What's new
Van's Air Force

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

VFR pilot into IMC

Bugsy

Well Known Member
VFR pilot into IMC. That was me yesterday in Springfield Missouri And I didn't get on the gauges for almost 30 seconds. I was at 600 ft AGL under a ceiling totally in the goo and in a turn back to the airport. I was doing what every mishap pilot does, looking out the window searching for the ground. I was lucky and learned from the scare. For 30 years as an Air Force Aerospace Physiologist I taught pilots to get on the gauges. I got humbled, it's easier said than done.

What I learned
- transition to instrument early and especially in a turn
- god saved me this time, I won't ask again
- instrument training starts now
 
You did good, Paul, and you're here to tell about it. By coincidence, I encountered a similar situation last week. It's scary.
 
- instrument training starts now

Good on you but remember that even with the IFR rating, you never want to be VFR into IFR conditions. You may be able to keep the wings level but unless you are on an IFR flight plan, you have no idea where the other aluminum or rocks are in the clouds.

~Marc
 
Last edited:
Autopilot didn't save me

I do have autopilot and that's the trap I learned about being a VFR pilot in IMC.

I didn't engage the autopilot because in my moment of panic I didn't want to continue straight into the goo so I initiated a turn back to the airport.

Thinking about it now I should have continued straight and level or slight climb into the weather and then initiate a controlled turn back.

Or better yet admit that METARS yellow means stay on the ground untold I get my ticket.
 
So glad you're alive to tell your story and no one got hurt. It takes courage to admit but it's good for souls. Yours and ours.

The conditions in your part of the country are so different then what I'm used to here.
 
Been there, done that. A couple of indistinct cloud layers <apparently> converged on me. Did a 180 and RTB'd. As the OP said, I should have engaged the AP and had "George" do the 180 for me.

'Twasn't scary, but it was a little sobering.
 
Me too

I punched my AP and focused on altitude...decided I would count to 30 and if not cleared, I?d climb. I knew it was clear above me, I thought I had a good hole to the airport, ?one little cloud? was about 15 seconds of total vision loss.

I?d had my ezpilot installed for about a month...I had just listened a few months ago to an ATC track of a guy flipping out in brief IMC, and I didn?t want to be that guy. At about an 8 count, I cleared, continued to airport and landed in MVFR.

Someone else said sobering. Indeed.
 
Bugsy,
It?s a bummer you didn?t make it to Petit Jean, but I have two thoughts:

I?m sorry this happened to you because guys like you and me have been through enough pulse rate spikes in our lives and USAF flying careers...

... but now that you successfully negotiated the situation, I?m actually glad it happened because it just made you a better pilot than before. The learning happens in the debrief, so thanks for taking us through the event and the lessons learned.

Get that IFR ticket, Brother.
 
Wow, glad you survived that.

The first time I few in actual IMC was my first IFR lesson. We launched into a 500' overcast and my flight instructor told me to maintain a 500fpm wings-level climb. I immediately became disoriented and had us in a death spiral after only a few seconds. My instructor took control of the airplane.

It really drove home to me the importance of the rating! Good luck with your IFR training.
 
Has something changed? I do not for a moment discount the potential dangers of VFR into IMC, but simple loss of control should not a significant factor for anyone who can meet ordinary private pilot standards.

We were all required to demonstrate basic instrument skills to pass a PP checkride. An inability to do so now just indicates a lack of proficiency practice. Buy a set of foggles or a hood or something, and do the next $100 hamburger run on the gauges, with any qualified pilot in the other seat.
 
Has something changed? I do not for a moment discount the potential dangers of VFR into IMC, but simple loss of control should not a significant factor for anyone who can meet ordinary private pilot standards...

Same can be said for stall/spin on the base to final turn. If this forum has revealed anything, it's that we all have a different threshold for basic abilities. What can be done in the relatively low stress environment of training is a whole lot different when reality hits.

It's the oft published statistic that a non-instrument rated pilot lasts 30 seconds to a minute before succumbing to spatial D.
 
Same can be said for stall/spin on the base to final turn. If this forum has revealed anything, it's that we all have a different threshold for basic abilities. What can be done in the relatively low stress environment of training is a whole lot different when reality hits.

