I hate instrument flying

[David MacRay]

Das autopilot can't get us to the gate? Scheiße!  C:-)

[Rookie Pilot]

[quote author=mcrit link=topic=7245.msg19756#msg19756 date=1507592246]
IFR flying is work.  VFR is for fun.
[/quote]


I would agree with that. 


Also, Deflection, I've stayed alive SP IFR by adhering to a few strict rules.
One, tons of fuel when flying into low WX situations, so can fly to a decent alternate, (like 90 minutes or more, on some trips) I've had enough, can't handle situation, I can fly an hour to decent weather.




If impossible, all area airports are too close to minimums, don't take off,
Don't mix hard IFR and night, or remote terrain ,
Stricter rules on my personal health, better be sharp, current and rested,
Autopilot must be functional for hard IFR. 


I've cancelled lots of trips, that might have been possible, cause too risky for my experience/ equipment.


For weekend warriors, an IFR rating and a little experience/ competence,will allow comfortable completion of MVFR trips ---- say light rain, 3 SM and -an 1000--- 800 foot ceiling -- that may be  impossible / difficult VFR but not too stressful compared to hard IFR, gusty winds, turbulence, convection, which must be assessed very carefully. 


Night is definitely a major added risk factor to IFR flight. 

[Slick Goodlin]

[quote author=mcrit link=topic=7245.msg19756#msg19756 date=1507592246]
IFR flying is work.  VFR is for fun.
[/quote]
[font=Verdana]Instrument flight is work, visual flight is fun.[/font]

The rules you fly under have little to do with it.  VFR sucks if you're doing that commercial 300/1 stuff and IFR rocks for getting places on a clear day in the flight levels.  VFR is great fun at 500 feet on a clear, calm evening while IFR to circling minimums in a snowstorm at night is awful.  It's really about "Can I see lots of stuff or not?"

[Trey Kule]

Why does it have to be one or the other?
I enjoy both types of flying.

[Colonel]

[quote]Night is definitely a major added risk factor to IFR flight[/quote]

Absolutely.  This is why I really like to do IFR training
at night.  Much more realistic.  Less competing traffic.

If there is any wx around at night, the sky will be
empty except for the guys getting paid to do it.

Sometimes it is beautifully still at night.  Then it's
time to have some real fun during IFR training.

Time to do some ILS's the fun way.  Climb up to PT
altitude, but when you level off, leave the power at
climb or preferably WOT.  All the knobs forward.  The
neighbors will love you.  Level in the procedure turn
or vector, accelerate to maximum level speed, turn
inbound, intercept the LOC and when the GS needle
comes down, so do we.  With full throttle.  We leave
the gear and flaps up for maximum speed.

Anyone can fly an ILS at normal approach speed,
which incidentally is going to make you as popular
as a hooker in church at a big airport with your
90 knots on final.  You might as well have an orange
triangle painted on your ass.

Down we go, needles in the donuts, as close to redline
as we can get it.  The LOC and GS are going to be
unbelievably sensitive at Vne below 500 AGL.  No time
for a PIO.

Down to 200 AGL, Cat 1 DH, and with all the airspeed
in the world, clean with the power up, we soar back up
to PT altitude in a wonderful climbing turn with an amazing
number on the VSI to do it again.

I developed quite a bag of tricks when I was doing IFR
instruction, decades ago.

Here's another fun one.  On the ILS, under the hood, ATC
asks me for minimum speed.  I was in the Maule, after GS
intercept and there was a bit of headwind on final.

Heh heh heh.

So, keeping the needles centered, throttle all the way
back, nose comes up, slow down and put it on the back
side of the power curve, power comes up, stall warning
is on, just above a power-on stall.  My father in the right
seat said, "I don't think that's what he meant".  I was
going for single digit groundspeed.  Not sure I quite
got it.

But learning to do drastic airspeed changes on the ILS
keeping the needles in the donuts builds character.

Any IFR student of mine found a normal ILS to be
pretty easy after what I put him through.

I won't mention 0/0 takeoffs and landings.

[JW Scud]

[quote author=Colonel Sanders link=topic=7245.msg19757#msg19757 date=1507592470]
Pardon me if I am wrong, but aren't all CAT II/III approaches
and landings fully automated?  The pilots just sit there and
watch the aircraft fly the approach and land, correct?
[/quote]


You are wrong.

[Liquid Charlie]

For me I fly IFR all the time but if I owned a little aeroplane it would be a cub like type with nothing fancy and I would fly only when I could enjoy it - no reason to be sticking your nose in cloud and a little scud running from time to time where I would be flying would be fun. If I lived in an area like southern ontario the first thing I would do is join the flying farmers and have fun dropping in on people, sometimes even where there was no airport at all. Off strip is so much fun. Clear skies, west at 5, now that is heaven. Fuck the instruments and get back to the basics if you do it for fun. Renting and being under the thumb of a club or school is so inhibiting and almost impossible to have fun. They feed your head full of bullshit to sell you things you should use unless you are prepared to do it all the time(like IFR) the wet their pants when they see you coming and scare you by telling you need more training because you are out of date. Go back to the basics -- enjoy flying. That big shit eating grin will be there.

[Eric Janson]

[quote author=Colonel Sanders link=topic=7245.msg19757#msg19757 date=1507592470]
Pardon me if I am wrong, but aren't all CAT II/III approaches
and landings fully automated?  The pilots just sit there and
watch the aircraft fly the approach and land, correct?
[/quote]

Depends on the operator.

I've worked for companies where anything below Cat 1 is an autoland (my preferred way of doing things). I like keeping things simple. This way the only thing that changes are the minimums.

My present company allows a Cat II approach with a manual landing - I won't normally do this.

This does require good teamwork as there are a number of events that need to happen correctly during the approach. Any failures could potentially have you flying manually at below 100' in IMC. I've only seen this in the Simulator.

There are quite a few extra items to be briefed.

F/O has the hard part monitoring things - I just monitor the flightpath and either pull the thrust levers back or push them forward depending on the situation.

The level of redundancy is amazing - on a Fail Operational Approach (highest category autoland) below 200' the aircraft can land successfully with any combination of engine and electrical failure.

[Colonel]

[quote]You are wrong.[/quote]

You are useless and uninformative.

[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrumen ... operations]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrumen ... operations[/url]

[quote]In contrast to other operations, CAT III weather minima do not provide sufficient visual references to allow a manual landing to be made. CAT III minima depend on roll-out control and redundancy of the autopilot,[citation needed] because they give only enough time for the pilot to decide whether the aircraft will land in the touchdown zone (basically CAT IIIa) and to ensure safety during rollout (basically CAT IIIb).

[size=12pt][b]Therefore, an automatic landing system is mandatory to perform Category III operations[/b][/size]. Its reliability must be sufficient to control the aircraft to touchdown in CAT IIIa operations and through rollout to a safe taxi speed in CAT IIIb (and CAT IIIc when authorized).

[b]However, special approval has been granted to some operators for hand-flown CAT III approaches using a head-up display[/b] (HUD) guidance which provides the pilot with an image viewed through the windshield with eyes focused at infinity, of necessary electronic guidance to land the airplane with no true outside visual references.[/quote]

How many aircraft in Canada are equipped with the latter?  Are
all the elderly A320's in the AC fleet retrofitted with CAT III
heads-up displays for hand-flown CAT III approaches?

[Slick Goodlin]

[quote author=Liquid Charlie link=topic=7245.msg19769#msg19769 date=1507635023]
if I owned a little aeroplane it would be a cub like type with nothing fancy and I would fly only when I could enjoy it
[/quote]
Yeah, exactly that.