Question about IFR Training

[BrianNC]

I was curious about this. When I got my instrument rating a few years ago (I did an accelerated course), the very first thing the CFI did was do our long IFR cross country right off. Arrived at the airport, and not long after that (hour maybe), off on the cross country. When I arrived I had just finished getting the allowed hours for instrument training on a simulator (ATC 610) from another instructor he partnered with. So it was not like it was the first thing off the bat as far as training goes, but it was our first flight after I finished the simulator portion.

It didn't matter to me one way or the other. Got my rating in two weeks. Just curious if any of you do that, or what is your opinion of that? I would just like to know your thoughts pro and con.

[tgrayson]

Originally Posted by BrianNC

I would just like to know your thoughts pro and con.

Poor idea, IMO. I view the long x/c as more a finishing course where a student has an opportunity to use everything he's learned. Sort of a waste if you do it too early.

[BrianNC]

Originally Posted by tgrayson

Poor idea, IMO. I view the long x/c as more a finishing course where a student has an opportunity to use everything he's learned. Sort of a waste if you do it too early.

Well, I did just finish up 15-20 hours of simulator time before that. Maybe he wanted to go ahead and put it into practice on a long flight, rather than just go up and do what I was doing on the simulator.

[meritflyer]

Kinda agree with tgrayson here but everyone is different so if it worked for you and you feel confident you should be glad you did it.

[BrianNC]

Originally Posted by meritflyer

Kinda agree with tgrayson here but everyone is different so if it worked for you and you feel confident you should be glad you did it.

Yeah, it worked for me. After spending 3 days on the simulator it was actually fun to go out and do the long x-ctry and not just go right up in the plane and start practicing what I had been doing on the simulator for 20 hours.

Maybe a lot of CFIs don't do this because all the training is done in the plane. So I don't think you would want to go out on your first day of training and do the x-ctry right off the bat. Or maybe they mix in the sim training if the allowed hours are going to be done on a sim.

So their thinking probably was, just spent 3 days on a sim learning all the instrument basics, now go out on a flight and put it all together. I think it worked pretty well. If I ever got my CFII, and had my own simulator, I would probably do it the same way.

[tgrayson]

Originally Posted by BrianNC

Well, I did just finish up 15-20 hours of simulator time before that. Maybe he wanted to go ahead and put it into practice on a long flight, rather than just go up and do what I was doing on the simulator.

A significant part of the long x/c is dealing with ATC. I take students into our Class B and have them depart from there, so that they have to deal with ATIS, Clearance, Ground, Tower, and Departure. We get a SID. Fly to a small, uncontrolled field, land, get a new clearance, depart, fly into St. Louis using a STAR. Then we leave there having to do all the Class B thing again. I cannot imagine a student being able to handle this after 15-20 hours of sim time.

I'm sure your instructor had a rationale for making the trip at this point, but that doesn't mean it was the best thing for you. My feeling is that you would have had a larger increase in confidence if you had gone into the trip with the greater knowledge and skill that you will have towards the end of your training.

Are other students at your school taking these long x/c at the same point in training? Are you Part 141 or 61? You might take a look at a 141 syllabus and see when it positions the long x/c. I bet it's not right at the beginning.

[PanJet]

I am a firm believer that the instrument rating by nature is not complete enough. There needs to be more XC training and more training on not just how to fly on instruments, but how to use the system. I know way too many IR pilots who can fly approaches all day, but they do not know how to use the system well enough. I think that there is no problem with doing an instrument XC early on, and I believe that people should do more of them, not just the one required one.

[killbilly]

Originally Posted by PanJet

...but how to use the system. I know way too many IR pilots who can fly approaches all day, but they do not know how to use the system well enough.

Would you elaborate on this, please? What do you mean by "use the system?"

[BrianNC]

Originally Posted by killbilly

Would you elaborate on this, please? What do you mean by "use the system?"

I believe he means interatction with ATC in the IFR environment.

[PanJet]

Originally Posted by killbilly

Would you elaborate on this, please? What do you mean by "use the system?"

Mostly I mean how the system works and like BrianNC said how to interact with ATC. How to navigate; how to get clearances, what happens here, what happens there, if I'm told something different than normal what does it mean, how can I legally do this or that, what does it mean if I'm cleared for this, etc. etc. etc.

Basically I've seen a lot of people, and heard about a lot more, that know how to fly off of instruments, and they could shoot an ATP standards ILS anyday, but they don't completely understand how the IFR system works. If they're told anything but the standard old "Cleared as filed" they get confused.

