What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

How many of you guys with IFR certified RVs use the capability?

Do you use the IFR capability of your RV?

  • YES (file IFR)

    Votes: 241 73.0%
  • NO

    Votes: 89 27.0%

  • Total voters
    330
I use it....occasionally

I haven't flown real IFR very often since getting the tickets about 16 months ago, but I am very glad I both have the ticket and an IFR aircraft. Commuting to work and on some business flights, those skills and equipment give me the confidence to make VFR flights in conditions that might have had me driving.

I keep myself current and (try to) keep the instrumentation functioning. A couple of weeks ago, I found myself over a thin layer 1600' off the ground that hadn't cleared yet (flawed TAF). Air filed and landed as planned. Otherwise, I had a long flight back home or would have had to circle for another 45 minutes for the clouds to burn off. On the way home, the clouds came in much earlier than forecasted (again about 1600' off the deck) and I prepared to air file once more. Fortunately, the hole remained over an airport near home and I made it in VFR before closing out. There have been many days of my commute when the forecasts predicted broken for landing at my work airport but the holes were scarce for part of the flight. Having the IFR option is a huge security towards continuing to work. Generally, I find the holes when I get up there and land VFR. But, I know I can get in one way or another. (I ONLY count on the IFR option if the layer is plenty high for my skills.)

If flying is strictly for fun, VFR-only works and I'm considering it for our -3. But, if you use it for transportation, I suggest going IFR.
 
IFR in an RV

I fly my RV-7A IFR whenever I can. It's easier to stay current if you go out in bad weather often (but always good enough to make safe approaches). I've made several approaches on trips where I had to take the extra 100' after seeing the "Runway Environment" with only 1/4 mile vis. Not for the faint of heart or those that do not trust their equipment. If I have a passenger, I'll usually couple the approach. Otherwise, I like to hand fly them just to stay really current in the plane. Currency to me means I can't "Feel" my corrections. If I'm jerky, it means I need more practice......
The RV-7A has: GNS480, SL-30, GNX-330, Triple GRT EFIS, Dual AHRS, TruTrak DigiFlight II VSGV Auto Pilot, with 3 1/8" Airspeed, Altimeter and TruTrak ADI as backups.
All this flying means I put a lot of hours on the plane every year. Top year was 330 Hrs, but lately it's only been 265/yr.....

This is a good follow-up question: for those of you flying IFR in a 3, 4, 6, 7, or 8: are you doing it with an autopilot? Would you do it without an autopilot? I exclude the 9 and 10 from that question simply because I assume, perhaps naively, that they are somewhat more stable as an IFR platform.
 
I really think the decision depends upon your intended mission(s), just as does the choice of airplane. I have upgraded two experimental aircraft to full IFR, and have an plan on continuing to file IFR and fly in the soup. My typical mission is long distance cross country, so the plane would not be very useful to me if it did not have this capability. I do not fly into areas expected to contain thunderstorms nor icing, but have no problem at all flying into clouds. I always plan to fly high (I have on-board oxygen) and the moments when I am not within gliding range of an airport are brief to non-existent on any given flight.

Having already experienced total loss of power airborne (broken prop over the ocean traversing the Bahamas) I have no real fear of gliding to an airport to land, even in weather. Provided you have enough starting altitude, it is nearly a complete non-event (leaving aside the pucker factor, that is!).

:D

Oh, I answered the poll "Yes" even though my bird is not an RV. I don't think that will "skew" the results. If you feel it makes the poll "impure," just mentally subtract one yes vote...
 
IFR via VFR Panel

I live in Sandpoint ID, and San Diego CA and could use IFR to "pop up" thru Costal Eddies, and cloud decks.
I'm ready to fly off my 40 hrs, and installing a "basic" panel expecting to install a full IFR system when when the 40 hrs are done.
I'm using an Area 740, GTR 200, and GDL 50 in the panel during the 40 hrs and will decide "exactly" what and how I want the final panel.
 
I live in Sandpoint ID, and San Diego CA and could use IFR to "pop up" thru Costal Eddies, and cloud decks.
I'm ready to fly off my 40 hrs, and installing a "basic" panel expecting to install a full IFR system when when the 40 hrs are done.
I'm using an Area 740, GTR 200, and GDL 50 in the panel during the 40 hrs and will decide "exactly" what and how I want the final panel.

