Multi IFR in under a Week - Maybe Not My Best Idea

[@joeyheynow410]

I really like what the instructor said at the beginning, "An instrument rating is not an achievement, it's a commitment".

[@SVSky]

I'm doing my instrument right now, I've never felt my brain go so slow in my life. Multi is just unimaginable for me.

[@flyingfox8360]

I flew into IMC for the first time back on Tuesday night, I had my instructor with me who holds his double I and we decided to go fly and if we had to grab a hotel at our XC airport we would. It was a wild experience, the first cloud i ever flew through i actually flinched when we punched into it. Then the wild feeling of what all my sensory input is saying is happening and what the instruments say is actually happening is such a crazy phenomenon that is impossible to convey to someone who hasnt experienced it. I know from what i was told by hundreds of other pilots either in person who i know, or on aviation subreddits or forums, I thought i knew what to expect, but when i actually flew into it there was nothing anyone could have said to prepare me for what i experienced. Great job documenting the humility it takes to learn the craft even with as much time as you have flying. When we stop learning and get complacent is when things get dangerous.

[@jaygallamore562]

Good job for sharing this experience. Retired U.S. Navy pilot here. Many flight-related evolutions are perishable skills which if not regularly practiced, quickly degrade. We were required to fly specified amount of flight hours per month, landings, night time, air refueling, etc. to maintain proficiency. This system and focus on proficiency works very well and the Navy has a very good safety record especially considering the mission. Not staying proficient is very risky for pilots and their passengers. I’ll end with a quick story. While flying a training mission in Northern California near dusk, I heard a civilian pilot request vectors to a small airport. The controller informed him it had been closed for several months and asked the pilot’s intentions. He was unaware of the closure, low on fuel, and had his family onboard. He further stated that although he was instrument rated, he was not comfortable flying at night and needed to get on the ground. I coordinated with ATC which switched me to a remote frequency. I was able to intercept the pilot in duress and escort him to another airfield where he was able to safely land. ‘Nuff said….

[@josephroberts6865]

I appreciate your comments on proficiency. As a retired Army helicopter pilot (CH-47s) we also had minimum hours and iterations of flight tasks (maneuvers). We also were required to fly at least 1 hour every 60 days to maintain currency. Herein lies my frustration. Many say that currency or recency doesn’t equal proficiency. I agree but say it should. When a pilot exceeded his 60 day currency requirement he was required to undergo a proficiency flight evaluation (PFE). If the pilot failed the PFE, he was given additional training until demonstrating proficiency. If the pilot passed the PFE he was considered proficient. Each pilot had semi-annual flight hours to sustain minimum proficiency. Yet rarely did any pilot fail a flight evaluation. It was simply because the evaluator would redo a flight task until the pilot got it right. That did not make the pilot proficient. Obviously, the hour levels were never high enough because of costs. Truth be told pilots need about 500 hours a year and practice doing all the flight tasks to truly be proficient. But military leaders have budget requirements and revert to placing the onus on instructor pilots and evaluators, who, for right or wrong, don’t want to alienate the pilots by documenting unsatisfactory performance which has its own stigma, and also don’t want to fail so many pilots that units become not mission capable and commanders fire them. So, that is the way it truly is.

[@clinty51]

When your mentor is quiet and gives you one word answers....It was at that time, you know you've F'ed up...back on the horse, you got this!

[@just-a-waffle]

@7:30 feather the prop to extend glide, and if that fence is coming up you can actually dump flaps to get a couple hundred ft balloon and extend the glide even further at the last moment. My instructor showed me that during my complex training in a Mooney and I was very surprised

[@TriumphDoc]

Thank you Steve for your contributions to aviation. Priceless your level of honesty and humility and vulnerability. Let’s us all know we’re mortal and to be vigilant about how difficult and dangerous IFR flying can be, especially single pilot in a twin. There is a lot of shit going on and it’s very easy to get way behind the airplane.

[@ivorevans1795]

So good of you to share these Steve. Thousands and thousands of pilots benefiting massively I have no doubt. Great great work!

[@SoarwithJordan]

I’ve been working on my multi engine and multi IFR simultaneously and we flew 1.5 hours in total IMC in a 310. I couldn’t believe how mentally taxing it is. We flew at 11000 and dealt with icing which was crazy

[@mrsaskriders]

As a fellow Canadian, I appreciate your humbleness. Very technical twin IFR. Thx😊

[@TheFlyingReporter]

Loved it. Good ole fashioned Flight Chops debrief video. You weren't doing so bad considering the conditions. Thanks Steve. Keep it up. We're behind you.