[killbilly]

Originally Posted by PanJet

Mostly I mean how the system works and like BrianNC said how to interact with ATC. How to navigate; how to get clearances, what happens here, what happens there, if I'm told something different than normal what does it mean, how can I legally do this or that, what does it mean if I'm cleared for this, etc. etc. etc.

Basically I've seen a lot of people, and heard about a lot more, that know how to fly off of instruments, and they could shoot an ATP standards ILS anyday, but they don't completely understand how the IFR system works. If they're told anything but the standard old "Cleared as filed" they get confused.

Are those things you're talking about not part of the standard IFR curriculum for CFI's? I've never taken an instrument course, but it seems logical that if those other things are tools available to the IFR pilot, it would be in the best interest of the pilot and the CFI to ensure that the whole toolbox was being used. Am I wrong?

[SteveC]

Originally Posted by killbilly

Are those things you're talking about not part of the standard IFR curriculum for CFI's? I've never taken an instrument course, but it seems logical that if those other things are tools available to the IFR pilot, it would be in the best interest of the pilot and the CFI to ensure that the whole toolbox was being used. Am I wrong?

You are sort of right, but keep in mind that there are literally thousands of those little things that pilots learn as they fly in the system. It takes, in my opinion, literally hundreds and hundreds of hours flying IFR to become really proficient. That is one of the reasons that many (most?) pro pilots shudder at 500 hour guys in the right seat of a jet. There is soooooo much that they still have to learn before becoming a true asset in the cockpit. Not that they are necessarily unsafe in the cockpit, but a two pilot environment requires two pilots that can both contribute in order to be really safe.

This is the real reason that we like to see pilots that have "paid their dues". It's not because "we had to do it, so should you". It's because we know how much there is to learn and "paying dues" = "learning the ropes".

[nosehair]

Originally Posted by SteveC

This is the real reason that we like to see pilots that have "paid their dues". It's not because "we had to do it, so should you". It's because we know how much there is to learn and "paying dues" = "learning the ropes".

Man, am I glad somebody said that. The newbies who want to PFT or buy their way into an FO job just do not realize that there is still a whole lot to learn after you are certificated and rated. There is an "intern" period where you learn the line.

[killbilly]

Originally Posted by SteveC

You are sort of right, but keep in mind that there are literally thousands of those little things that pilots learn as they fly in the system. It takes, in my opinion, literally hundreds and hundreds of hours flying IFR to become really proficient. That is one of the reasons that many (most?) pro pilots shudder at 500 hour guys in the right seat of a jet. There is soooooo much that they still have to learn before becoming a true asset in the cockpit. Not that they are necessarily unsafe in the cockpit, but a two pilot environment requires two pilots that can both contribute in order to be really safe.

This is the real reason that we like to see pilots that have "paid their dues". It's not because "we had to do it, so should you". It's because we know how much there is to learn and "paying dues" = "learning the ropes".

That is a pretty succinct, clear, concise answer to not only the question I posed, but a pretty good answer to some of the issues that come up in the PFJ/PFT threads. I haven't been around THAT long and I've read many of them, and your explanation makes a lot of sense.

Thanks.

[MFT1Air]

Originally Posted by nosehair

Man, am I glad somebody said that. The newbies who want to PFT or buy their way into an FO job just do not realize that there is still a whole lot to learn after you are certificated and rated. There is an "intern" period where you learn the line.

Forgive me, but I didn't believe comments made about "pay their dues" were synonymous with PFT. IFR training means comprehensive training to be competent in an ATC enviroment under IFR flight rules. . .no more, no less.

Relating specifically to the question asked, I've also asked myself personally if I did the accelerated course as opposed to either FBO or academy training, would I be equally proficient as a certificated IFR pilot to fly in that environment? The answer has been from many that you train as you fly, fly as you train. Flying/training in IMC conditions makes you better "prepared" than simulation or hoods. . .generally speaking. Flying "heavily" in an ATC/IMC environment makes you better prepared than not flying in those environments. Lots of experience in IMC conditions. . .and I do mean "experience"(successful) makes you better prepared for a right seat.

That's what I take from "paying your dues." I'm in Houston. My primary airport is towered. This is the IMC season. If I get my rating in two weeks and continue to fly IMC, I'm paying my dues. . .two/three months in the same IMC environment - I'm paying my dues. PFT/PFJ to build IMC time and "experience?". I'm still paying my dues. Now, as for moving up in the airline industry with PFT/PFJ? In my opinion, that's a totally different focus of discussion not even related to the level of proficiency gain with an IFR certificate achieved in two weeks or two months of training.

Or, have I missed the focus of the thread? I'm trying to make that decision. Short term, longer term. . .pros and cons knowing either way I'm still gaining experience flying in IMC.