VFR student in the clouds :)

pa31350pilot said:
Hey man, I really doubt you were in class G in the pattern at Wings. On the surface, yes....in the pattern, no. Better take a closer look at the sectional.
Click to expand...

actually it's class G to 700', 1000' msl. Having figured this was going to happen we were at 1000'. It's my home airport man, don't bust my nuts too hard.
 
I voted no because I think there are better ways to get them disoriented than MVFR in the pattern.

I'd go up at night and have them try to tell you what the airplane is doing while they're closing their eyes.

An aerobatic plane I flew at my first flight school had one instructor that was really good in it. Far better than the rest. I will always remember the lesson I did with him that culminated with his disorientation demonstration. He said, in his Tennessee accent, Shut your eyes and look down. I'm going to do a barrell roll, and you're going to tell me when we're upside down. Then you can look up.

I shut my eyes, looked down, waited a few moments and felt a very slight negative G. I told him I thought we were upside down at that point and he said look up.

We were 30 degrees from being level again! He'd performed it perfectly at 1G, with absolutely no yaw or sensation of +/- Gs either. He probably could've done the whole "glass of tea on the glareshield" thing without spilling a drop.

Anyway, I voted no.
 
I was a little vague, it's not as cut and dried as I made it out to be, there are numerous IFR rules you'd have to comply with to be legal, but having a clearance/flight plan, and talking to ATC are not part of them.

flyguy said:
Can't go into the cloud unless you are instrument rated and current.
Click to expand...

Original poster said he was with them. I went out on a short but sturdy limb and assumed that he was instrument current.

flyguy said:
they must understand that until they have an instrument rating they cannot go into any cloud anywhere while acting as PIC. Also, they should be taught that just becasue it is legal does not mean it is safe.
Click to expand...

Never said it was. Original question didn't ask anything about that.

flyguy said:
If there are any other nutjobs flying around in that same cloud, neither of you being controlled by ATC.....hope you have your will made out.
Click to expand...

So everyone who flies IMC in class G is a nut job? Sure it's not as safe as in controlled airspace, but you sure are using a lot of doom and gloom in your painting.

meritflyer said:
Tell that to the NTSB when there is an accident..
Click to expand...

Assuming you followed the IFR rules for class G, they're not going to find that you violated any of them. They might find you guilty of stupidity since you crashed, but that's not the point.
 
Ralgha said:
Original poster said he was with them. I went out on a short but sturdy limb and assumed that he was instrument current.
Click to expand...
I wasn't replying to the origional poster

Ralgha said:
Never said it was. Original question didn't ask anything about that.
Click to expand...
Still wasn't replying to the origional post. However, your post implied that it was. And I didn't mean to flame. Sorry if it came across that way.
Ralgha said:
So everyone who flies IMC in class G is a nut job? Sure it's not as safe as in controlled airspace, but you sure are using a lot of doom and gloom in your painting.
Click to expand...
I can't speak for everybody, but I will only fly IMC in class G if I am getting into or out of an airport in class G. I spend the absolute minimum amount of time I can. Why? because its no different than flying VFR in VMC without flight following and not looking out the window. In my opinion, only a nutjob would do that. I don't know about the rest of you but I like to see my traffic less than 2 seconds before it hits me. Call me over conservative if you wish.
 
Ralgha said:
Assuming you followed the IFR rules for class G, they're not going to find that you violated any of them. They might find you guilty of stupidity since you crashed, but that's not the point.
Click to expand...

Acutally, there have been several rulings about being in IMC in class G while not on an IFR flight plan. It has also been ruled against under FAR 91.13 (a).