Does that mean your RV won't be certified for flight into IMC?

-Marc
 
Does that mean your RV won't be certified for flight into IMC?

-Marc

This question is probably not worded quite right. The correct question would be, “Do your operating limits allow flight under IFR under certain conditions, and does your airplane meet those conditions?”. The typical conditions are ‘equipped as specified in far 91.205.’ So usual flight instruments (AI, DG, TC, airspeed, etc) plus ‘navigation required for the route’. Any redundancy/backups are left to the discretion of the PIC.
 
Age??

Might wanna consider one's age also. I was going to outfit my 8 IFR. But at the time, I was maybe 73--74. It was going to cost me some 22 to $23000 bux--I wanted a lot of redundancy if anything broke---GRT EFIS, little GRT EFIS as a backup , and 3 AHRS's, so if one went blooie, I had a 3rd as a tie breaker,and lastly, a Garmin 625, But then I got to thinking--how much longer can I fly? So I said to heck with it. A lot of guys here are, I guess, like me--pretty old.:cool::rolleyes:

Now as other guys have said here---if you do a lot of cross country, then very definitely outfit yourself IFR. (I've been cross country only 10 times in my RV, but the last time, I sure coulda used IFR equipment, but hey, only 10 cross countries in some 13 years of RV flying---Atl to Sun n Fun doesn't count--too close))

(Even now, I've just got a Dynon 180, but if it quit at night, I'd have a black cockpit. So, 2 years ago, I had installed a Tru Trac autopilot with the artificial horizon, airspeed, altimeter backup.)
 
Last edited:
I got my instrument rating as soon as I finished my private. Did my multi right after that, just for kicks, but that’s another story.

My wife wouldn’t let the kids, or herself, fly with me until I got the IFR rating. She has a few friends who fly for United and told her to make sure I get it.

I don’t use it very often. In Colorado, 90% of IFR means snow or thunderstorms. Most of my currency is maintained in a Red Bird sim at my old flight school. Did my 6 sim approaches and a hold just a few days ago to buy me 6 more months. However, for the other 10% of the time, it is VERY nice to have it. The weather changes quickly and a pop up clearance is much nicer than doing a 180. I have even had a few VFR days turn bad when doing touch and go loops, with IFR conditions at pattern altitude come from nowhere. Yes, the private training gives you a little experience under the hood or foggles, but the training and discipline of getting and keeping an IFR rating is invaluable when things turn bad.

Think about all the crash or near crash stories you have read over the years in Flying or AOPA Pilot. How many could have been prevented simply by a few hours of extra training for an IFR rating? 30%? All those deaths and near deaths simply become a routine flight. Would you ever drive a car from October to April if you didn’t know how to drive in snow, rain, or fog? Then why drive another vehicle that can’t just pull over?

I’m still building my RV-10, keeping current in a rental 172. But the one I’m building will be IFR capable down to minimums.

It is just my opinion, but if every pilot took off with full tanks and an IFR rating on every flight, I’m guessing the GA accident rate would fall instantly by at least 50%.
 
Absolutley...

I bought a flying RV7A 5 years ago. It did not have "certified" IFR gear in it. I shot many approaches under the hood in VFR conditions and the runway was alway there. After the first year of flying it and a few cancelled trips because of not being willing to file illegally, I upgrade the panel to "certified" gear. I don't want some clouds to be the reason I can't go. I almost always file for cross country flights, even in VFR conditions. It adds a layer of safety. That said, stay away from convective activity and icing...
 
Last edited:
I got my IFR ticket in my 9A, with the equipment I installed, so that I would have maximum knowledge of how to use it and a comfort level with it. That was the best thing I've ever done, I use it all the time now. It greatly simplifies flight planning for a cross country and takes a great deal of the worry factor out of the weather equation.
 
FWIW for our experimental aircraft "certified" means whatever your operations limitations requires.

:cool:
 
I do

I use my RV6 for IFR and love it. I think a big thing in the RVs is to have an autopilot. Makes it so much easier. Keeping altitude in an RV can be a bit of a challenge without it. I regularly fly and practice IFR in my RV, and got my rating in it.
 
Prior to retirement, I was instrument rated for forty-four years. When I built my RV, I knew I would not fly IFR enough to justify maintaining the rating. There are days when it would be useful to be able to file IFR and be on my way; however, they don't occur with enough frequency to pursue it at this stage.
 