It's the oft published statistic that a non-instrument rated pilot lasts 30 seconds to a minute before succumbing to spatial D.
I believe you're referring to 178 seconds to live.

https://youtu.be/b7t4IR-3mSo

And that's a non-inst rated/capable pilot in IMC (with or without gyros). On this flip side, don't get too confident being rated/capable and in a non-gyro airplane. Same potential net effect.
 
Last edited:
Has something changed? I do not for a moment discount the potential dangers of VFR into IMC, but simple loss of control should not a significant factor for anyone who can meet ordinary private pilot standards.

We were all required to demonstrate basic instrument skills to pass a PP checkride. An inability to do so now just indicates a lack of proficiency practice. Buy a set of foggles or a hood or something, and do the next $100 hamburger run on the gauges, with any qualified pilot in the other seat.

Dan,
You missed Bugsy?s human factors lesson. Once he entered IMC, his initial reflexive reaction was to try and reestablish visual contact with the ground. He shortly realized the human factors hazard and successfully reverted to the trained and proper procedure...he got on the gauges. He used those previously demonstrated ?basic instrument skills? to successfully exit IMC.

Bugsy told us that this human factors phenomenon is not unique, and he succumbed to it even though he has briefed it over and over as an aerospace physiologist. He?s an USAF expert on the subject, but even he wasn?t immune.

It took deliberate force of mental effort to get his eyes back up to the panel. ONLY then did PPL basic instrument skills save the day.

Well done, Bugsy.
 
I believe you're referring to 178 seconds to live...

No, I've seen it in print several times, but thanks for that link. I have not seen that one before but it certainly hits home. My situation was similar except I got on the instruments right away and was doing pretty good for about 10 minutes - Until the whole panel went dark (well, I had GPS speed, pitot static altitude and VSI).

Unlike the guy in the video, when my VSI was pegged and the altimeter was unwinding there was no confusion on my part - I knew that I pushed too hard and was about to die.

A sobering experience, to say the least.
 
Dan,
You missed Bugsy’s human factors lesson. Once he entered IMC, his initial reflexive reaction was to try and reestablish visual contact with the ground. He shortly realized the human factors hazard and successfully reverted to the trained and proper procedure...he got on the gauges. He used those previously demonstrated ‘basic instrument skills’ to successfully exit IMC.

Naaa, I didn't miss it. Look at the other posts, many of which go something like "If I enter a cloud I shall surely die". While Bugsy's lesson is "Quit looking outside and get on the gauges right away", we have other folks stating they can't fly on the gauges. When the spit hits the fan, they will not follow Bugsy's advice.

Every PPL holder is rated for attitude control by reference to instruments; it's a basic PPL standard. I'm pretty sure the survival difference between instrument and non-instrument rated pilots is just regular practice.
 
To Dan's point, I think that too many PPL pilots forget about this required skill once the check ride is over... Only to start accumulating simulated instrument skills when they finally submit to getting an IFR ticket.

Continuing to practice under the hood would help combat the instinct that drives PPL VMC to IMC pilots to not trust their instruments immediately.

It would also help expedite IFR training when they finally do decide to pursue it... As the instrument time would already be completed and they would only need to document the 15 hours of training.
 
I?ll admit I?m rusty

I hadn?t flown under the hood since primary, and that was almost 600 hours ago.

Earlier this summer i flew with a safety pilot in my -6 for over an hour, and i need to do it more often. I can do turns and climbs pretty well with someone beside me... when the chips are down, it wont be any easier. I don?t have an autopilot.

Grab a buddy and fly under the hood for fun! It will save your life someday.

Don
 
Every PPL holder is rated for attitude control by reference to instruments; it's a basic PPL standard. I'm pretty sure the survival difference between instrument and non-instrument rated pilots is just regular practice.

I think the difference between simulated and actual IMC can be very real, even if only in ?human factors? or ?psychology?. Here?s an example:
I was giving an IPC to a pretty good, instrument rated, pilot. He was under the hood, night VMC. I had him doing a partial panel approach, AI and DG covered. Up ahead I could see some clouds. He was flying just fine. As we entered the clouds, I said to him, ?We?re in the clouds now so don?t screw up?. His performance immediately went downhill. Not that he lost control, just the opposite: he fixated so hard on the TC and altimeter that he didn?t notice us drifting off course. Even after I pointed that out to him, he was reluctant to bank the aircraft to change the heading. If this can happen to an ifr rated pilot, one can only imagine what happens to a non-rated one.
 
