Single pilot IFR

[ahramin]

And if you can't do it, what happens if your Capt gets incapacitated?

And if you do do it, what happens if you yourself get incapacitated!?

Touché

[esp803]

weather IFR or VFR

I'm not trying to be a grammar Nazi, and I don't know if this was intentional... but man that is a good pun.

E

[Colonel Sanders]

200 lbs of extra fuel might not be much in a
Boeing, but in a little piston twin ...

[Skyhunter]

200 lbs of extra fuel might not be much in a
Boeing, but in a little piston twin ...

630lbs in a hornet (more fuel in the single seat than the two seater), it is a big deal, and would way rather the gas than the guy in the back seat!

[Cat Driver]

630lbs in a hornet (more fuel in the single seat than the two seater), it is a big deal, and would way rather the gas than the guy in the back seat!

However we need to take into consideration that a Hornet's design mission was to kill people.

A Boeing on the other hand was designed to keep people alive.

A Hornet performing its mission is disposable as are the people in it.

Boeing does not entertain such thoughts.

[Skyhunter]

F/A-18E/F Super Hornet
The Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet are twin-engine carrier-based multirole fighter aircraft

Slight correction, Boeing makes fighters, that small point asside, I do agree with you though in the big picture Cat, large commercial airliners should have two crew (sometimes more), doesn't mean I wouldn't prefer to fly single pilot if I could though.

[Cat Driver]

Don't get me wrong Skyhunter I am very pro military.

The truth is flying airlines is a sector of aviation all by its self, just like the military is..

If I had my choice of a personal airplane for pleasure here it is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-27

[Skyhunter]

Nice pick Cat, the 27 is a mean machine in many ways. For me, oddly enough, I would love a Catalina, but decked out inside like a live-aboard boat, and put the some downriggers out the bubble windows for some serious salmon fishing. Dreaming a bit big there. Don't know if that would required two crew or one though to be honest, but then who likes fishing alone.

[Cat Driver]

The Catalina is a two crew airplane, especially if you have to do an emergency gear extention.

And if you are flying long range trips it is nice to have three or four pilots as they have no autopilot and the flight controls are quite heavy.......and they will fly forever on full tanks.

The longest non stop flight I ever did was ninteen hours and ten minutes.

The longest delivery flight I did was from Johannesberg S.A. to just south of Norfolk Virginia via Africa, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Europe, England and the North Atlantic to Labrador and down to Virginia.

[dufflebag]

Out of experience, SPIFR is all about self preparation, motivation, setting your own minimums

Interesting point. Should I be setting my own minimums higher or lower than what's in the Cap?

I didn't see anybody else jump on this, but just to make it clear: set personal minimums above the CAP minimums. Never break CAP minimums.

[Dagwood]

set personal minimums above the CAP minimums.

Again, I have to ask why?

If a pilot is not comfortable flying down to minimums and safely completing a missed approach when required he should not be in the pilot's seat.

[shimmydampner]

+1

[traveller123]

+1

[dufflebag]

set personal minimums above the CAP minimums.

Again, I have to ask why?

If a pilot is not comfortable flying down to minimums and safely completing a missed approach when required he should not be in the pilot's seat.

Well, you asked if you should set personal minimums above or below the CAP minimums. If you start dipping below CAP minimums, the you are obviously 'busting' minimums. I don't believe I'm alone in saying that this would be unwise, especially in a single pilot IFR situation. Don't take this the wrong way, but something tells me you haven't actually done much IFR flying, or single pilot IFR for that matter. It's easy to say someone shouldn't be flying if they can't shoot to minimums, but try actually flying single pilot IFR in real world conditions. Throw in other variables like ice, unfamiliar aircraft, strong winds, no GPS, turbulence, illusions, short runways, no PAPI/VASIS, night/day, fatigue, etc etc etc. It's not always as simple as shooting the approach and popping out to unlimited visibility and clear sight of the runway like in training. Setting personal minimums above the legal minimums and knowing you're limits is very common practice as far as I can tell. And the CAP minimums are minimums for a reason, there's no guarantee of flight safety if you start busting those.

[trey kule]

I do not think anyone was suggesting setting their "personal" minimums below the published ones. A question is not, or should not be, a statement. somebody was jumping on semantics.

But the issue that an IF rated pilot should be able to safely fly , and if necessary do a missed approach to minimums is a valid one.. As to the rain , lightening, challanging approach..They are specific to the particular approach and conditions at the time and no reason to set a generic personal minimum..

If one is to set a personal minimum it should be with regard to getting off the profile..something like...if I am out more than 5kts, 2 dots either way, or not on the profile for the MDA I will abort.
Pilots that set personal minimums will try to fly to them even when things are not going well.
Pilots are supposed to do a pre approach briefing, even if it is to themselves , where they consider all the variables associated with the particular approach ...That is an example so no need to challange the specifics.

