Who Flies Real IFR?

Bill Greenwood said:
How many pilots fly single pilot, single engine in actual IMC conditions? I'm not asking about flying around in vcm weather and on an ifr flight plan and the only thing ifr about it is talking to control.
Click to expand...
So why is ‘Real IFR’ limited to single engine????

I flew 3.5 hours last night from Jacksonville to Norfolk in the Beech 18. Was IMC from 300’ until I broke out on the approach around 900’. Whole trip was at night and rain most of the way.

If that isn’t ‘real IFR’ I don’t know what is.
 
Bill Greenwood said:
I really don't see much value of filing an ifr flight plan and flying those altitudes and routes when it is good vmc outside.
Click to expand...
The value is priority and separation. VFR Flight Following is just not the same.

There is nothing wrong with choosing to fly VFR when the weather supports and I do it all the time in the T6 and Waco, but when I’m flying an IFR capable airplane, I often opt to have the system work for me.
 
Bill Watson said:
Hand flying real IFR, single pilot, from TO to Landing at minimums is a skill, but it’s not the best way to do it. The AP is an important tool that makes the flight safer, even if it’s just used to give the pilot a rest during cruise in VMC.
Click to expand...
Very true. It was extremely nice to have a working A/P while departing Jacksonville last night. Sure, I could have hand flown, but it definitely would have been more stressful.
 
MauleSkinner said:
To me it's still a single engine airplane and will be treated as such. I've had enough turbine engine failures to know it can happen.
Click to expand...

So according to the FAA there is a turbine failure every 375,000 engine hours and you've had a few of them? Man you're 'unlucky'.
 
James_Dean said:
There are numerous and varied reasons to trust a turbine over a piston.
Click to expand...

Of course...but avoiding the indignity of a crash landing through IMC due to lack of powerplant redundancy is just not one of them.

The math isn't particularly complicated. The probability of dual independent failures for the twin is the square of the individual component probability. That's not only a smaller number, but an exponentially lower number. That's the mathematical reason folks can disregard the need for a VMC block of altitude to crash land into in the case of twins, as you illustrate in your own predilection for twins. But it needs to be understood that this has nothing to do with the differences in reliability between turbines and piston, as often proferred. It's the compounding effect of numerical redundancy that is the inflection point in outcome differences highlighted by the math. A long winded way of saying people overestimate turbine reliability in the context of this question.

But hey, to each their own. Whatever we need to do to gets us over the hump and do this flying thing. :thumbsup:
 
hindsight2020 said:
That's not only a smaller number, but an exponentially lower number.:
Click to expand...

Sort of a personal pet peeve, but we are talking math in the response.

[pedantic]
Many people now use “exponentially” when what they really mean is significantly or greatly. Exponentially originally meant the growth was exponential, like a base raised to a power, like e^x. It does not really apply to a single number.

In this case, the exponent would be a fixed number, 2, for the square of the number being discussed. It is geometric in the number, not exponential.

Here’s a definition from the Cambridge Dictionary:

An exponential rate of increase becomes quicker and quicker as the thing that increases becomes larger:

[/pedantic]
 
I fly single-engine turbine IFR down to 1800 RVR.

The chances of both the engines quitting on your piston twin are less than a single-turbine failure.

That being said, at night in the winter in Alaska I much prefer the King Air to the Caravan......
 
Last edited:
Let’s be real here... I have a Cherokee 180 I have owned for 4 years and know and trust the plane... I know every little sound she makes.. I have flown it down to mins.. I have flown her all over the US.. I trust her.. I perform my own maintenance.. (with AP/IA of course) I know this aircraft.. now would I feel better with a twin or a turbine..... I would make sure I have an alternate that I can get to if I can’t get in.. but my plane doesn’t know if it’s in the clouds or not.. and I feel confident in my plane.. in a rental? Maybe not. It’s all about personal preference. Let the bashing begin........


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
EdFred said:
Not quite. It's less than double.
Click to expand...

Only choosing the 520 engine, because my twin had them, not criticizing them.