Glad it all worked out.
One thing I have noticed in all the replies is that no one has stated go/no go flight conditions. There are so many available outlets, FSS, internet etc that asks why would you put yourself in this position in the first place?
 
With all of the PC sims available today, controlling an aircraft in IMC should be a non event.


This.

Assuming you have a functional gyro or glass equivalent, Keeping the shiny side up is trivial if you spend any time at all on a PC sim. Navigation, separation, and and preventing CFIT are of course a whole 'nother ball of wax...
 
I had my own incident a while back just before I started my instrument training, though it wasn't technically VFR into IMC. I was over water with some decent precip around me, visibility was otherwise good but it did cause me to lose the horizon. Islands were gone, zero stationary references, just flying in a big dull gray sphere. I hadn't done hood work since my ppl but luckily my training kicked in and as quickly as I could think "Huh, no more horizon." I was looking at the AI.

I set my heading bug to a reverse course as that would take me back to my departure airport. It was quite unnerving to not be able to see it and have to trust my instruments (at that time), but with a 430 and my ipad at least navigation wasn't an issue.

Got back, went for steaks, an hour later it was severe clear.

It surprised me how disorienting it was for a split second there, I was certain that could never happen to me. Not a safety issue, but enough to get my adrenaline going which, as it turns out, is something I do not enjoy feeling while flying. Instrument training makes this a non-issue now, I cannot recommend it enough.
 
Good debrief

Nigel. Your right. My go no-go reasoning was flawed. I had th information available and failed to use it. ADSB METARS showed IFR in the vicinity by I thought I could skirt the worse of it.

I consulted on the JFK junior spatial D accident made it on a couple news shows at the time. I should have known better.

Thanks Scroll
 
My story

There I was.......flying from santa ynez to hawthorne and went thru the smoke from the brush fire at 4500. Was on flight following. Asked controller if he had any pilot reports on when smoke would clear? He asked me if i was still vfr, I said ya , i could see the ground ( at 3500?) but have no horizon. Immediately he came back to me and said I am clear thru class bravo ( 500 feet above me) and am free to navigate at my discretion, just let him know what I was doing. I did a cirlcling climb up 500 feet to clear the smoke. Was using the artifical hrizon but never felt dis orientated. I was jsut shocked how serious the controler took the phase,? Cant see a horizon?. Last i check, flight was still on file with flightaware.
 
... My go no-go reasoning was flawed. I had th information available and failed to use it. ADSB METARS showed IFR in the vicinity by I thought I could skirt the worse of it...

Probably my biggest message when I tell my story is exactly this. Should have known better, but the rationalization to press on is often so strong that you can talk yourself right into a "no win" scenario. I dont think this is a young pilots "invincible" mindset or even some compelling "get home itis" thing... Its FAR more subtle, and can catch even the most rational pilot. Unless you are willing to set extremely conservative limits and NEVER deviate, then all pilots are going to have this battle with the grey area eventually. Most of the time we get by just fine and feel like we are better prepared for the next time. Sometimes however, we nearly kill ourselves and as a consequence KNOW we will be better prepared for next time.
 
Toolbuilder nails it pretty well, we rationalize ourself into a situation.

So there I was, several years of instrument currency and even flirting with proficiency every now and again. Weather triple checked, lots of extra fuel for the IFR flight plan filed with an alternate and VFR areas duly noted. Uncontrolled departure airport reporting OVC 1700 double checked visually, I'm sure center is gonna be busy given the conditions but I don't want to spend an extra 20-30 minutes picking up my clearance via FSS. It's a familiar airport with no terrain and with 1700 OVC I was more than comfortable departing VFR.

Normal startup, runup, taxi and takeoff with my course and frequencies pre-loaded. As I turn on course and switch to center frequency it appears my 1700 OVC/VIS is obscured with some newly formed mist and lower clouds so I level off at 500 AGL to stay clear of clouds. I momentarily thought about returning to land and pick up my clearance through FSS but press on because it's familiar territory.

