VFR or IFR?
 

Hello all,
New here and was just reading some topics and a couple other websites and it got me thinking. Im just trying to decide where to do my training for PPL, and so Im rather clueless.

My main goal is going to be to just go for my PPL, obtain my own aircraft, and have it for personal use. It would be getting used quite a bit, as I travel a LOT, for hunting, fishing, and work.

Probably going to be something small that I buy, is IFR really necessary? Is it something that I would use in a small Cessna? Or is it made more for larger planes flying higher altitudes?

School me on this please!
Thanks in advance

absolutely recommend IFR ticket it will make you SAFER and BETTER.

what else do you need ?

+1... It will help you more than you'll ever realize.

Look through NTSB accident databases and see how many non-instrument rated pilots have crashed, with IMC conditions being a contributing factor. Should be enough to convince you.

IFR
 

Imagine being stuck on the ground for a thin cloud layer 800 feet above the departure airport, while your arrival airport is VFR. Punch through it to clear and a million on top, and you're on your way.

It's a tremendous accomplishment - combining stick and rudder (physical hand-eye coordination) with better situational awareness (mental).

Insurance will be cheaper and you will be a safer pilot.

It's for the little guys too. Hand flown 172s, a Cheetah and a Mooney just about everywhere East of the Mississippi. While you can have VFR fright following (workload permitting), there's also comfort in knowing that ATC is also keeping an eye on you.

For fun flying, I'd rather fly actual IFR (within my personal mins) rather than VFR. It's a running joke at home - the weather is too good to fly. :)

Most definitely get the IFR certificate. I had a great instructor for that and to me, personally, it is my favorite type of flying. The first time you hit actual IMC you're just stoked since before that the closest you could get was 500 feet. :P

Seriously though, it will make you a much better and safer pilot. After obtaining my PPL I didn't exactly feel the most comfortable with knowing I could just hop in an aircraft and take off but after obtaining the instrument rating your confidence/flying ability increases a lot.

Do the instrument rating! STAY CURRENT! Set your own personal limits and slowly build your confidence. Stay safe!

While I agree with the sentiments above, that an IFR rating is invaluable, it's also important not to get too far ahead of yourself. You need to get the PPL license first and built the fundamentals. When that is behind you, you will be in a better position to evaluate your needs going forward.

As for where to do your training, that is a very personal decision and will depend a lot upon where exactly you live. IMHO for the type of flying you envision, bigger is not better. The best bet is to find a small, friendly FBO ("Fixed Base Operator") at a small, friendly airport and pair up with a single instructor who you can develop a good working relationship with. Large schools will tout the benefits of their structured programs, but in the end you will probably pay less and get a better experience with the little guy. My opinion only. Once you've started down this path, commit to it. Fly every weekend at a minimum. Study hard at home. You can easily knock out a PPL in a few months. If you drag it out, it'll cost you more.

Thanks guys. The good thing is I have and can make time when I do it. and money is not an issue as well. Location wise I can do it anywhere, so the search begins.

I am going to plan to do my PPL, then get some airtime under my belt, then fo IFR later once I get some experience.

The PPL requires about 40 hours minimum, the IFR is about 200, so yeah, you will have to get some time under your belt, about 160 hours, just to qualify for the IFR ticket.

In those 160 hours you will be taking Instrument lessons and flying cross country type flights, etc. You can save some money (or share the cost) by finding another pilot to split the cost with.

When I did it (back in 1978), I would share the ride (in a C150) with another PPL buddy who was also working on his IFR, we'd take turns flying with the hood on. One of us would fly to an airport about an hour away while wearing the hood, the other guy would be responsible for clearing for traffic, then swap seats/hood for the ride home.

Might want to go back and do a little review of FAR 61.65. I realize 1978 was a long time ago. In addition to the PPL, you need 40 hours of actual or simulated instrument time including 15 hours of instruction. 20 hours of that 40 can be in a flight training device or simulator.

When I got my instrument rating, back in 2000, I had logged a total of about 80 hours flight time, which is pretty close to the realistic minimum.