When I got my 9, I did not build it, it had a very complete VFR panel with a dual AFS 4500 EFIS system. But I’ve used airplanes for cross country travel so knew I needed an IFR panel. With the help of Tom Berge, actually he did the work while I handed him tools and whatever else he asked for, in five long days I had the panel I wanted.
We added the new GPS 175, an audio panel, a second comm, remote ADS-B In, an ARINC module and a heated pitot. All equipment and wiring harness came from Stein who knew this airplane intimately.
That new IFR panel came in handy on the very first flight. Leaving Minnesota weather was good. Half way to North Georgia weather got serious. Two hours of solid IMC, getting from the back side to the front side of a front was made possible with ADS-B In and Sirius weather. Upon reaching my home airport it required a GPS LPV approach not quite to minimums.
But shooting that approach made me realize the short comings of my TruTrak autopilot. So I upgraded to the Vizion 385 with auto trim.
I could not be happier with the upgrades we’ve done. We use the airplane for medium to long cross country flights. Have had to shoot numerous approaches, many to minimums.
 
Yes, I've equipped my RV7 for IFR. That said, it's mostly for getting in and out of my home airport which is on the coast and frequently has a low overcast but good visability.
I'm not a fan of enroute IFR flights in the WX but often file IFR to some destinations because it's quicker.

With the new Garmin GPS WAAS devices it seems like one can install a great IFR package for not a whole lot of dough, if the plan is to do occasional approaches to your home airport to avoid scud running.

I still shake my head thinking about all the single engine IFR time I did flying bank checks with only two VOR's. Now with Foreflight, moving maps, and Geo -referenced approach charts, and WAAS GPS we are way ahead of the game.


Pat
RV7
KHAF
 
When I first started my aircraft, I wanted a fully IFR bird. 2 radios (Nav/Com), VOR/LOC/Glide slope, GPS unit, EFIS, electronic engine monitoring, the works. My wings will be finished soon and I have been thinking about my ?mission?. I don?t know if a fully IFR bird is required any more. I am starting to lean towards the ?build it light and simple and get it in the air?.

So, if you have an IFR certified RV, could you tell me if you use the capability or not?

Wow !! Can't believe the number of responses here. I have an all glass cockpit (3 Garmin G3X screens, GTN 650 IFR navigator, and full autopilot). I got my instrument ticket in the RV-10 and it's well worth it to have the capability for peace of mind, resale value of the plane, and capabilities and options it opens up for usage. I have been IMC to approaches to 300 to 400 foot breakouts, with minimal pucker factor. Knowing that you and your plane can do IFR if needed really reduces the stress level for cross country trips. If you're all glass, make sure that the electrical system has plenty of redundancy for at least two screens and E.I.'s etc. I have no regrets of building my 10 that way.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0383.jpg
    IMG_0383.jpg
    371.4 KB · Views: 133
I fly my RV in IFR conditions

I got my IFR cert prior to buying my first RV. It was the best thing I did and wish I had gotten it sooner. If you only fly locally then you don't really need it but if you do fly a few hrs away or for over night stays then I would say it's definitely needed. I can't tell you how many times prior to getting my IFR cert I was worried about not being able to go or if I go over night having to constantly monitor the weather if it became iffy or had to return earlier than I liked. Also if I was wanting to go someplace locally for an early breakfast but had to wait for the fog to clear when if I had my IFR cert I could simply takeoff and punch through a few 100 feet of fog and have perfect VFR on top. It is so worth it.
 
Since this thread is over 13 years old, I suppose a mild drift won’t upset anyone.

The original OP asked how many of us use the IFR capability of our RVs.
To me there are two parts to this question. 1) Using the IFR system 2) flying IMC.

I’m building a IFR capable aircraft but without crazy redundancy. My plans are to use the IFR system. This makes sense to me as I’d like to fly places with complicated airspace. I have dreams of flying back east and that just sends shivers up my spine thinking about navigating that airspace :eek:

Now IMHO, IMC in this sort of aircraft is best left to busting out of marine layers or guidance through smoky airspace. Again IMHO, one can plan an IFR flight with VFR conditions in mind. To some that’s underutilizing the aircraft but for my purposes, I’m in heaven. All the equipment to make a safe flight through challenging airspace.

