Thank you guys; this thread has been a pleasure to read, and the links are great.

It would put an untenable burden on countless handfuls of FBOs if they had to adhere to draconian IFR equipment requirement$ in order to crank out instrument ratings.

It would put an untenable burden on countless handfuls of FBOs if they had to adhere to draconian IFR equipment requirement$ in order to crank out instrument ratings.

 

Not sure what you mean Frank.

 

I always adhered to the FARs to the absolute best of my ability. I always taught students to adhere to the FARs to their absolute best ability.

 

Draconian? What you prefer to do all your IFR flying with just Partial Panel? (no Attitude Indicator / DG for example)... takeoff & land in VMC maybe?

 

I always viewed the FARs as a written way to keep me safe, as long as I abide by them. So you can see I would have a hard time equating Safety with the idea of "draconian". Staying alive and healthy... I think I would term that like Martha Stewart... "a good thing".

 

Btw... did I mention, I always adhered to the FARs to the absolute best of my ability... and I always taught students to adhere to the FARs to their absolute best ability.... for our safety?

Not sure what you mean Frank.

 

Although he didn't include a quote to make it clear, I interpret that he's referring to the misconception regarding the exact equipment requirements for GA CAT1 ILS landings...

 

...specifically this post #2:

 

From what I have read, ILS approaches are illegal without an autopilot. I am not sure what the procedure is if the autopilot fails.

Yeah, I took it the same. Draconian = the misconception that you can't have an ILS without a push-button autoland system.

Aha... ok Fr. Bill and Ray... thanks.

 

yeah no autopilot needed for any Part 91 approach (unless something to do with turbine aircraft & single pilot ifr and that out of my realm).

idea of "draconian".

 

I was coming strictly from the financial angle, nothing more. I agree that it would be ideal if the best of everything (READ technology) were available to everyone at every small town FBO in existence, when they go there to get their instrument rating. But, in the absence of a perfect world it's a good thing options are still available, and that the requirements are such that the relative ease of obtaining the rating is not confined to military pilots or a few "fortunate sons" with fat bank accounts. So, while I said the word "draconian" I was not intending to come across in a negative way, just using colorful adjectives to point out that the status quo is not so bad...

I was coming strictly from the financial angle

 

This has been an "eternal problem" with Aviation... high costs of aircraft & fuel + instructor x number of hours required to get a license or rating = $$$$

 

You understand that you only "need the instruments you need" for an IFR flight. If you have a TSO'd IFR WAAS GPS w/ a current Database for your particular plane... that may be all you "need" to conduct an IFR flight (nav-wise).

 

Again the RV panel is sufficient... certainly from a standard IFR usage point… and from an IFR training point.

 

You mentioned the FAA... you might not realize that not only is the FAA charged with ensuring safety (which they do thru Regs but also thru numerous Seminars, products / literature available to instructors / pilots... much of it at "no cost")

 

...but they also have a second (dual) role of promoting the growth of Aviation. Some say these roles (Regulation / Enforcement & Promoting) are in conflict with each other and should be carried out by separate agencies, but that is another topic altogether.

 

When you say "it would be ideal if the best of everything (READ technology) were available" sure it would be... but what is true in aviation is true in the rest of our economic reality:

 

For example, I would like the best car available... best engineering, best technology, best safety; that means (to me) to look hard at something like a Mercedes. No way I can afford one... years ago picked something sturdy / stout / safe to last a lifetime (a Ford truck btw).

 

Same is true in the U.S. education system. I would like my son to go to MIT... not happening. But he can still apply to the U.S. Naval Academy or if not accepted, he'll get into one of the midwest Big-Ten colleges that provides a very good education in Engineering.

 

The military has money and they invest heavily in their pilots... unless you find some billionaire philanthropist, that isn't going to change... the military will always be the “best” (a qualified best) place to get a flight education.

 

But there are many other (civilian) places to get a good flight education. Personally I don't believe one needs all the latest tech in the aircraft... To me a good pilot has not only good stick and rudder skills... what is even more important is the ability to THINK. One can always learn GPS / FMC etc...

 

However you HAVE to be able to think and manage the airplane (and its systems) in the environment you are flying in. This is a crucial aspect of today's flying. Here is a handful of items to think about:

 

-Do you think about the Weather you are flying in... what it has done... what it is doing.... what it will do and how it will impact your flight.

 

-Do you think about your aircraft's performance and fuel usage... when to switch tanks... how much fuel remaining will you have once on the ground?

 

-Are you thinking about your navigating and your surroundings... are you where you are supposed to be?

 

-Are you in compliance with the FARs that govern your flight?

 

-Are you following / complying with ATC clearances? What clearance(s) do you expect? What will you do if you lose radio communication?

 

-What do you do if the engine loses partial or complete power... or there's a rise in oil temp... do all engine instruments look the way they should look?

 

-What airports are available nearby should the need arise to divert (due to a maintenance issue, weather etc...)

 

If it were me, and a client came saying... "hey I'm about to buy a Cirrus SR22... and I want you to train me to be an Instrument Rated Private Pilot"... wow ok.. this assuming I was certified by Cirrus as one of their qualified IPs...

 

But a (big) part of me would want the person to start out in something like a Cub. They get a tail-dragger sign-off and learn some real stick and rudder skills along with what Pilotage and Dead Reckoning really means. Then on to say a Warrior to focus on a standard "T-Scan" and learning basic VOR / ADF nav skills (I have specific reasons for saying these things). Then maybe an Arrow for a "complex" sign-off.

 

The Air Force for decades used C172s (T-41s) for UPT (Undergraduate Pilot Training) - they obviously did not have glass panels. I'm looking at a pic right now of a DA-20 the Air Force uses for IFS (Initial Flight Screening)... Standard "Six-Pack" panel with a VOR head (looks like just 2 GPS Receivers {built-in VOR?}; that may be all that is necessary for their requirements). I believe our Air Force was/is training Iraqi Pilots using the C-172.

 

My point here is... you do not need the latest & greatest technology to become a good, competent and safe pilot. It still will be expensive... but that has always been the nature of aviation.