How would you rather fly? IFR or VFR?

[. ._]

Hey folks,

I'm in the Soo right now in the process of renewing my IFR rating. Personally, I like the idea of bombing around without anyone telling me where to go, but I figured I should renew my IFR rather than let it lapse. I'd rather look at the view than the instruments when I fly.

I know other people that LOVE IFR flying and find it challenging and interesting.

What do you like better?

-istp

[sissyphus]

IFR, VFR is way too much work.

[Flying Low]

I answered the polled that I liked both. I get a great deal of satisfaction from flying IFR very precisely and flying an approach successfully in minimum wx conditions. I also enjoyed the low level VFR flying I did for the first ten years of my career.

If I had to pick one; all other factors being equal...home everynight, number of days off, etc. I would pick my original job. Flying a Supercub off logging roads doing low level recon for spray planes.

[AuxBatOn]

Depends.. For going from A to B, IFR all the way.

For doing my work, VFR.

[Hedley]

For x/c, if there is significant wx or airspace to deal
with, IFR can be worth the upfront hassle of filing and
getting a clearance to get into the system.

For local, VFR.

If at all possible, I prefer to turn the radio off ASAP
after departing the circuit. Blah blah blah blah blah ...

[canwhitewolf]

flying instrument flight rules (IFR) in VFR weather

[Nark]

Flying otherwise IMC, VFR.

[C-GGGQ]

For x/c, if there is significant wx or airspace to deal
with, IFR can be worth the upfront hassle of filing and
getting a clearance to get into the system.

For local, VFR.

If at all possible, I prefer to turn the radio off ASAP
after departing the circuit. Blah blah blah blah blah ...

Bingo. Going a distance, possibly landing at an unfamiliar airport IFR just simplifies things. flying local for fun or going to a well known fly in location VFR is more fun no annying controllers to talk to

[old_man]

I like IFR. Besides time building and what not it does seem to speed things up when you are going through busy areas. Worst comes to worst you can always cancel IFR or request a visual approach once you get to your destination to make things simpler. It's good practice and it seems to get my brain working more which is always a good thing. Just my 0.02.

[. ._]

Thanks guys!

Very interesting so far. I suppose each has its purpose.

Keep the comments coming though. I appreciate the opinions- just to verify that I'm not insane for paying a bunch of cash and re-learning procedures after 4 years of not thinking about it.

There might be an ISTP story coming out of my Soo IFR renewal... Some weird shit has happened. (God, I love flying/writing motivation!)

-istp

[AuxBatOn]

Thanks guys!

Very interesting so far. I suppose each has its purpose.

Keep the comments coming though. I appreciate the opinions- just to verify that I'm not insane for paying a bunch of cash and re-learning procedures after 4 years of not thinking about it.

There might be an ISTP story coming out of my Soo IFR renewal... Some weird shit has happened. (God, I love flying/writing motivation!)

-istp

Just use flight sim to get you back up to speed. When you need you MIFR then renew it.

[paydaymayday]

Voted IFR, all the way. There is nothing more satisfying than taking off in windy, bumpy, rainy, cold weather - where everyone is suffering - to level off above the layer in the smooth air and bright sun. And the precision it takes to nail a solid approach to minimums while getting the shite kicked out of you in a low level jet is something to be proud of, too.

[randallg]

Interesting question. I've flown about 70 hours the last month in my little single from CZBB to Cape Breton and back. When doing a 3-4 hour leg going from A to B I prefer IFR. However, I'm not super experienced so I don't want to push the weather. If conditions are clear or ceilings and tops are low, IFR is a no-brainer. Surprisingly this has happened most of the time. Otherwise, if ceilings and tops are high, or low ceilings with no TCU, I have gone VFR and used the XM weather to avoid heavier precipitation. This has proven to be amazingly accurate. If ceilings are low and TCU are predicted more than isolated, I wait for conditions to improve.

[StudentPilot]

I'd rather go VFR, I like watching the scenery pass by, the view of rain showers off my wing as the sun sets, dodging the heavy rain showers along my route, and especially seeing the mountains my destinations are surrounded by. I also find satisfaction in flying an approach and popping out of cloud just before minimums, but I find watching clouds go past and the GPS distance ticking down boring most of the time.

[SkyWolfe]

I love IFR, its like a video game... But you only get one turn

Canpilot loves VFR

[sky's the limit]

There is nothing more satisfying than taking off in windy, bumpy, rainy, cold weather - where everyone is suffering - to level off above the layer in the smooth air and bright sun. And the precision it takes to nail a solid approach to minimums while getting the shite kicked out of you in a low level jet is something to be proud of, too.

I get a great deal of satisfaction from flying IFR very precisely and flying an approach successfully in minimum wx conditions

I find it very interesting the way the word "precision" is being used in this conversation, or more accurately, the way it is not being used.