I confidently called center requesting my IFR clearance, center was busy and I eventually received a "sqwuak and maintain VFR" currently 15 miles from my departure airport still at 500 AGL. Because of my low altitude I can only hear center with the squelch on and seems my transmits are broken as well, I know the farther I go the worse the frequency gets at low altitude.

30ish miles (minutes at RV speed) from my departure airport I still don't have a clearance and even with the squelch on I can barely catch half of what the controller is saying. Seems a NASA test flight is non-radar in a low block altitude in my vicinity that also can't hear center on frequency. Again I contemplate turning around but my closest airport is 30 miles away. Surely I'll get a clearance soon, I press on watching my terrain page as a clearance in a couple minutes is safer than flying back at 500 AGL.

I wasn't shy about my clearance request at this point and eventually had my IFR clearance relayed through another aircraft after center finally determined the NASA test flight position, an IFR clearance never felt so good.

How did I rationalize myself into this situation, as always it was a chain of events:

-familiar airport
-didn't want a FSS delay
-1700 OVC was comfortable for departing VFR and pick up clearance airborne
-squawk code and talking to center feeling I would get a clearance anytime
-I've got a squawk and ATC is expecting me to be on route
-I'm too far away to turn back
-If I could just get my clearance I would be fine

Looking back when I hit the OVC/VIS at 500AGL I should have turned around and landed. I wouldn't think of departing without an IFR clearance in 500 OVC yet I rationalized and flew for 30ish miles because. Judgement isn't taught, it's gained through experience.
 
VFR into IFR

Buggsie- Thanks for your post. It definitely alerts us to the fact that it could have been any of us - - or probably was us at some time in the past.
Congrats for keeping your cool.
For the benefit of all readers, could you take us through your preflight actions, ie, what led you to take off in less than marginal conditions. Was it a situation that "it didn't look that bad" or "I'll take a look and see" ??

Thanks again for confessing.

Buz McAbery, CFII
RV9 N50BM
RVS - Tulsa
 
To Dan's point, I think that too many PPL pilots forget about this required skill once the check ride is over... Only to start accumulating simulated instrument skills when they finally submit to getting an IFR ticket.

Continuing to practice under the hood would help combat the instinct that drives PPL VMC to IMC pilots to not trust their instruments immediately...

This is a very valid point. I am not instrument rated; VFR only. Also pretty conservative in the conditions I will fly in. For six years and 3 BFRs no CFI asked me to do simulated instrument work, so I didn't worry about it. But two years ago I got a new CFI for my biannual. He DID require sim instrument work, and it was a real eye-opener. Having had no practice in over six years, it was very difficult, much more so than I expected. My basic competence for short periods under the hood was gone. :eek: The good news? With a little practice the basic skill came back and I again feel capable to get myself out of trouble if need be. And yes, I now practice and use that same CFI every two years.
 
Happened to me once.

Not long ago. Was in the soup for 3-4 minutes.

BUT....before I departed, I made a plan.

"What if I hit the soup ?" ---- because it was one of those days.

I already knew what heading I would turn and how I would do it.

Plan ahead.
 
Go no go rational

My rational

Metars showed VFR at departure and destination fields, but just barely. METARs showed one area IFR along the route but marginal VFR to the north with TAF forecasting improvements.

I had successfully scud run to the destination so surely I could scud run my way out. I reinforced my flawed logic by successfully accomplishing it a day earlier.

I'm remind of a story about Dr Kent Gillingham from Brooks AFB, a brilliant flight surgeon who discovered several spatial disorientation illusions and taught me spatial D as a LT. Dr Gillingham died from spatial D in a twin that lost an engine. He attempted to turn back to the field, over banked and impacted the ground. The most brilliant spatial D scientist died from spatial D.

Sometimes we think we can outsmark ourselves and as others have said convince ourselves on an unwise course of action.
 
I ended up doing a little scud running last week. Without going into the embarrassing details, the Synthetic Vision on Foreflight was a real blessing. It kept me from running into any towers or other obstacles and, when I got close enough to the airport, pointed out the runway for me. I understand the Garmin Area 660 does all this but also alerts you to transmission lines.
 
