Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Floating an idea, interested in thoughtful feedback

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    I agree with that argument. Every airplane I've flown in for the last several years is older than 40 years. My airplane had its 54th birthday a couple of months ago.

    Cary

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Cary View Post
      Every airplane I've flown in for the last several years is older than 40 years.
      Definitely not surprised, the fleet is long in the tooth. I actually picked that number based on the age of the airplane we just had an offer accepted on. If everything works out with the prebuy, etc, I'm about to be a proud new owner of a small, single engine airplane born three years before me.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by hemp View Post
        Definitely not surprised, the fleet is long in the tooth. I actually picked that number based on the age of the airplane we just had an offer accepted on. If everything works out with the prebuy, etc, I'm about to be a proud new owner of a small, single engine airplane born three years before me.
        Congratulations! Now you'll have a whole new bunch of stuff to learn. Believe me, ownership has its own steep learning curve!

        Cary

        Comment


        • #19
          I fly newer airplanes than that for CAP. Even the "old" ones are less than 40 years old. The one I take care of is a 2012 182T with G1000.

          It's overrated. The older 182s are more capable. Well, in any case, a LOT lighter. That 182T is a fat pig. One of the neighboring squadrons has a 182R that is a whopping 150 lb lighter, with the same 3100 lb max takeoff weight and 2950 max landing weight. But that's 30 years old, not 40.

          A GFC700 autopilot is nice when you have a pair of cameras rigidly mounted to the wing struts and it isn't too turbulent. It's not necessary for much of anything else. A one axis KAP140 (a la 172SP) is almost as useful in IMC.

          Now, the airplanes I rent are definitely 40 years old, sometimes more.

          As for reliability, new planes have problems, too. The 2008 I used to take care of recently blew a cylinder, and a corroded prop seal was found in the last 100 hour.

          Comment


          • #20
            So I kind of dropped this idea temporarily because I got really busy with my new used airplane and also because I enrolled in a local instrument ground school. But just today I happened to be listening to a new GA podcast and the words "Restricted Instrument Rating" came up as an aside, referring to something a U.K. listener is working on. That got me wondering, what is this restricted rating and what other funky ratings might they have in Europe?

            And wouldn't you know it - as tends to be true with all good ideas, not only did I not invent the concept of an en-route instrument rating, but it's already a thing over the pond:

            http://www.rateoneaviation.com/eir/

            I don't know that it's all that popular for many of the reasons outlined in this thread. But I do know the purpose of the rating is to make VFR pilots safer and to enable them to better utilize their PPL when the weather is good at both the departure and destination airports.

            Certainly helps when proposing a new thing to know that someone else has already tried it. We wouldn't have to guess about the outcome, we can just look at their data.

            Incidentally they also have the IR(R) which is more like a full instrument rating but as I understand it doesn't allow for operations in C,D, and B airspace.

            Comment


            • #21
              Things are quite different in Britain. Even the airspace classes don't mean the same things. They are about what services are provided, NOT what requirements you have to enter. The UK doesn't even have Class B, so something is wrong with your info. Class C and D require clearance to enter, even VFR, so they are not at all analogous to US Class C and D. And the airspaces tend to be much larger than in the US.

              See http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/eadba...2017-04-27.pdf

              Flyable IFR is seldom solid enroute. When enroute is needed, the weather is often terrain driven, which can easily make it unflyable. Worse, you can cross a front. That will make strong turbulence, and often ice or thunderstorms.

              Where you really need it is for approaches, both for routine flight and for emergencies. Your proposal will not help that.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by MAKG View Post
                The UK doesn't even have Class B, so something is wrong with your info.
                The error about the IR(R) was mine. I read this and interpreted it to mean something it doesn't because I'm unfamiliar with their airspace:

                The privileges of the IR(R) allow:
                • flight in IMC outside controlled airspace, (in Class G) and IFR flight in Class D or E controlled airspace with appropriate permission
                As for the rest, I hear repeated statements that an en-route instrument rating would not be useful. I now have a real-world example of a place where it is available and used. So apparently it is useful, at least to some extent. There's no longer any need for opinions. When I have time, I'll work on trying to collect data from EASA on how many holders there are and how often they make use of it, and any relevant incident statistics. However that would all be for naught if there's no one to read the findings, so I also need to work on getting someone interested in publishing it. None of that will happen anytime soon. Likely not until after I have earned my IR.

                Comment

                Working...
                X