So to say you havent violated any reg is somewhat true but to assume you will not be ruled against is stupid seeing since there have been such rulings in the past.
 
txpilot said:
Cue Midlifeflyer in 3...2....1...:)

By the way, Midlife, when are you going to burn CD's of all of your FAQ's? I bet you could make a small fortune with all of the info you have compiled. By the way, I love reading all of your posts when it comes to the regs and interpretations, etc.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the compliment, but even I wouldn't buy it.
 
meritflyer said:
Actually, there have been several rulings about being in IMC in class G while not on a flight plan. It has also been ruled against under FAR 91.13 (a).
Click to expand...
Indeed there have. As I recall, a bunch out of California where pilots thought it would be okay to take off in the fog while still in Class G. Problem seems that while technically "legal" it has the potential of interfering with real IFR traffic is thus reckless under 91.13.

The best non-aviation equivalent I can think of is driving at the posted speed limit of 30 through a busy intersection while a lot of people were crossing the street. You weren't speeding, were you?
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
Indeed there have. As I recall, a bunch out of California where pilots thought it would be okay to take off in the fog while still in Class G. Problem seems that while technically "legal" it has the potential of interfering with real IFR traffic is thus reckless under 91.13.
I have read a few. Also, the FARs list VFR cloud and vis requirements while operating VFR. So, if you arent on an IFR flight plan (yes, even in G) you can and will be held liable for anything that may go wrong while you are in such airspace. Its been held up in the past as MidlifeFlyer said. There are several cases that the FAA has found pilots thinking its okay to fly in class G exercising careless and reckless activity. I would have to agree with them.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I voted no.

I feel that doing too much instrument training with primary students is kind of like the parachute in the Cirrus. I don't want to give them the tools to make them feel safe enough in clouds to the point where they'll make a bad decision and do something dangerous.

My inadvertant IMC encounter lesson is 121.5, 7700, "I messed up", and take a good look at your certificate after you land if you're lucky enough to get that far.

Mike
 
Van_Hoolio said:
I voted no.

I feel that doing too much instrument training with primary students is kind of like the parachute in the Cirrus. I don't want to give them the tools to make them feel safe enough in clouds to the point where they'll make a bad decision and do something dangerous.

My inadvertant IMC encounter lesson is 121.5, 7700, "I messed up", and take a good look at your certificate after you land if you're lucky enough to get that far.

Mike
Click to expand...
HA! You actally think that I fly with the thought in my head, hey I can pull the chute if i mess up? Honestly, I am more scared of pulling that chute than crash landing.
 
I may be mistaken, but I believe the original poster was asking if instructors should let students "accidentally" fly into clouds to show them that it can happen. If this is the case, I definately vote no. That'd be kinda like taking a driver's ed. student and letting them "accidentally" run a stop sign. Teach them how to avoid clouds at all costs. If they ever do run into them "accidentally," that's partly what the three hours of required simulated instrument time is for.

As far as legally taking student pilots into the clouds. I don't really see any problem with that. I know some instructors that use it towards the student's three hours of instrument training, and it's a good thing when used in moderation. Besides, for some students it may be an inspiration to get an instrument rating after their private.
 
I had to do traffic pattern work with a student once and our home airport was IFR but an airport 20 miles away was VFR so we filed IFR to the other airport and then commenced our lesson. My student really learned alot from that. I would not take a student on a flight for the sole purpose of flying in the clouds but this one day it ended up being neccessary.
 
Errily similar to the spin training discussion, and you all know my stance on that.
Suffice it to say: I know what the regs say about it. I also know that knowledge and experience makes a safer pilot.
Interpret that however you like.
 
PanJet said:
I may be mistaken, but I believe the original poster was asking if instructors should let students "accidentally" fly into clouds to show them that it can happen. If this is the case, I definately vote no. That'd be kinda like taking a driver's ed. student and letting them "accidentally" run a stop sign. Teach them how to avoid clouds at all costs. If they ever do run into them "accidentally," that's partly what the three hours of required simulated instrument time is for.

As far as legally taking student pilots into the clouds. I don't really see any problem with that. I know some instructors that use it towards the student's three hours of instrument training, and it's a good thing when used in moderation. Besides, for some students it may be an inspiration to get an instrument rating after their private.
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:

Show them different experiences firsthand, but demonstrate a rule abiding and responsible thinking mentality, and hopefully the students will absorb it.

Student see-student do; right?

-ColM
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top