In summary, to me IFR does not necessarily mean IMC.
 
Since this thread is over 13 years old, I suppose a mild drift won’t upset anyone.

The original OP asked how many of us use the IFR capability of our RVs.
To me there are two parts to this question. 1) Using the IFR system 2) flying IMC.

I’m building a IFR capable aircraft but without crazy redundancy. My plans are to use the IFR system. This makes sense to me as I’d like to fly places with complicated airspace. I have dreams of flying back east and that just sends shivers up my spine thinking about navigating that airspace :eek:

Now IMHO, IMC in this sort of aircraft is best left to busting out of marine layers or guidance through smoky airspace. Again IMHO, one can plan an IFR flight with VFR conditions in mind. To some that’s underutilizing the aircraft but for my purposes, I’m in heaven. All the equipment to make a safe flight through challenging airspace.

In summary, to me IFR does not necessarily mean IMC.

Pretty much exactly my thoughts too, Michael. I equipped my RV for IFR, but “barely,” such that it’s suitable to getting in or out of an airport with low ceilings, but not best used by sitting in imc for an extended period of time.

Dual AFS-5600 screens, heated pitot, and a GNC 355 as the navigator. I’ve found this setup to come in handy when used as intended, but also to not encourage extended flight in IMC.
 

Attachments

  • D960EB27-2F32-42CC-9972-B71204074CC4.jpg
    D960EB27-2F32-42CC-9972-B71204074CC4.jpg
    366.7 KB · Views: 120
Flying IFR, without expecting to fly IMC, is just fooling yourself until the day you learn better.
 
Flying IFR, without expecting to fly IMC, is just fooling yourself until the day you learn better.

That's like saying flying VFR without expecting to fly IMC, is just fooling yourself.

My commercial go go go days are over.

One certainly can flight plan and file expecting VFR conditions, using the IFR system, just like one can flight plan for VFR. The weathers the same the system is the only thing that's changed.

Now for those that are used to flight planning in IMC conditions...well they expect IMC conditions. Granted, one will not have the flexibility to continue when conditions deteriorate but that's expected.

I never said the plane and pilot should not be IFR current through training OR avoid IMC at all cost...just that IMC would be avoided as a matter of practice.

I've had this conversation with many of my current and retired airline pilot friends and that's their strategy too when flying GA. Use the IFR system but generally avoid IMC.
 
Primer war!!

If you really believe there is soft IFR you haven’t flown IMC much.
Weather forecasters are wrong a LOT. AWOS systems are wrong a LOT.
Weather systems are unpredictable a LOT. Stuff happens a LOT.
If you file and fly IFR you are at some point gong to find “hard” IFR, whatever you think that means and you and your plane should be ready.

The phrase “I didn’t expect this” is used a LOT out in the real world. Be prepared!
 
.....SNIP.....
Weather forecasters are wrong a LOT. AWOS systems are wrong a LOT.
Weather systems are unpredictable a LOT. Stuff happens a LOT.....SNIP.....

Of course your right.

Stuff happens a lot is the nature of aviation. And being prepared and current is vital... for whatever one’s aviation endeavors.

In VFR flying, as I’m sure your aware, when the weather turns bad, one diverts, retreats or lands. I’m applying this philosophy while using the IFR system. BUT staying current and prepared to enter IMC conditions... the difference is I’m prepared to divert, retreat or land as soon as possible.

If you had a choice when flying along the eastern seaboard on a CAVU day from Atlanta to NY wouldn’t you rather use the IFR system?? Maybe not but I would.
 
A few more thoughts, and I'm probably repeating myself:
* A test pilot friend never flies his A-36 Bonanza above a ceiling less that 1,000 feet. His rationale, which I have adopted, is that if the engine goes poop when you're in or over the clouds, it's nice to break out at at least 1,000 feet so you can find somewhere soft to put it down. Early morning departures through a low overcast? No, thanks.
* You may decide never to fly an approach to published minimums, but best to be able to, just in case;
* Somebody posted that they'd not be able to fly enough IFR to justify keeping it up. I disagree. I fly a bunch of practice approaches just to keep proficiency up in fussing with the glass and the procedures. If fussing with the avionics is second nature, hand flying (if the autopilot poops out) is much less of an issue. But with all the buzzards around here, best to keep eyes outside.
 