[@jackkrueger4150]

Mad respect for how you handle everything in flight and how honest you are in the videos. I started to get a little ill myself listening you talking about "it feels like we're in a descending right turn" and getting rattled by the turbulence. Made me remember knocking out all of the IMC time required for Private in one sitting. That was a looong flight for a 20 hour pilot.

[@aaron235423]

Took the “accelerated” commercial multi in a Tecnam Last year, definitely didn’t feel comfortable or ready for the checkride after 7 hours so I had to retry 6 months later. Highly recommend learning all the emergency procedures and flows to the last dot before getting in the cockpit.

[@Pilotwisco]

Thank you for showing the real side of multi instrument flying training. I think a lot of students get discouraged, but it’s excellent for them to see what I think is a great pilot undergoing such a positive learning experience.

[@CleffedWings]

The aviation (specifically general aviation) industry is truly better off for FlightChops and similar channels that are not afraid to let us all learn from mistakes they make with humility, grace, and a metric fuck ton of insight. Truly an amazing video and channel!

[@cturdo]

This is so important to hear. Thanks for your candid self-evaluation - we can all identify with you.

[@ChrisB257]

Kudos Steve - so many folks regard IFR as 'just another technique' and yet as you show, way more to it! Plenty of stress. :)

[@theflyingfool]

I have a wry smile on my face at the end of this video, 'cos you seem to beat yourself up the same as I do when something isn't right. The chasm of difference though is that I'm barely 100hrs P1 and still in nappies!

[@carytaylor1415]

Great video Steve, I am past-due for an IPC myself. Boy this reminds me my multi and instrument checkrides. They are always quite humbling!

[@SkylineBaronPilot]

Excellent and thorough as always! Great job Steve. Thank you for sharing. Always learning. Love it.

[@joelamb3581]

Trigger Gap airfield at 3:40 or so! That is a beautiful field. The kids and I had our first airplane camping adventure there a couple weeks ago and it was wonderful.

[@gatestpilotpaulmsouthwick7012]

The P2006T is a great economical twin IFR trainer, that makes you work hard and stay on your game. The new NG Sport with injected engines, 3 doors, and a fully integrated GFC 700 autopilot will be a game changer. A few extra inches MP on one engine will help a lot too!

[@OldCessnaSkylaneGuy]

Great content (again) and even better, great humility (again). Thanks for being honest and keeping the lessons real.

[@papajuliettdelta2825]

Just a few questions to Luke, how far below minimums would you say is acceptable, what is the new gate, is there a new gate, is there no other way other than commiting to land, how likely is a second engine failure during a go around, did you really have to punish him, wouldn‘t flight freeze, a short discussion over the options, pros and cons and thereafter a reposition to final and reflying the whole approach with the abnormal possibly be the better way? Just thoughts that came up, because my inital reaction was, that I would’ve done it differently, since the possibility of negative training was given. but I am eager to hear about your or everyone else‘s point of view.

[@llaughridge]

If they were doing an approach with vertical guidance, or a CDFA on a non-precision, then there should have been less concern about sinking below MDA and not making the runway. Reaching minimums, maintaining the same trajectory would take you to the touchdown zone. Nobody should be doing dive-and-drive technique.

[@papajuliettdelta2825]

@@llaughridge given the fact that you maintain the sinkrate perfectly all the way down to the RWY and maybe still have some crossing altitudes left to check your CDFA non-precision - only then I might agree. But what if you don‘t maintain the sinkrate perfectly (even worse, it happened unnoticed). And you break through the clouds in let‘s say 200‘ and you still have 1.5 NM to go. Other than that there could be obstacles, do you really want to try to power yourself into the RWY with the given single-engine performance? So where do you draw the line? What if there is a rainshower just overhead the threshold, patches if fog…. You don’t see anything. You still land (without autoland)? Or do you try a missed approach then, even lower, with even less options. I don’t know the aircraft they are flying at all, but from what I took out of the video, it seems to have very poor single-engine-performance. Which lead me to thinking that the whole approach to an approach in an OEI condition in that particular aircraft may be worth another thought. Would it be an option to pick an airport with more suitable weather, set the minimum higher (commander‘s discretion) - leaving you with more air aka time under the belly to make a reasonable decision. Of course we all don‘t know what they‘ve briefed and the exercise was all about. It is just a short outtake from many hours in the simulator. I just don‘t feel confortable with the thought that someone has to descend down to an RNAV, non-precision or even ILS minimum before he may or may not see the RWY and is then left with only one option because of the (non existing) performance of the aircraft - land and the runway better be where it is expected. Just some thoughts, and I would love to hear from Luke - because so know I might be so far off, and can learn from him and his experience. And if there is some truth to my thoughts, maybe some of y‘all in the Community take something away from that. In the end I don‘t want to blame - I want us all to understand, comprehend, learn and tomorrow be better and safer pilots than today. Step by step from current to proficient.