Pilots that tell me their personal minimums are published plus 200, for example, are really telling me they cannot fly all that well. Some approaches are straight in , clear under a 200 foot ceiling, and there is no way in the world a rated pilot should not be able to do that. I have to agree that they should not be sitting in the pilots seat.

And I have lots and lots of real world IF experience, both single pilot and crew..I am not a fan of single pilot IF at all. Things can go all to hell in a handbasket really quickly sometimes, and personal minimums aside, it becomes a case of luck not skill getting it on the ground safely. But I am also not a fan of the right seat pilot having zero experience either..Worse than useless when the fur hits the fan sometimes. And I recognize the irony of wanting a second pilot with experience only...no need to point it out. At the very least single pilot IF should not be allowed with out a functioning autopilot (not a wing leveler)..something that I believe is the case for commercial operators who are doing it every day, but apparently not for private operators who fly less frequently, are not subject to mandatory annual training etc..The hardest for the poorest in many cases.

[Skyhunter]

Trey,

Lots of single pilot IFR flying no auto pilot to minimums. Hornet autopilot not authorized for approach, Harvard and Hawk no Auto pilot. All single pilot. Oh forgot the tutor as they are still flying it for the snowbirds.

In a airplane designed to be flown single pilot I fail to see the big deal. Like one the previos posters I also think that unless there is a very specific reason, at that specific time for that particular approach, if you have to set higher mins you probably shouldn't have a ticket.

[trey kule]

Well, I think that most of us agree that a pilot should be able to fly to minimums if they hold a rating subject to exceptions for specific conditions..

The comparison of military flight to civilian is a bit of apples to oranges..A huge difference in the training, initial selection aptitudes, and sometimes quality of equipment and maintenance. And, quite frankly, in the age and maturity of the pilots..

Besides, it seems to me that we, the Canadian taxpayers, paid for an 18 not to long ago where the pilot got a bit disorientated on approach and decided to take an alternate way to the ground...That type of thing may be OK in the military , but not an option in the civiliam world.

[Mr. North]

For what it's worth the company I work for has additional minimums for junior captains (and we operate two crew). Can't remember them offhand but I believe it's an additional 1-200 ft. and 1/2 sm on top of published. After 100 hours of IF these restrictions are waved. Can't say how much it's adhered too but it is there in our Ops manual.

SPIFR in the real world can be quite intimidating and downright harry for the uninitiated. For someone with no IFR experience I don't see any problem with setting personal limits in addition to the CAP, least until they gain confidence in their abilities. I like Trey Kule's idea of setting "profile minimums" but that still requires a certain amount of flying discipline and skill that many novice pilots have yet to acquire. Shooting down to minimums is of course the standard for IFR pilots but it is not acquired overnight and pilots short of IFR experience (in a single pilot environment) would do well in catering to their abilities which hopefully improve in a timely fashion.

[trey kule]

Company mandated minimums for new captains is a bit of a different issue. The company is , I assume, being cautious...
I am aware of one company that used to have new captains in their navajos with 100 PIC time.
The minimums imposed are simply to insure an extra margin of safety..They are not allowing the Captain the discretion of maybe overestimating thier ability.
And this is where it gets tricky, because the Captain should be able to do an approach to minimums, but unfortunately,that sometimes is not the case. It is however different that a pilot making a self assessment that they cannot fly to minimums..

Not so long ago I had to do a SPIFR ride.. Quite a difference in the work load from a well trained and qualified crew working together. But if a pilot cannot handle it then either our rating standards are to low, or the training is not meeting its objective..something to think about

[Colonel Sanders]

There is SPIFR, and then there is SPIFR.

When I first got my group 3 instrument rating 20 years
ago, I used to fly my Maule around in the cloud. I cannot
imagine a worse airplane for IFR. No autopilot, and it
happily rolls upside down if you try to fold a map. No GPS,
no moving map, just a single VOR/ILS/ADF. That was a
pretty high workload, esp if you were flying an unfamiliar,
complicated approach.

Fast-forward to today. Huge colour IFR moving map
GPS in the panels for situational awareness. Superb
autopilots that will fly the approach for you. NDB
approaches are a thing of the past. That's a different
kind of SPIFR, which should not be confused with what
we used to do.

If you are flying a familiar approach with a huge colour
GPS in the panel and a superb autopilot, SPIFR really
should not pose a challenge. To published minimums.

[traveller123]

Right Colonel,

flying a NDB approach (without GPS) and a RNAV approach SPIFR it's two different things.

[trey kule]

I have to agree with you CS....
I hated the hockey puck DGs then and I hate them now..I have one on my shelf as a reminder of the not so good old days.
Unfortunately, even with all the great advancements , pilots are still finding a way to fly perfectly good airplanes into the ground.
I still feel however, that a well trained and qualified second pilot on board makes things alot safer, and particularily when things go a bit astray the cockpit can become a busy place. Not so much with a talking bag of sand warming the right seat and acting as your sexual advisor..