Musing on the topic of Currency/Proficiency (which most will admit are two different things....), a lot of doing either has to do with where you live. I spent over three decades living on the gulf coast, just south of Houston, and I could fly over to a nearby airport that had six different approaches, alternate flying to either end of the runway on each approach, and fly six approaches (different ones each time, so there was not only the hand flying, but LOTS of button pushing and situational awareness work) in less than 45 minutes. It was great for both currency and proficiency, and for many years, I’d do that every other week or so.

Now I live out in the mountains near Carson City. The only ILS we have is at the big airport in Reno, and I don’t need to get in the airline’s way. We have two GPS approaches to Carson City, two to Minden, and one in to Silver Springs - most of them have missed approach instructions that start with “climbing left turn to 12,000’....”, and getting back to start another one can take ten minutes. In short, it takes a lot longer to maintain currency, much less proficiency.

Add to that the fact that the only real reason we would be filing IFR is to get in and out of the coastal airports if we’re headed to California - if we’re IFR, its due to winter weather with ice, so we generally don’t fly IFR in and out of home base (with RV’s or other similar piston singles). And if I am headed east of the Rockies, I usually am on an airliner, just to make efficient use of time.

So while years ago I was always staying current and proficient because I could USE my IFR capability, I have lots of other reasons to fly rather than just drone along between legs of practice approaches, and don’t always stay current anymore. Like many, I have flown IFR all my life in lots of different planes, but at some point, the “need” goes away for much of the time. I most likely will have the need again, and then I’ll crank my proficiency back up - for now, I maintain my precision flying skills doing test work, which is rewarding and interesting enough.

Paul
 
Last edited:
IFR proficiency

Even though you may not have the opportunity to fly actual IFR you can still go through the mechanics of shooting approaches in VFR conditions so you remain comfortable/second natured with doing it and with the equipment, which I often do. When I do my currency under the hood I hand fly it instead of using the autopilot. Although flying under the hood IS different than actual IMC it still keeps you fresh on the basics. I sometimes do my currency at night under the hood because it's closer to simulating IMC since your peripheral vision is inhibited if you aren't around big city lights.
 
I'm aware this is an old thread but it surprises me so many people are not comfortable flying a properly equipped and maintained RV IFR. I'll take my RV in low weather over driving in similar any day of the week! My closest brushes with death have come on the road. Managing risks in the air a lot easier than managing the idiots on the street.

I also don't believe a multi-engine aircraft provides additional safety margins for the average non-professional pilot. Statistics don't support one is safer over the other even though safe landings after engine failures aren't reported or tracked.

I have an RV-9A with only GPS175 for instrument approaches and only 1 COM. However, I do have significant redundancy in the electrical and primary instrument systems, and a handheld I carry for emergency COMs and ILS. I'm happy to fly all day long IMC in an aircraft I intimately know.
 
I try to fly at least one practice RNAV or ILS every time I fly. My usual flight is takeoff from El Reno, fly to the contact area; do steep clearing turns; power-on, power-off stalls; a few aileron rolls and/or lazy 8; maybe a gentle loop; then setup for a vector to Wiley Post for a couple of practice ILSs (coupled and non-coupled), and finally return to El Reno via self navigation to the RNAV IAF, complete a turn in holding then fly the approach to MAP and then to the VFR pattern for a few visual T&Gs.

This typically takes about 1.5/1.7 hours, keeps me busy working buttonology and hopefully keeps my proficiency up. Since I generally fly solo my “currency” doesn’t benefit from this workout but that’s not my true goal.

When I fly to different destinations it’s usually under VFR rules always requesting “flight following.” I treat my radio communication as if I was on an IFR flight plan. Its been so long since I last filed IFR I would probably embarrass myself in working the clearance process. Most of my true IFR flying was in heavy, multi-engine aircraft and today I consider real IFR flying something that will only occur if I screwed up.

My RV7A has everything thing needed to fly a beautiful instrument approach and in fact is extremely capable. It’s kept current for IFR flight. I have complete confidence that if I screw up and find myself in instrument conditions the skills and capabilities are there to extract myself from the situation. However, as others have said, my true instrument flying days are behind me. As the saying goes: there are old pilots and bold pilots - but very few old, bold pilots. At 73 I certainly qualify as old, but my bold days are hopefully behind me. Fly safe.
 
