Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Single engine IFR

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Go look at the numbers...when twins crash in an engine failure related accident, everybody dies, every time.
 
FN FAL said:
Go look at the numbers...when twins crash in an engine failure related accident, everybody dies, every time.
I don't doubt that. I've lost my share of friends in twins. The trick is flying an appropriate twin in an appropriate manor.

'Sled
 
Go look at the numbers...when twins crash in an engine failure related accident, everybody dies, every time.

There are no such numbers...it's a myth. It's a myth that's largely perpetuated by a campaign by Richard Collins quite some time ago to publicise the need for more training in light twins. It got blown out of proportion a long time ago, and it's just not true.

Some aircraft have been made into excellent single engine IFR platforms...the Caravan, the PC-12, and so on. Aircraft with extremely reliable, redundant systems, generally flown by very well trained pilots with advanced experience...very different from cloud busting in dad's cessna 150.

I'm with Sled on this one...generally the advocates for single pilot single piston IFR are inexperienced pilots who haven't the background to know better.

Justification. Narcotic of the soul.
 
avbug said:
There are no such numbers...it's a myth.
You need to smoke some more crack. First of all, there are no single piston planes certified for IFR.

avbug said:
I'm with Sled on this one...generally the advocates for single pilot single piston IFR are inexperienced pilots who haven't the background to know better.
 
avbug said:
Some aircraft have been made into excellent single engine IFR platforms...the Caravan, the PC-12, and so on.


OK hold the phone.

On the other thread you said you would never fly IFR in a single, now you say that it's OK. What's the real story?
 
Last edited:
USMCmech said:
OK hold the phone.

On the other thread you said you would never fly IFR in a single, now you say that it's OK. What's the real story?
I think he forgot to sign out >>>>>it's probably some guy named Bruce just typing stuff randomly under his screen name.

:laugh:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You need to smoke some more crack. First of all, there are no single piston planes certified for IFR.

First you quote false stats, and then come up with a crack like that? No piston single airplanes certified for IFR? Really? You sure about that?

I think we've found our pilot imposter...a whole lot of single engine piston airplanes are certificated for IFR flight, and are legal for IFR flight...hence the topic of this thread. How can you not know that?

As for the personal comments...those are beneath even you. Not by much, but still beneath even your low standard.

On the other thread you said you would never fly IFR in a single, now you say that it's OK. What's the real story?

Do you see me flying a single engine airplane IFR? You do not. There is no inconsistency in this; I said I don't, and go figure...I don't.

Additionally, I never said "it's okay." Don't put words in my mouth.

I also specifically pointed to the Cessna 150 in the thread to which you refer, and if you'll go back and read, I addressed the danger of flying single pilot IFR in an ill equipped light single piston airplane with no auto flight control system, poor nav and radios, failure-prone systems, being flown by inexperienced personnel. Again, no inconsistency. I addressed that point here in noting system redundancy in more advanced singles such as the Caravan and PC-12, as well as greater aggregate pilot experience, typical frequent advanced training, etc.

Hardly a way to substantiate a love for flying the Cessna 150 in the soup.
 
Totally agree with the comment made about low time inexperienced pilots that don't know any better, with the exception of the many Caravan drivers that have oodles of experience.

I used to fly a 152 in the soup and had many, many problems. It was in my flight instructing days, and in that Cessna 152, I lost the vacuum instruments twice, and electrical once in IMC.

The loss of electrical was more interesting than the no-vacuum flying - which had become routine. My student and I were returning from a long cross country with unforecast marine layer in the South Bay. After loosing electrical, I decided to take her over the ocean so I'd not hit anything, then descend to VMC (about 800') and limp back to an uncontrolled field. And there it sat until it was fixed.

I'm not against single-pilot IFR with no auto-pilot, if it's within your limitations, if its beyond what you can do, or think you can do, there are plenty of instructors out there willing to lend a hand.
 
NoPax said:
I'm not against single-pilot IFR with no auto-pilot, if it's within your limitations, if its beyond what you can do, or think you can do, there are plenty of instructors out there willing to lend a hand.
The no auto-pilot, ill-equipped crowd of single pilot IMC flyers are better than me. IMO a wing-leveler should be considered as minimum equipment before any true nasty weather flying is conducted.

Punching buttons on the GPS, writing down amended clearances, reading approach plates ... normal stuff. Hard to do while keeping the wings level when hand flying. Especially in turbulence.
 
I guess freight dog's shouldn't step in here:nuts: :nuts:. Last Time I checked 1/2 mile vis was VFR.:laugh:
 

Latest resources

Back
Top