It seems most people here have a certain idea of what VFR flight is, and that idea is limited to the usual progression of flight through the early stages of ones career.

Hedely for example exercises far greater precision when flying aerobatics than in any IFR environment, the Twin Otter boys and girls working off-strip in remote areas in very poor weather conditions landing on eskers or gravel bars engage in very precise flying. And in my world, setting towers on mountain tops, building diamond drills on glaciers or at the high altitudes, slinging people on mountain rescues, or toeing into any number of places to let loggers off on wet, slippery stumps in the wind and the fog mere inches from overhanging trees or fallen debris requires extreme precision to the inch. Try putting a hook on the end of a 200ft long line in the hand of a guy half way up a mountain 150 times a day logging or moving drills in 30kts of wind on the lee side of the hill.

In my experience, IFR is some of the least precise flying I've been involved in. It's not to say that it doesn't take some precision, but the point I'm trying to make is that these terms are relative and there are many applications in aviation that require a great deal more precision than IFR flying. That said there is satisfaction in IFR flight when things are near legal limits, but it's not anywhere near the satisfaction of some of these other jobs for me.

So I guess I'll have to vote VFR, just because it can be so much more entertaining.

stl

[Chuck Ellsworth]

There is no doubt that flying IFR is easier, it was far easier flying floats IFR because you had a hell of a lot better chance of not running into another airplane when you were in cloud.

[Nark]

To each their own, but STL hit the nail on the head.

IFR, everything is planned out for you.

VFR, its up to you to do it and avoid it.

Like I said earlier, flying VFR in otherwise IMC is the challenging part of "fun." Having your wing tip mere feet from a cloud while at 500' is a heck of a lot more exciting to tell the girlfriend about than tracking a needle.








PS. FAR 91.155 will answer your question why I would ever skirt clouds at 500' and talk about it on an open forum.

[Janszoon]

IFR for me.

STL says that some VFR jobs have more precise flying involved than IFR, and I agree. This is especially true when autopilot is involved. I still think that flying an IFR approach to minimums in icing and turbulence without autopilot takes a certain amount of precision that doesn't allow for much straying from nominal to be successful. In the case of large aircraft, you cannot expect to fly away from the glide slope and be able to recover in time to be successful, so precision is important. It is precision of a different kind, involving close-monitoring of instruments and power settings to keep a perfectly stabilized approach. Although there is some wiggle-room during an approach, flying one by hand exactly on track and slope is quite rewarding for myself.

When the weather is poor, I would much rather be IFR. When I have a flight of, say, 3 hours up in the arctic and I know the destination weather is say 400 OVC, and I am unsure of the exact enroute weather (GFA says 2000-5000 SCT, INT 500-1000 AGL, 2SM -RA, BR), I dread being in a single-engine VFR aircraft. This is especially true when my destination is a lake and I have no weather. Do I want to be flying for 2+ hours low level with reduced visibility? No thanks, I've had my fill of that and don't enjoy it much. There are no sights to see on that trip.

Same trip and in a twin-engine IFR aircraft? No problem. I climb out of the weather, enjoy a nice smooth flight, then fly a nice approach to minimums and land. Instead of spending a couple hours in bad weather and struggling to see, I spend only 10-20 min in cloud and have instruments to guide me down with accuracy.

[Sulako]

I like VFR in Canada, but I always file IFR in the USA.

[cgzro]

Well I don't have any choice really, my single seater can only do VFR, but I am reminded of a rather fun trip. I was down in new york and my wife had joined me in a friends Mooney. The clouds were about 2000' overcast but superb visibility all he way back, he filed IFR and I of course bombed back up through Syracuse etc. Well I had lots of fun because I overflew a huge field of wind turbines about 500' above, circled them, then over thousand islands and circled Bolt castle, then back. When I told her about the cool stuff I saw on the way back she was most annoyed as all she had seen was white the entire way back

[Shiny Side Up]

My vote is for VFR. IFR flying I find is both boring and stressful at the same time. I've talked with many pilots who will regale me with the tale of how fun it was to shoot an approach, but I don't see that as something "enjoyable" or "satisfying" to accomplish, merely necessary. All the things I love about flying are done VFR.

[iflyforpie]

I remember sitting jump seat on several flights when I was wrenching for KFC (before I started flying) and just loving the 400Hz hum of the avionics, the radio chatter, the rapid fire checklists, and all the blinky lights associated with flying heavy metal IFR. It is what sold me on flight training and eventually a commercial license (with Group 1 IFR).

But that was before I found out how cool VFR flying was. Chugging along aimlessly as a butterfly on a sunny day. Hugging a ridgeline as you eek 1000FPM out of a plane that normally gets 400. Taking it down to the deck to mark a fire or shoot a radio collar off. Doing a lazy barnstormer loop or aileron roll.

I will probably eventually go to an IFR job, but I think I will miss uncontrolled VFR terribly.