I've had this conversation with many of my current and retired airline pilot friends and that's their strategy too when flying GA. Use the IFR system but generally avoid IMC.

Your experience is the complete opposite of my experience. I have 5 retired airline pilot buddies, all flying RVs, and not one of them is equipped for IFR.

When I ask them why they did not instal IFR equipment they all give me the same answer.....after a working lifetime trapped within the highly regulated IFR system they are elated to be out of it. Now they’re free to go where they want to go at a whim and just enjoy the scenery. None of them exhibits any desire to fly IFR any more. Now they’re just flying for pure fun...there’s no rush, no imperative to get anywhere. If the weather’s cr@p they just stay on the ground and have a beer.

The poll for this thread was taken 13 years ago and indicates that virtually 30% of builders who equip for IFR do not actually fly IFR. If this poll was taken today we might find that those numbers might be even higher. However more to the point is how many of the other 70% who say that they actually fly IFR are actually using the equipment to actually fly in serious IMC, rather than simply lodging IFR plans in VFR conditions.

And the final question is how many of those 70% are actually flying enough IFR time per year to remain proficient. My guess is that there are a lot of IFR equipped RVs out there these days that are flying maybe 30 hours or less per year...with perhaps half of that being IFR....and most or all of that in VMC and the rest being dependent on an autopilot.

My observations are that there’s a LOT more RVs being equipped for IFR these days but there's also a lot more low time button pushing pretenders flying them.
 
Last edited:
IFR Is Awesome

I love having the peace of mind that my aircraft is IFR. Just knowing that I can fly an approach through a layer rather than scud run is worth every penny. It also adds to the resale value. And if I am flying into congested airspace or class B, filing IFR makes things so incredibly easy. And lastly, even flying VFR I use my IFR to backup my VFR approaches. Flying into a big new airport at night? intercepting and tracking a localizer to my landing runway gives me a warm fuzzy knowing I'm lined up on the correct runway. I see no downside to IFR qualified and equipped. And keep in mind, you don't have to file IFR, just having the capability is comforting should you need it.
 
Last edited:
The poll for this thread was taken 13 years ago

The poll was started a long time ago however, runs continuously still today. The data are what they are.

I am the OP. It was just a simple question regarding if folk use the IFR capability in their RV or not.
 
I love having the peace of mind that my aircraft is IFR. Just knowing that I can fly an approach through a layer rather than scud run is worth every penny. It also adds to the resale value. And if I am flying into congested airspace or class B, filing IFR makes things so incredibly easy. And lastly, even flying VFR I use my IFR to backup my VFR approaches. Flying into a big new airport at night? intercepting and tracking a localizer to my landing runway gives me a warm fuzzy knowing I'm lined up on the correct runway. I see no downside to IFR qualified and equipped. And keep in mind, you don't have to file IFR, just having the capability is comforting should you need it.

Your speaking my language ;)

After living and flying in Alaska for 30 years, I'm anxious to use all these gadgets to make life easier, plus it's fun!
 
Worth it if you go x-country

Just made a trip from Baton Rouge to Hot Springs and back. Weather was perfect until time for the return flight. We filed IFR, climbed to 7000 and had a beautiful flight over the deck back home. Canceled before landing since it was VFR in BTR. Can be much safer than flying marginal VFR if you're careful and take it seriously.

Staying current takes effort, but you'll be a much better pilot. John
 
Yes, still using my ifr rating. With improved equipment upgrades since 07 ( adsb, G5’s, synthetic vision, wass gps ) the fun and function is better. Definitely a challenging rating to get but worth it if you plan on long trips.
 
Increased Utility

My experience in general aviation is that having an IFR capable airplane adds significant utility. Most of my interstate trips have required flying through a layer or two and a few have ended with an approach procedure in IMC.

Though I prefer not to fly single engine at night or in LIFR, it’s good to have the capability should it become necessary.

After equipping the airplane, the maintenance cost is reasonable @ $300/yr for GTN updates, $100/yr Foreflight and $400 biannually for 91.411 & .413 checks.
 
where I visit in Los Angeles

Where I fly in Los Angeles, we get that June Gloom that is only 1000 feet thick, but means an IFR departure or arrival for that last 1000 feet.
I plan to finish my IFR rating (last 10 hours or so) in my new plane and then not sweat arrivals.
 