But if you have a plane with one 520, a twin with 520s is twice as likely to lose an engine. Although chances are really good the single engine will not just grenade itself to pieces either.
 
I fly a SE piston for work, so I’m IFR in IMC a fair amount. And 95% of the time I’m solo. I do avoid heavy cumulous and icing conditions, which is pretty easy out west. But normally I’ll be in and out of the clouds in spring and winter, with lots of low fog layers to shoot approaches through. Nothing heavy though, and certainly no night IMC if I can help it, which usually I can. Usually the fog bottoms out above the minimums for the approaches and if I need to go over the mountains I’m very cautious, since icing is always a concern. I don’t NEED to push it, ever, so I don’t.

The sled is a C-T182, steam gauges with a GTN 750, KAP-140 autopilot(old and doesn’t work half the time, so plenty of hand flying). Still keep a GMN 496 for weather, and iPad foreflight synced to the GTN750. The turbo 182 is a great platform IFR, but there is no SE piston made that can tackle real IMC. Cessna does offer a C-206 with weeping wings however. Not sure how they handle heavy icing though.
 
Last edited:
Setting the stage: I fly a 172 with an autopilot; it'll track GPS or VOR. I'm not a professional pilot.

I will and do fly real IFR, east coast, excepting thnderstorms and ice. I won't go if the AP is broke - single engine, single pilot hard IFR, without an AP is hard work, especially as I don't do it constantly. I can do it, but I don't want to.

Oddly enough, VFR or IFR, I don't give consideration to engine failure - you can survive a forced landing of a 172 in the average driveway.
 
I probably shoot more instrument approaches than most and occasionally down to minima's. The aircrafts equipped with an ADF/DME and an iPad. Pretty well every airfield with an instrucment approach in my part of europe has an NDb. Ground is pretty flat mind.
 
mryan75 said:
What do you fly and where?
Click to expand...
Warrior with steam gauges, and based in the Midwest (specifically southwest Michigan). My home field only has non-precision approaches, but just a few flight-minutes away I have a larger feeder airport with multiple ILS approaches. Those 2 times I've had to go missed were due to low ceilings and I couldn't get into my home airport, so I had to fly the ILS nearby to "wait it out".
Where I'm at/with what I fly, my biggest concern is ice when flying IFR, and that concern keeps me on the ground often, where low ceilings/poor vis typically don't.
 
Last edited:
Last week I was leaving San Luis Obispo airport at night it. One-minute weather was saying 1/4 visability, it was closer to 1/2. I had to wait for a Bonanza to land before I was released and just after departing a Lancair landed behind me. Despite the tower being closed, everything was very efficient. There we had 3 singles operating in conditions that the airlines can't operate in. My work rides are Turbo Bonanzas and I fly them ~500 hours a year. If we can avoid ice and convective weather there is a 99% chance we are flying. Night over terrain and night in IMC is generally something I try to avoid but sometimes the mission calls for it. That particular evening we got both. Extra awareness and planning is required in those scenarios.
 
Just this past Monday I flew IFR to Canadian Rockies International airport, YXC, the Airliner in front of me called missed approach, and was hesitant about going around for another attempt, or just heading to his alternate. The controller asked me if I had heard the 737 Pirep, I assured them yes I did, and they cleared me to land, it was not bad at all, done much tougher approaches, behind me a private King Air landed no problem. So the 737 decided that since we landed fine, he would try again, and another miss, he left to his alternate after that. A 210 was holding waiting for the 737 to land for his turn, now gone finally, the 210 was cleared to land, and did so with ease. This is not a tight runway either, at 8,000' it doesn't get much better than that, so I was shocked when the 737 missed twice. Later I find out that the crew is not new to coming there either, they are regulars and still couldn't get it done. It makes me wonder if they actually do real IFR often, or are too used to just being on AP or IFR on top which is really just glorified VFR. Before I was in my rental car driving away another plane landed without incident on their first try.
 