More than a little scary

Ditto. Guys if you can build the plane you can get the instrument rating. Even if you are good on the instruments when you get into trouble, if you aren't coordinating with ATC and others in the system you are presenting a major hazard to other air traffic. If I am shooting an approach to an uncontrolled field and you are scud running, ATC may or may not see you, and I may not hear any calls you are making after ATC hands me off to the local frequency. If you are inventing your own approach, the chances of us hitting each other goes up dramatically.

Some of the posts in this thread really scare me.
G
 
WOW!

Some of the posts in this thread really scare me.
G

Agreed!

To the people that have an instrument rating or are working on it, after you're filed and in your aircraft ready to go you can call 1-888-766-8267. The briefer will put you on hold and call the center responsible for your area. They will come back and give you a departure clearance and a void time. This number specifically gives out departure clearance's. No worries about flying in the clouds you're clear! I did this at Petit Jean this past weekend and listened to a few people trying to open with center after they departed but center was busy and they had to wait. While the WX wasn't that bad its still unnecessary risk from my point of view. If you can't get anyone on the ground try this number its a handy tool.
 
I'm starting to se some posts here getting a bit "Scoldy", and I'd suggest that is counterproductive in a safety discussion. The OP clearly understands that he made a mistake (one that has been made by, oh.....just about EVERY pilot who has flown long enough to be called experienced...), and he's sharing the experience with the intent to let those who think they know it all and woudl never do anything dumb that yes, indeed, you can stumble into a place you didn't intend to be.

I think that's pretty obvious to most. Stumbling VFR into IFR conditions is bad for everyone. Don't do it. What the OP is going is to help remind us of that, not justifying anything. Not saying its OK to do it.

If we start scolding and starting to shake our fingers at people, then in the future, fewer will be willing to share such experiences, and the learning pipeline gets cut off. That's bad.

Just something to think about. And Bugsy - thanks for sharing! I've been flying for 45 years now, and you bet I have my own stories of being where I didn't want to be - and I've shared many of them.
 
I'm starting to se some posts here getting a bit "Scoldy", and I'd suggest that is counterproductive in a safety discussion.
A big amen to that. Over on another aviation forum, I posted the story about my scud running experience last week; All I got were condescending lectures about how dangerous that was and that I shouldn't fly more than 100 miles away from home until I took an IPC and equipped my panel like a Lear Jet.
 
This discussion reminds me of the adage that "good judgment comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgment". I've been flying for 36 years and I've made my fair share of stupid mistakes, but in each case, I never intended to make a bad decision. Weather forecasts are error-prone, equipment doesn't always work, ATC makes errors, etc, etc. The key is knowing how to extricate yourself from a bad situation, and then learning from the error. I appreciate all of the stories I've read here. They make you think.
 
I'm starting to se some posts here getting a bit "Scoldy", and I'd suggest that is counterproductive in a safety discussion...

Thanks Paul.

Those of you who are "scared" at some of these posts: Good! YOU are exactly the audience these types of stories are aimed at. So listen up.

I don't claim to be a particularly skilled aviator, but I have been in the aviation business for 30+ years and a significant portion of that time has been flight ops with fast jets. I'm currently employed as a flight test engineer and paid (comfortably) to assess/analyze safety of flight risk at a clinical level. Even with that professional background, I too talked myself into a horrible decision. And polling my work colleagues - most of whom are bona fide Test Pilots - revealed that I'm far from alone. So fair warning - If you're shaking your head and wondering how many "morons" you're sharing the sky with, well there's a good chance YOU are next. Your success in avoiding dumb decisions coupled with your condescending attitude is making you a prime candidate.

Also, while I'm on a rant:

An instrument rating is a very valuable skill to have. That said, it is not a panacea for bad judgement. It adds another level to your toolbox, but at the same time places your nose further out into the envelope. Yep, we have amazing panels that can navigate with precision, but the reality is these airplanes are extremely limited, delicate, fair weather structures. You're not punching any icing, hail or any other significant weather like an airliner or combat aircraft will. You still have to make good decisions, just like the VFR pilot.
 