[@Billliamm]

A lot more people have died by going below minimums than on a single engine go around on a good engine. The correct answer is zero.

[@igclapp]

​@@BillliammAre you sure about that? In light piston twins specifically?

[@flyingjeff1984]

Chops, you’re normal. Thanks for sharing. Trust the gauges-100%.

[@JoshWelsh]

Thanks for sharing this Steve, this was helpful for me as I start in to my IFR training..

[@alexpitts7634]

This is my favorite part of this channel

[@parrotraiser6541]

Pleased to see the Tecnam used for the job. From the first time I saw that machine, I thought it would be perfect for multi training. It really needs a couple of stainless steel sacrificial strips on the bottom for the inevitable gear-up landings that kind of work will incur.

[@WingsOverTO]

Great video, Steve. And a good reminder that I’m way out of proficiency with my own IR.

[@caprica_13]

Just keep in mind with that single engine missed approach, your instructor said it's an emergency and go below mins anyway. That is only true if your airplane doesn't have the single-engine performance to climb, like most piston twins. However that's not the case for turbine twins, you have plenty of single-engine performance to go back up and try again or go to your alternate.

[@whiskeybravoaviation]

Not sure if this is US/CA thing? Certainly in the UK we do single engine missed approaches on piston twins, it is always part of the proficiency check. The drill is to retract gear and flaps without waiting for positive rate as you are unlikely to get positive rate with them deployed.

[@igclapp]

​@@whiskeybravoaviationIt's never very high nor hot in the UK! 😂

[@whiskeybravoaviation]

@@igclapp very true! We do always check the OEI performance for departure, destination and alternate though. The danger for UK pilots is visiting our lovely European neighbours where these conditions do exist and becoming complacent to flying from low airfields at mostly ISA temps.

[@dennisstoesz]

That would be deadly mistake ..get it on ground ,,no single engine abort in imc ..or vfr..

[@caprica_13]

​@@dennisstoesz in a piston, maybe. Depends on the airplane. The Baron 58 with the 300hp engines has just barely enough juice to go missed single engine if it isn't too hot or high. However the King Air 350 or Hawker I fly can shoot approaches and go missed all day single engine without any complaints. Safer thing there would be to go missed and go somewhere you can see the ground.

[@jdos2]

Thank you for sharing your learning experiences. For me, learning is hard, can be frustrating because of personal pressure (or other pressure - to say nothing of having to learn while dealing with an audience, turbulence, and vestibular funkiness!). On the other hand, humility is a great trait and you've got that. Thank you again for reminding me that failure is a completely normal part of greater success!

[@smacfe]

Excellent video. Real IFR is way different from practice. Very humbling for sure after my proficiency begins to erode.

[@Sometungsten]

Flying - Thumbs up !!! Thanks for sharing Steve.

[@Calatriste54]

Long time fan, marveling in your progress. A fan since your touch and go flights out of Zillah.. you go boyyo!

[@SimonHollandfilms]

really good film about flying....hope you can do more SIM training and take this as a good learning experience.

[@marshmellow377]

I did my ME rating in a day (6hrs), Did my IR in a week (40hrs in the simulator and the 10hrs in the aircraft)

[@mikercflyer7383]

Great video. Safe travels

[@maillouski]

Just passed my IPC and I somewhat voluntarily switched from CDI to GPS while doing the ILS. I stayed in the box and managed to recover, but probably out of sheer luck.

[@JFirn86Q]

Great instructor for sure.

[@AC-jk8wq]

Nice work Steve! 😃

[@marcelszabo9585]

ahh the legendary VLOC /GPS switch over aka the $500 button. (cost of another check ride lol )

[@jspalla]

I've heard it called the $1,000 button for same reason

[@NicholasQuickLiveStreams]

first flight lesson this week, Day before I Leave for Oshkosh

[@theafro]

If you're not humbled by the thing you're learning, you're not learning anything.