Shuswap BC said:
Just this past Monday I flew IFR to Canadian Rockies International airport, YXC, the Airliner in front of me called missed approach, and was hesitant about going around for another attempt, or just heading to his alternate. The controller asked me if I had heard the 737 Pirep, I assured them yes I did, and they cleared me to land, it was not bad at all, done much tougher approaches, behind me a private King Air landed no problem. So the 737 decided that since we landed fine, he would try again, and another miss, he left to his alternate after that. A 210 was holding waiting for the 737 to land for his turn, now gone finally, the 210 was cleared to land, and did so with ease. This is not a tight runway either, at 8,000' it doesn't get much better than that, so I was shocked when the 737 missed twice. Later I find out that the crew is not new to coming there either, they are regulars and still couldn't get it done. It makes me wonder if they actually do real IFR often, or are too used to just being on AP or IFR on top which is really just glorified VFR. Before I was in my rental car driving away another plane landed without incident on their first try.
Click to expand...

Wow, you're just so....awesome!! :rolleyes:
 
Yup, in a few planes, pistons to turbines, for single pilot I’d say a auto pilot is on the need list, a HSI is very nice, a ehsi is better, a iPad beats a phone book worth of tissue thin plates, aside from that it’s mostly just training and experience, don’t just jump in the deep end of the pool/don’t just jump into it was a dark and stormy night.


Doc Holliday said:
Wow, you're just so....awesome!! :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Come on doc, you didn’t think you had a non compete on being smug did you? Let others play too ;)

Lots of operators who do 90% of their flying in clear blue and 22, even the “pros”, can seem rookie like when they are flying in a different environment than they are used too, think we all have been there, just a matter of having the confidence to admit it and learn from it.
 
Last edited:
Shuswap BC said:
Just this past Monday I flew IFR to Canadian Rockies International airport, YXC, the Airliner in front of me called missed approach, and was hesitant about going around for another attempt, or just heading to his alternate. The controller asked me if I had heard the 737 Pirep, I assured them yes I did, and they cleared me to land, it was not bad at all, done much tougher approaches, behind me a private King Air landed no problem. So the 737 decided that since we landed fine, he would try again, and another miss, he left to his alternate after that. A 210 was holding waiting for the 737 to land for his turn, now gone finally, the 210 was cleared to land, and did so with ease. This is not a tight runway either, at 8,000' it doesn't get much better than that, so I was shocked when the 737 missed twice. Later I find out that the crew is not new to coming there either, they are regulars and still couldn't get it done. It makes me wonder if they actually do real IFR often, or are too used to just being on AP or IFR on top which is really just glorified VFR. Before I was in my rental car driving away another plane landed without incident on their first try.
Click to expand...

That kind of things has happened to me a few times but it always leaves me thinking, “did I push it too hard”?

Is there a possibility that their company operating standards were higher than the FAA mins?

A 737 is whole lot more aircraft than a 210 or whatever.

I believe that experience always informs.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
Bill Watson said:
That kind of things has happened to me a few times but it always leaves me thinking, “did I push it too hard”?

Is there a possibility that their company operating standards were higher than the FAA mins?

A 737 is whole lot more aircraft than a 210 or whatever.

I believe that experience always informs.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Click to expand...

Could have been a high mins Captain on the 737. Or the weather was fluctuating.
 
Can a 737 make 350 ft/mile to 4800 feet? And/or I wonder if they were loaded too heavy because the weather was lower than they planned.
 
Actually it seems that there are two regular crews for the early morning Westjet flights. Locals say the one crew rarely has to go to an alternate even in weather to minimums. This crew is known locally as the "Chickens" they always bale out before minimums, and this time of year weather is often less than ideal, so they don't land regularly. If I was the owner of Westjet, they would be served their walking papers. It wasn't that bad, I have done a hell of a lot worse, and considered Monday's landing on the scale of difficulty from 1 to 10, about a 2. No it was not VFR which would have rated a 1, but it was a simple IFR approach and runway in site above minimums, basically no wind to speak of, and I was not loading up on ice either.
If they couldn't stick that landing, maybe they should consider a new career, possibly package puller for Amazon, nice indoor job, and easy, no risk, no fog.
 