Out west here, one likely scenario of VFR into IMC is with fire smoke. I've made some pretty marginal flights. On one of them, the vis went from 5 miles and a good horizon to 1 mile and no horizon fairly quickly. But not instantly like going into a cloud. It gives you a little bit of decision time, but you better make the right decision. I had started a descent to maintain good sight of the ground ( I knew I couldn't get on top of it because I knew how high it went) so I made the descent much more aggressive, and turned back.

On another occasion, I was flying east across basin-and-range country with 4 mile vis, but the periodic ridges crossing in front of me gave me a good horizon. At a certain point in central Oregon, the ranges stop and it is just a big basin, which happens to be the same color as the smoke. Now no horizon. In this case I climbed until I had a good horizon on top, although I could only barely see the ground at all.

For me, the key is recognizing the evolution of the conditions and acting soon enough to prevent a complete loss of horizon or ground vision. It is a bit different with smoke because it happens gradually, not suddenly like going into a cloud. But that also makes it insidious. Its easier to say I will keep going unless it gets worse, and it keeps getting worse. And of course next time I might not recognize the trend and make a good decision soon enough.

The "experience" I've gained from these is two-edged. Part of me has gotten more conservative and more willing to turn back. But part of me has gotten more confident that I can recognize the situation and react accordingly. I have to remind myself that this is dangerous stuff, and this thread is really good.

To Dan's point, although I am not instrument rated, I have done a lot of hood work, including a BFR two years previous with 1.5 hrs under the hood with lots of extreme attitude recovery. The rub is not having appropriate equipment in the airplane.

With the advent of glass cockpits, it is now more common to have a good artificial horizon. But I really favor old-fashion round gauges. I don't want a vacuum system. So for now, I have just a Trutrak ADI-pilot. But it is not a "real" AI. It synthesizes AI information from rate gyros updated with other sensors. I'd like to think it would be a good fall-back instrument for inadvertent IMC, and I have practiced a little with it, but I find that it does not always know correctly which way is up. (maybe something wrong with it?) An electric ADI is pretty expensive, but I am pretty seriously considering the investment. Or perhaps succumb to the glass side and get a Garmin G5.
 
Steve - a quick bit of feedback for you... You are absolutely right that electric AI's can be expensive, and they remain expensive to maintain over time. Glass, on the other hand, seems to avoid most of the pitfalls associated with flight instruments from the mechanical era. The really nice part about going "glass" is that you get SO much information packed into one small package.

While you reference the Garmin G5 in your comments, there are other options. For ease of installation and ultimate "do it all in one box" capability, I would suggest you look at a GRT Mini-X with the mapping and internal backup battery options installed. This provides redundancy for all your "steam" instruments, as well as redundancy for your navigation solution (built-in VFR GPS and map database) as well as redundancy of electrical supply. There's nothing in the "mechanical" world that can come close to providing this level of functionality in one package, at any price, let alone at a sub-$2K price.

I know this thread isn't about equipment, so let me put a spin on this particular post that is in keeping with the intent of the thread.

When we make bad decisions (it's not a question of "if", Bugsy's post shows us that human factors mean it's a matter of "when", because we WILL make bad decisions), having a reasonable level of equipment is an important factor in being able to recover from or survive that bad decision. It's even better if we spend some time flying behind the equipment, building confidence in it, getting to the point where we can trust it. It's this latter element that makes it easier to transition to the gauges when we've inadvertently poked our nose into the clouds. If the glass in your panel is a familiar friend, you'll not hesitate to look at it and be guided by the information it provides. "Getting on the gauges" faster and easier are two of the best ways to justify installing a modern "all in one" EFIS system.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Mark, I wasn't aware of the GRT option. Not being a fan of glass, I have not researched whats out there much. This seems like a good solution and a half-step toward embracing the glass world.


Steve - a quick bit of feedback for you... You are absolutely right that electric AI's can be expensive, and they remain expensive to maintain over time. Glass, on the other hand, seems to avoid most of the pitfalls associated with flight instruments from the mechanical era. The really nice part about going "glass" is that you get SO much information packed into one small package.

While you reference the Garmin G5 in your comments, there are other options. For ease of installation and ultimate "do it all in one box" capability, I would suggest you look at a GRT Mini-X with the mapping and internal backup battery options installed. This provides redundancy for all your "steam" instruments, as well as redundancy for your navigation solution (built-in VFR GPS and map database) as well as redundancy of electrical supply. There's nothing in the "mechanical" world that can come close to providing this level of functionality in one package, at any price, let alone at a sub-$2K price.