IFR in RVs

Indeed. And one of the under-appreciated advantages of experimental aircraft is that they can be equipped for full-function GPS IFR flight (relatively) cheaply. The required certified GPS navigator is always going to be pricey, obviously, and the data subscriptions for them cost the same — but practically everything else gets materially cheaper, especially autopilots. And you can save on installation costs of course!

After equipping the airplane, the maintenance cost is reasonable @ $300/yr for GTN updates, $100/yr Foreflight and $400 biannually for 91.411 & .413 checks.
 
Quite a bit! I fly IFR a lot around the Pacific Northwest inspecting aircraft. I try to avoid Ice like the plague, but sometimes it is there even when forecasts say no. I have anti icing vents (very important) and also keep a jaundiced eye on the manifold pressure gauge, any reduction makes me spring loaded to pull the alternate air knob. Otherwise, with dual G3X on dual ADHRS, dual busses and dual battery back up, GTN 650, and Garmin autopilot, it is a push button aircraft. Flying IFR without autopilot is a bit "twitchy". Can be done very safely if pilot is current and knows how to deal with partial panel loss and can fly on "back up".

DAR Gary
 
To build in IFR capabilities or not.....

My motto, "Better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it."
 
Flying IMC in GA aircraft is not smart.

A common theme you'll see in these threads is that professional pilots with tens of thousands of hours are typically the ones who hesitate to fly GA aircraft in IMC, while newer pilots are typically more eager/naive. There's nothing wrong with flying IFR, or shooting a few approaches to stay current. But, I just don't think it's very smart to fly in the weather in ANY single engine GA aircraft – especially without de-icing capability. If I end up in the actual weather in my -7, I feel like that would be a pretty decent screw-up on my part.

RV's are sport aircraft. If someone's life, or business, etc, depends on getting there on time, just buy an airline ticket.

Besides, flying VFR is just way more fun. VFR flight following gives you all the benefits of being on an IFR flight plan with way fewer restrictions if you need traffic advisories, SAR, etc.
 
A common theme you'll see in these threads is that professional pilots with tens of thousands of hours are typically the ones who hesitate to fly GA aircraft in IMC, while newer pilots are typically more eager/naive. There's nothing wrong with flying IFR, or shooting a few approaches to stay current. But, I just don't think it's very smart to fly in the weather in ANY single engine GA aircraft – especially without de-icing capability. If I end up in the actual weather in my -7, I feel like that would be a pretty decent screw-up on my part.

RV's are sport aircraft. If someone's life, or business, etc, depends on getting there on time, just buy an airline ticket.

Besides, flying VFR is just way more fun. VFR flight following gives you all the benefits of being on an IFR flight plan with way fewer restrictions if you need traffic advisories, SAR, etc.

Couldn’t disagree more. You’re painting all of us non-pro pilots and all of the RV models with the same broad brush. IMO a proficient and current IFR pilot can safely file and fly IFR as long as they respect and understand their capabilities and limitations in both their ability and their equipment. Every x/c I fly is done IFR. I consider this much safer than VFR as it gives me more options and an extra sets of eyes looking out for me. YMMV....
 
You’re painting all of us non-pro pilots and all of the RV models with the same broad brush.

It's not the pilot, it's the category of aircraft.

Less experienced pilots tend to MASSIVELY underestimate the risks of flying single engine w/no icing equip in IMC.

Can it be done? Yep. Is it legal? Yep. Is it smart? Nope.
 
Last edited:
It's not the pilot, it's the category of aircraft.

Less experienced pilots tend to MASSIVELY underestimate the risks of flying single engine w/no icing equip in IMC.
.

Do you have data to back up that position? To be clear I’m not saying flying into known (not just forecast) icing in a non-FIKI aircraft is a good idea. I agree it’s a really bad idea. But icing is a variable not a constant and can be managed and risk minimized. Brought to zero, no, and in certain parts of the country during winter icing certainly makes IMC flight in non-FIKI aircraft all but impossible. Here in a Florida icing is not much of a factor so winter flying even in IMC isn’t bad. For me it’s the half a year where IMC typically means embedded t-storms that cancels more IFR flights at a specific time than anything else.
 
Last edited:
I believe in priming the interior and exterior surfaces of every single part of your airplane. And then you should prime all of your car parts and airport bicycle too.

