
 
Arnold said:
What long list? Rigid yes, but not long. 1.3 hrs. max if you are proficient and efficient not including time to get to a suitable airport.
Click to expand...

I agree it doesn't need to take long - a LOT depends on your proficiency level and of course the aircraft you do it in. My last IPC took 1.2 in a Cessna 340 (this was under the insurance requirement of "must have an IPC in that airplane"). And we really could have taken another .1 or even .2 off by planning it differently (though that wasn't a real concern at the time). But I was proficient, knew the airplane well, and (admittedly) know the local approaches very well, having taught using them repeatedly.

Two times around the hold with unusual attitudes while holding.
Click to expand...

I do like the idea of unusual attitudes in the hold, and seeing how they recover. I'll start using this idea!

But it doesn't require 2 times around the hold, one is sufficient, as it is for currency or for a checkride.
 
dmspilot said:
Depending on how far out of currency you are, an IPC might be shorter (3 approaches vs. 6).
Click to expand...
In Canada, the IPC gives you a full year of recency before you have to start counting your 6 and 6 in 6 again, so it's not a bad deal. If I did an IPC every year (vs the required 2 years), I'd always be in IFR recency.
 
Salty said:
Unless needed due to lack of recency, is there any reason to do an official IPC rather than just taking an instructor with you as you do your required actions to keep current? Likely we'd do most if not all of an IPC anyway by the time we're done. I know I said safety pilot in the title, but the assumption is that there would be instruction happening also.
Click to expand...
You can get an IPC every week if you wanted. My opinion is, it won’t be worth the ink on the page. If insurance or regulations don’t require it, it’s useless.

The learning on the other hand is of tremendous value. I find the most truly proficient GA IMC guys I KNOW aren’t double I’s…at least active. They fly in the real system all over very regularly. Those are my favorite safety pilots.

*I know there are great CFI-I’s. Just don’t dismiss the value of the others. Not that you were/are
 
Yes, the CFI-I can present you with situations that you don’t commonly do and some you were not trained for.
 
RussR said:
I do like the idea of unusual attitudes in the hold, and seeing how they recover. I'll start using this idea!

But it doesn't require 2 times around the hold, one is sufficient, as it is for currency or for a checkride.
Click to expand...

I agree. I find holds are intimidating for many pilots, especially those who don't have modern gps navigators. In those cases I use the first time around to let the pilot settle down, but 1 is sufficient.
 
Arnold said:
What long list? Rigid yes, but not long. 1.3 hrs. max if you are proficient and efficient not including time to get to a suitable airport. Vectors to a precision approach (ILS or LPV <300'). Fly the published miss. Two times around the hold with unusual attitudes while holding. Non-precision to the airport from the hold - partial panel. Full LOC approach (if needed) where you began. Break out at mins. circle to land.

If you are proficient it is done. If not proficient you'll know right away and - lather, rinse, repeat.
Click to expand...

You got me curious. Why unusual attitudes during a hold? Is it more likely to occur during a hold, or just trying to save time?
 
sarangan said:
You got me curious. Why unusual attitudes during a hold? Is it more likely to occur during a hold, or just trying to save time?
Click to expand...

It certainly saves time. In real life I think unusual attitudes are actually a surprise which is experienced during high workload situations. But in training you need to set them up. Holds are high work load and telling the pilot that they need to remain in the holding airspace when they recover puts a bit of additional workload on them. It's not hard with modern SA tools, but it does give them one more thing to think about.

Edit: I usually ask for an altitude block and longer legs, but if I am confident of the pilot's ability we'll do it with a 1 min. legs and no additional altitude.
 
sarangan said:
You got me curious. Why unusual attitudes during a hold? Is it more likely to occur during a hold, or just trying to save time?
Click to expand...

The reason I liked @Arnold 's idea is this:
The standard, typical, most basic way of doing unusual attitudes is to just be in level flight on some heading, they close their eyes, you maneuver some, say "recover", and they just go back to straight and level flight. In other words, there is often no real navigation component to it - they just have to recover from the unusual attitude.
But if it were to happen in real life, say on an approach, or in a hold, or whatever, if they just recover to straight and level and whatever heading they happen to end up on, heck that heading could be flying into a mountain that the approach is designed to avoid. So I like the added component of having to continue navigating even though you're all disoriented - just like it would be for real.
 
RussR said:
The reason I liked @Arnold 's idea is this:
The standard, typical, most basic way of doing unusual attitudes is to just be in level flight on some heading, they close their eyes, you maneuver some, say "recover", and they just go back to straight and level flight. In other words, there is often no real navigation component to it - they just have to recover from the unusual attitude.
But if it were to happen in real life, say on an approach, or in a hold, or whatever, if they just recover to straight and level and whatever heading they happen to end up on, heck that heading could be flying into a mountain that the approach is designed to avoid. So I like the added component of having to continue navigating even though you're all disoriented - just like it would be for real.
Click to expand...
A good description of my only real unusual attitude.
 
Salty said:
Unless needed due to lack of recency, is there any reason to do an official IPC rather than just taking an instructor with you as you do your required actions to keep current? Likely we'd do most if not all of an IPC anyway by the time we're done. I know I said safety pilot in the title, but the assumption is that there would be instruction happening also.
Click to expand...
What region are you seeking a safety pilot for? I am out of southwest Florida.
 
I just do IPCs every 6 months. Then I know I'm legal for another 6, plus I get an outside and hopefully unbiased opinion of my competence and safety of operation.
 
The way I did it with my II is printed the checklist of tasks from the checkride and he told me to just go out and fly anything I wanted that hit the items on the list.
 
Salty said:
How would the insurance company care? I don't think they ask for last IPC information, but maybe I just never noticed since last time I re-upped the instrument rating was new for me.
Click to expand...

I get asked for my last IPC every time I complete any insurance application that I'm a named pilot on. Currently, that's three airplanes. But then again, the least complex airplane of those is a Mooney 231. (P210 and 310 are the others). Maybe in a 172 or equivalent, they wouldn't be asking.
 
flyingron said:
The way I did it with my II is printed the checklist of tasks from the checkride and he told me to just go out and fly anything I wanted that hit the items on the list.
Click to expand...
Love it! Not an IPC, but years ago, I was getting checked out for a rental. The instructor said, "you're a CFI. Check yourself out" while he watched.

My IPC SOP is not quite that. I have a short list of modern avionics tasks I've found pilots have trouble with. I incorporate at least one of those. But creating the plan of action is definitely something the pilot is part of.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top