I know this thread isn't about equipment, so let me put a spin on this particular post that is in keeping with the intent of the thread.

When we make bad decisions (it's not a question of "if", Bugsy's post shows us that human factors mean it's a matter of "when", because we WILL make bad decisions), having a reasonable level of equipment is an important factor in being able to recover from or survive that bad decision. It's even better if we spend some time flying behind the equipment, building confidence in it, getting to the point where we can trust it. It's this latter element that makes it easier to transition to the gauges when we've inadvertently poked our nose into the clouds. If the glass in your panel is a familiar friend, you'll not hesitate to look at it and be guided by the information is provides. "Getting on the gauges" faster and easier are two of the best ways to justify installing a modern "all in one" EFIS system.
 
An instrument rating is a very valuable skill to have. That said, it is not a panacea for bad judgement. It adds another level to your toolbox, but at the same time places your nose further out into the envelope. Yep, we have amazing panels that can navigate with precision, but the reality is these airplanes are extremely limited, delicate, fair weather structures. You're not punching any icing, hail or any other significant weather like an airliner or combat aircraft will. You still have to make good decisions, just like the VFR pilot.

Good point. It's important to remember that a fair number of VMC into IMC accidents happen to instrument-rated pilots who, for whatever reason, weren't prepared for the transition or proficient enough to extricate themselves.
 
Good question

Was it a situation that "it didn't look that bad" or "I'll take a look and see" ??

Thanks again for confessing.

Buz McAbery, CFII
RV9 N50BM
RVS - Tulsa[/QUOTE]

Good question. It was a case of I'll take a look and see. If it's too bad I'll turn around. The 20 knot tail wind compressed the time I had to turn around. That to is a learning point for me. Don't take a look and see, this is a hobby to be taken seriously.
 
IMC

I have been sort of tracking an interesting scenario for many years. That is Unlimited Category completion pilots scud running, on occasion in weather below ILS minimums. Duane Cole did this and got fired from Flying magazine for writing about it. Duane did this all his life. No radio, no gyros. A certain group including an airline Captain arrived in Fond du Lac in very low ceilings after a lengthy excursion 90 degrees in the wrong direction because none of them even had a working compass.
There is also the old story of a world team flight in Europe where one of the pilots supposedly actually kissed the ground after landing. lead said I didn't think that was bad at all. There was so much of this, especially in the 70's and 80's that there has to be something unique to this.
This was mostly in the pre GPS era and the pre cellphone tower era. Way too many small obstructions now.
My partial theory is that most of these pilots never got excited no matter how bad things got. Another factor is that in the Pitts one can do a 90 degree bank 180 at 6G in an incredibly small space. 200' radius would be a reasonable estimate.
This does not translate to high time pilots in non aerobatic airplanes. Far too many of them have crashed while scud running. Anybody recognize the name Frank Tallman?
I am not advocating any of this. I am simply pointing out that a lot of this was going on for a long time so there must be something to it. The only things I can personally offer are NEVER get in the clouds with no gyros and NEVER get caught on top with no gyros.
 
Was it a situation that "it didn't look that bad" or "I'll take a look and see" ??

Thanks again for confessing.

Buz McAbery, CFII
RV9 N50BM
RVS - Tulsa

Good question. It was a case of I'll take a look and see. If it's too bad I'll turn around. The 20 knot tail wind compressed the time I had to turn around. That to is a learning point for me. Don't take a look and see, this is a hobby to be taken seriously.[/QUOTE]

Bugsy, when I read that, I wondered why the wx you were not wanting to get trapped in would not be moving along with that tailwind, away from you at... 20 kts??
 
And I didn't get on the gauges for almost 30 seconds.

Bugsy, you've studied the issue. What give me pause in your story is the "surprise factor". Is 30 seconds typical? Why don't pilots transition to the gauges? Is there a demonstrated difference between consciously or unconsciously transitioning to the gauges, and being surprised with a sudden demand to get on them? And if the average pilot does make an immediate conscious effort to focus his attention on the instruments, has research shown a "dead zone" time period before reaching full competence?
 
Back
Top