...oh sorry, wrong thread. :)
 
I understand why pilots who have worked hard to get their instrument rating want to fly in IMC. It's challenging and rewarding when you do it right. Here's the thing though - in order to be proficient you need to be practicing instrument approaches every time you fly. Now if that is fun for you then go for it. After 42 years of IFR flying and a lot of IMC, I never want to see another instrument approach. So I like many others have decided not to stay instrument proficient. For us it's all about looking down at the beautiful earth on a sunny day. :)
 
It's not the pilot, it's the category of aircraft.

Less experienced pilots tend to MASSIVELY underestimate the risks of flying single engine w/no icing equip in IMC.

Can you please stop with this non-sense? This is not the reason i started this poll. If you want to talk about yourself and own experiences that is a different situation than generalizing all of us. I dont know you and you dont know me. But i can assure you risk is something i evaluate every time i go fly.

Please Knock off the thread drift. Thank you.
 
It's not the pilot, it's the category of aircraft.

Less experienced pilots tend to MASSIVELY underestimate the risks of flying single engine w/no icing equip in IMC.

Can it be done? Yep. Is it legal? Yep. Is it smart? Nope.

Again, more generalizations. Please explain the icing risk in July, excluding trips to the North Pole.
 
Risk Tolerance and Exposure

I'm going to agree with Chattin35, but with a caveat and explanation about risk and exposure.

A 20,000 hour airline pilot is used to flying a plane with with somewhere between 2 and 4 (sometimes 8) turbine engines. This means 4 or more gear driven generators driven by engines and an APU. Multiple batteries, TRUs, inverters, RATs, etc with complex and intelligent multi-bus electrical systems. Automatic fault detection, load distribution, load shedding, all that fancy stuff. Usually one or two electrical faults means consult the manuals, a bit of paperwork and go flying. The redundancy is incredible.

A 20,000 hour airline pilot will have also seen their fair share of electrical and other faults that made them change their underwear after landing (scared the $%&! outta them).

Having seen stuff go really wrong, even with a level of redundancy that isn't seen in 3 RVs combined, will make a pilot very risk adverse.

Is IFR flight in a small GA aircraft safe? Well that depends on the level of safety one desires. Any single engine GA aircraft won't have the level of safety legally required to transport 10 passengers. The reliability of alternators and batteries is relatively well understood. If one and a friend are comfortable blasting off IFR into the soup realizing that there's a 1:X chance of the electrical system biting the dust, then that's up to them. It's obviously much higher risk than a transport category aircraft, and that might be acceptable to the individuals. Most aviation authorities worldwide have decided that the single alternator, single battery setup in a Cessna 206 is acceptable risk for a pilot and 5 passengers flying IFR.

For my plane, it will be night VFR capable, it won't be flown IFR. I'm contemplating dual alternators and dual batteries feeding dual busses, and both sides isolated and independent. The idea is some one can "drop a wrench" and short out any one component of the electrical system, and at least one electrically dependent EI will continue running. Conversely, a wild volt spike can fry everything on one side, including the battery and the other side is unaffected. The reason for dual alternators is temperature. Even a big backup battery has minimal capacity at -40 OAT. With my climate, unless I want to park my plane from December to March, it had better be able to handle some real cold. Again back to my professional exposure, I've seen enough batteries bite the dust, that I'm not trusting my engine to a battery alone, especially given the cold climate.

Every conversation about icing in an RV boggles my mind. If the forecast or OAT encountered is +5*C or below, don't fly into any cloud. Wait till the weather is better or use a plane (as pilot or passenger) that is certified for known ice. That will mean cancelling a lot of trips because an RV is a VMC-only aircraft all winter. Note that I used the term VMC-only. Can certantly fly IFR on a beautiful blue skies day.
 
Can you please stop with this non-sense? This is not the reason i started this poll. If you want to talk about yourself and own experiences that is a different situation than generalizing all of us. I dont know you and you dont know me. But i can assure you risk is something i evaluate every time i go fly.

Please Knock off the thread drift. Thank you.

Hey Axel, I think you’re being way too harsh on Chattin35. He’s an ex-USAF pilot and his real world experience has presumably influenced his point of view (which he’s fully entitled to). As for “thread drift”..... what thread drift....its a thread about people using or not using IFR capability.
 
Back
Top