Shuswap BC said:
Actually it seems that there are two regular crews for the early morning Westjet flights. Locals say the one crew rarely has to go to an alternate even in weather to minimums. This crew is known locally as the "Chickens" they always bale out before minimums, and this time of year weather is often less than ideal, so they don't land regularly. If I was the owner of Westjet, they would be served their walking papers. It wasn't that bad, I have done a hell of a lot worse, and considered Monday's landing on the scale of difficulty from 1 to 10, about a 2. No it was not VFR which would have rated a 1, but it was a simple IFR approach and runway in site above minimums, basically no wind to speak of, and I was not loading up on ice either.
If they couldn't stick that landing, maybe they should consider a new career, possibly package puller for Amazon, nice indoor job, and easy, no risk, no fog.
Click to expand...
Above 700-some-odd feet and a couple of miles vis?
 
I could see where the deck angle and cockpit height could have the 737 crew still in the soup while the little guys are breaking out and picking up the runway.
 
Last edited:
Shuswap BC said:
Actually it seems that there are two regular crews for the early morning Westjet flights. Locals say the one crew rarely has to go to an alternate even in weather to minimums. This crew is known locally as the "Chickens" they always bale out before minimums, and this time of year weather is often less than ideal, so they don't land regularly. If I was the owner of Westjet, they would be served their walking papers. It wasn't that bad, I have done a hell of a lot worse, and considered Monday's landing on the scale of difficulty from 1 to 10, about a 2. No it was not VFR which would have rated a 1, but it was a simple IFR approach and runway in site above minimums, basically no wind to speak of, and I was not loading up on ice either.
If they couldn't stick that landing, maybe they should consider a new career, possibly package puller for Amazon, nice indoor job, and easy, no risk, no fog.
Click to expand...

Ah, was that a strong wiff of BS in the air? :eek:

Westjet has 125 airplanes and flies to 100+ destinations. I find it hard to believe only 2 crews regularly fly that route.

““The difference between fiction and reality? Fiction has to make sense,” -Tom Clancy
 
Last edited:
Between saying that making a $1 mil a year is so-so of a salary and these comments, I think that Shushwap is a professional troll.
 
Groundpounder said:
Between saying that making a $1 mil a year is so-so of a salary and these comments, I think that Shushwap is a professional troll.
Click to expand...
Then there’s this gem:

“Yes, airliner time is not a good example of time being a good teacher. Someone who sits in a room doing the weight and balance, checking weather, telling them how much fuel to use, just droning along on autopilot, heck it will land itself, and never ever go to a small runway. I don't really consider airliners building time, those pilots don't even do a walk around style thorough preflight. They just expect others to have checked it over and fuel itnfor them. They don't even stand by the door, greet the passengers, check how the luggage and passengers are being loaded. They are out of touch with the actual plane, and activities going on with it. Auto throttles, autopilot that lands, it almost takes away the need for a pilot completely. I bet they would feel better if they were hands on, request the shorter runway, hand fly at 1000' agl. ”
 
Shuswap BC said:
Just this past Monday I flew IFR to Canadian Rockies International airport, YXC, the Airliner in front of me called missed approach, and was hesitant about going around for another attempt, or just heading to his alternate. The controller asked me if I had heard the 737 Pirep, I assured them yes I did, and they cleared me to land, it was not bad at all, done much tougher approaches, behind me a private King Air landed no problem. So the 737 decided that since we landed fine, he would try again, and another miss, he left to his alternate after that. A 210 was holding waiting for the 737 to land for his turn, now gone finally, the 210 was cleared to land, and did so with ease. This is not a tight runway either, at 8,000' it doesn't get much better than that, so I was shocked when the 737 missed twice. Later I find out that the crew is not new to coming there either, they are regulars and still couldn't get it done. It makes me wonder if they actually do real IFR often, or are too used to just being on AP or IFR on top which is really just glorified VFR. Before I was in my rental car driving away another plane landed without incident on their first try.
Click to expand...

Reminds me of the multiple times I waited for 737s to go missed before getting a Special "VFR" lol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top