Woes of SEL IFR

[John Clark]

Well written Arthur. There is a lot to learn from the recent Cirrus crashes. As someone said in another forum "The airplanes did not let the pilots down, the pilots let the airplane down." Sadly, Cirrus' advertising is sometimes their worst enemy. While getting a customer to fork over $300K they are making some promises that won't hold up in the real world. None of this is new, Beechcraft went through it with the Bonanza in the early fifties. The buyers bank accounts were qualified but the pilots weren't. I know several very qualified, competent Cirrus owners but I also know at least one that scares me silly. It all comes down to training, judgement, currency, and experience. No amount of glass and gee-whiz avionics will cover for a lack of judgement.

Back to the thread. I am a retired ATP, current, with a reasonably equipped RV8. If the mission requires more than a climb thorugh the coastal clag and /or a straight forward approach. I'll stay home or take the airlines.

John Clark

[ddurakovich]

Originally Posted by David-aviator

The problem with loading up a small airplane with expensive equipment is the guy spending the money. These accidents are occuring outside the safe limits of the airplane and/or pilot. Did the pilot deliberately fly into the situation - probably not. He simply did not believe it could happen to him. He just spent mega bucks and off he goes, with his wife and kids.

I've often wondered if it really is expensive equipment, or the appearance of previously unobtainable/unaffordable technology that lure people into that false sense of security

I've read more than one post in the last year about the utilization of a Garmin 396, with all the bells and whistles, to keep them out of trouble and clear of the weather. And yet there was a distinct undertone of having a cool new tool to allow them to go where they couldn't go before.

It doesn't take a lot of technology to legally, or probably even safely fly IFR in many circumstances. I wonder if we unconsciously equate that additional technology as a 'license' to play in the same ball park as the big boys?

[w1curtis]

I don't get the point of this post

Is there a point in here or are you just venting? Certainly flying is dangerous -no secret there. Certainly IFR flying is dangerous -single or multi -no secret there. But again, what's the point? Are we bashing Cirrus, IFR, SEL IFR or what? -let me know so I can get my football bat.

If you are going to get on your soapbox about something, how about all those innocent (non relative) people who get killed by drunk drivers every day--got a number on them? I bet the number is HUGE in comparison to stupid Cirrus pilot tricks. Just trying to understand.

[Bob Axsom]

...OK, I feel much better now, thanks. I'm still going to fly my single engine land RV-6A in IMC with my wife by my side and I'm not going to feel any more or less comfortable because someone says it's dangerous. I KNOW IT'S DANGEROUS! You don't get any more competent by not flying when IMC prevails and you must recognize unacceptable risk situations.

Bob Axsom

[TSwezey]

Arthur that was well said. I have less than 160 hours of flying with about 35 hours of hood time and 6 hours of actual IMC. I enjoy flying in IMC. I feel very comfortable in it but I make sure that I am flying in good IMC. With today's technology at a reasonable price you should be able to plan and fly around any bad IMC. What amazes me is that one can get an IFR ticket without ever being in IMC. Under the hood and real IMC are two completely different things. I am lucky to have a building partner who is a CFII. Once in while he has to take trips to West Palm, Fort Myers or Atlanta. I get to tag along and fly for free. It never seems to fail that we will be in IMC at least one way during the trip. If it is severe IMC we sit and wait it out. We just make sure we find airports with nice pilot lounges. When is IFR much safer than VFR? A good example was leaving LOE this year. Paul was able to sneak out early through the cloud layer (good imc) and make home before the front started to really kick up. Us non-ifr fools had to wait for the clouds to lift before we could make it out. We were too late to get ahead of the front and hit a wall (0' agl to up over 20,000') of clouds just east of Abilene. Luckily nothing closed in behind us and we had no problem getting back to Abilene (which has one of the greatest FBO's I have ever been to.) Had I had my IFR ticket I would have felt much more comfortable getting out early and flying through the cloud layer than encountering the massive front. But it was fun being in a flight of four RV's buzzing the West Texas sky! I think IFR is a personal choice. My RV-10 will be fully IFR capable with multiple systems. I intend to learn them inside and out and practice, practice and practice. I think IFR can be safe in a SEL if you don't act like a fool, know your limitations and your planes limitations. If you don't have your IFR ticket find an excellent CFI who can train you in ACTUAL IMC. I can't wait to finish my plane and finish up my IFR training.

[sportpilot]

At first I thought about this thread, it must mean "single pilot" IFR. Then after readiing the posts it dawned on me it was oriented at single "engine" IFR. Just last week, a professional pilot flying a cessna twin crashed in IFR conditions killing 5 souls. I once watched a boeing 720 with 4 big motors on it fly into IFR conditions, and 20 minutes later the radio announced that a Northwest Orient airline had crashed west of Miami killing all 43 souls on board. I dont think you can limit the danger to the single engine crowd.

Single pilot IFR is frought wiht hazard, even if you have 2 or more engines. I have always believed it is the weather itself that catches so many people by surprise. There is weather you can float thru safely in a cessna 150, and then there is weather no one would venture thru in a battle ship. Your survival requires you learn to know the difference. JMO

[Captain Avgas]

Originally Posted by atreff

Many of the good folks I encounter who do not fly IFR in RV's or production craft are transport-category drivers full time. I totally understand.
Arthur

As some-one else very humourously stated recently....transport category pilots tend to view single engine solo IFR as an emergency situation....they're down to the last engine and the first officer is totally incapacitated.

[David-aviator]

Good post, Arthur. Obviously you know of what you speak. Perhaps your perspective is as necessary as mine, we don't want to scare everyone from the satisfaction of a job well done.

The comment about your Father not flying IMC anymore is interesting. We all get to that point eventually. Another retired guy (RV-4 driver) and I recently speculated that perhaps as few as 15% of retired pilots ever fly again - some never go to an airport again. Total burn out, I guess.

dd

[k5buz]

I've read this thread with interest, and it appears that it's all a matter of perspective and experience. Most of us probably earned an instrument rating in a single initially, and we probably did some actual IFR in that airplane. We all probably worked on some instrument procedures/currency training in a single engine in actual conditions.

So what's the difference? Cross country comes to mind. Flying local IFR is far different than flying cross country. Also, the heavy iron guys probably have far more experience in hard IFR situations. It all comes down to the particular situation, airplane equipment and pilot experience. Most of us are probably more comfortable flying with 200nm of home then halfway across the country in unknown terrain and unkown airspace. I know I am.

For me, I have different limitations for every situation depending mostly on the airplane and my 'gut feeling'. My RV is a VFR machine, but several other planes I fly are good IFR airplanes, both SEL and MEL. The number of engines doesn't concern me as much the situation. Sometimes you just have to say NO.

Tim/ATP

[David-aviator]

Originally Posted by w1curtis

I don't get the point of this post

It's about making decisions, William.

When a pilot takes off, does something really stupid and kills innocent people, the situation is difficult to ignor and not comment on.

If one wants to go out and do it himself solo, have at it, but when wives and kids are involved, it is not good.

dd