I agree that not nearly that much time is required - but are you saying that you got your PPL right at 40 hours and then got your instrument in exactly the minimum time prescribed too?
What is the current national average for PPL?
In your last sentence suggests that your 80 is a realistic mimimum.
That I highly doubt.

As far as whether to get an instrument rating or not....absolutely. By far one of the best *safety* related training opportunities available. There is NO DOUBT that it will make you a better pilot. Just be sure to use good decision making when deciding what levels of weather you decide to fly in after getting that rating.
But don't spend too much time building that *experience* base after getting your PPL. A lot of those experince building trips that you want to take could be worked into training opportunities for instrument training. That is extra time and extra cost. Also - it is my opinion to get out and away from your home field. Experience different airports, different ATC, different weather conditions (within reason) during your training and time building expeditions after your IR. the real time building is required after you IR and your next step in professional development - the Commercial certificate.

Instrument rating also requires 50 hours of x-country PIC. 50 of your 80 hours are cross country PIC? How is that possible?

Solo time from when you're doing your PPL counts (provided it's x-country). I just dug up my old log book to confirm. Turns out I had 91.6 hours flight time when I took my IFR checkride - plus 10 hours of FTD time. My memory must be getting hazy. When I took my PPL checkride I had 11.3 hours of solo x-country and a large percentage of my IFR training flights where done x-country (and dual received counts as PIC for that purpose, when you are qualified on the aircraft).

So, I apologize for suggesting 80 hours is realistic. But it probably could be done. At any rate, 91 hours is still a lot less than 200.

I'm not too concerned with FAR 61.65. I got all my tickets back when you had to fly more to get them. So you got your Instrument ticket with only 91 hours in an airplane? :eek:

Boy, the FAA really has lowered the bar. And yet they wonder why they have more accidents. They've been lowering the bar instead of keeping the standards up, or God forbid, raising them!

Do they still require 250 to get your Commercial, or have they dumbed that down too?

Hey, relax, if you do get your 91 hours and your IFR ticket, the Autopilot will take care of you!

Are airline pilots relying too much on automation? - TODAY.com

There is no reason to get personal. They have not "dumbed down" the rules or "lowered the bar" from 1978. It's the same rules. If you took more time to get your instrument ticket, more power to you, I'm sure all that extra training makes you a superior pilot. But it's worth checking your sources before telling people that an IFR ticket *requires* 200 hours. It does not, and it never did.

Who's getting personal?

Or do you write the FAR's?

So 200 was -never- required to get the instrument ticket?

Really?

Then why did I have to get 200 hours before I could get my instrument ticket, and 250 to get my commercial?

I guess my IP and all the other IP's were lying to me. :rolleyes:

I got my PPL with 41 hours and IFR with 90 hours, fwiw. Commercial is still 250 unless you do it 141, then it can be done with around 230. I never knew it was required to have 200 hours to get the IR, but it's been at least 20 years that has not been the case.

I flew with a couple less than 250 hour guys in the CRJ. :eek:

Well it was many, many beers ago, so I may be mistaken. I was 18 at the time, so my mind was not fully developed, and what was developed was focused on scoring with chicks at the beach!

I got my Multi-engine ticket in an Apache with 150's to build time on my way to my Instrument and Commercial, in 1978. I'm pretty sure I had to have 200 to take the IFR checkride.

I know I had to then take my Commercial in both a C172 and the old Apache, otherwise they said I'd only have a Single Engine Commercial! Maybe they were trying to gouge me, or maybe I was so bad they just made ME get to 200 before my Instrument check!

As soon as I turned 23 though, with about 3,000 hours, I took my ATP ride with the FAA, in good old N9166N, my nightly check run ride, the Turbo Commode. I scared the crap out of the FAA guy when I landed just behind a 747 on takeoff at JFK. He was sure we were going to be "Blown Away".

"Ahh relax, I got this."

I agree, start with the PP license & go from there. Don't get ahead of yourself, all in good time.