[@clarencewiles963]

You do want to do it all in and not loose what you did two weeks ago and do a refresh and refresh every week.

[@jesseekkerd]

To anyone watching this video: Please, please, please do not go below minimums - even in an emergency! Love your videos!

[@alinajmaldin]

Depends on the situation. Here, if you’re familiar with the area, you could technically do a contact approach since you see the ground. Much safer than single engine go around

[@w4tpz982]

Thanks for posting a struggle. That is real training!!!

[@Sometungsten]

What is up with the belly belts? I have been seeing this lately on KZbin and this can be a fatal mistake in and of itself while striking an obstacle on the ground. Lap belts must by tight ON TOP of the upper thighs. Having a lap belt on your belly places your hips below the belt fulcrum and your lower body will move out from under the belt during deceleration Gs [into the space under the instrument panel with the associated injuries.] What the shoulder harness is going to do during this event in unknown to me, but my guess is pretty bloody. In the U.S., and I assume north of the border as well, this topic has been studied ad nauseum by National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and numerous automotive engineering centers since the mid 50s with crash test dummies and high-speed film etc. The shoulder harness can only offer acceptable protection if the lap belt is positioned properly. Also, a belly belt will not hold you in the seat in the event of turbulence. The shoulder harness may offer some protection with a pure vertical vector (only a guess) but no one can say for sure without advanced full-scale testing. NASA has done some full-scale crash tests with actual aircraft, but I do not know the technical results of correct / incorrect seat belt use.

[@llaughridge]

So much this. I've seen too many videos where people are wearing harnesses incorrectly which would kill them due to internal injuries. Showing this as an example is horribly irresponsible.

[@EJWash57]

I find 5-point harnesses far more comfy than 3, and even 4-point. The latter always ride up and I'm constantly readjusting.

[@andre5468]

Interesting. Going to review this with my students

[@DataRew]

Oh damn, you've been in Kansas? I wish I'd known so I could've said hi!

[@Bob-sk6xq]

Anyone else watch the 4 split screen four times to see each video’s perspective on the landing?

[@maillouski]

Yuuuup…. Yuuuup….at the end.😂

[@quinnjim]

Great video (as always). The seatbelts up over your belly buttons is the only weird part!😄

[@superpilotish]

My Multi-IFR training was brutal. After passing the test, I hated flying. Went camping, got drunk and burned all my books and notes. I vowed to never fly again. A few months later I got my float rating.🙄

[@adammcghee1466]

If ATC is giving a long string of instructions like that, would you be able to interrupt and ask them to hang on? Seems like you'd have to ignore them and deal with the cockpit and then come back to them to pick up the last thing you copied.

[@aldohattonduran5227]

Excelente brother 🛩️🇺🇸👍🏼👍🏼

[@mlfeiden]

I see a couple of snippets in here from an location that I know well (62AR). Was looking... Is there a video?

[@Tiwow]

Do you know how many students have "died" following an unexpected engine failure at go around? Almost all of them. That's the trickiest situation you can find yourself in with a twin engine, especially in IMC. That procedure and those actions have to be repeated over and over. Also, flying every single day means a lot of fatigue, and having a deadline for a test is from experience the worst stress factor there is for a student (along with a strictly limited budget).

[@StjepanNikolic]

tecnam 2000 has 2 x 100hp rotax engines. is there any single engine performance with this aeroplane ?

[@dennisstoesz]

Why flap on single engine landing ?

[@richardgreen6857]

You’re going to go back and finish it, right?

[@joshuasamples8693]

Steve you gotta trust that autopilot, you’re creating your own self hazard by getting so worked up on little things. Just fly the airplane.

[@froop4852]

I did my rating in this very airplane. Don't trust the autopilot. It caused more problems than it solved, and in the end I hand flew the check ride.

[@cml1864]

Is it normal to use the A/P for MEIR training now?

[@ChavngRynsPvts]

If it's equipped in the plane, you better know how to use it and be proficient.

[@Journeyman1642]

How do people afford these excursions 😂

[@dennisstoesz]

Negative flap on single engine lading ..

[@Sammie-n8y]

. Thanks for sharing. Whoever is reading this comment, I wish you success, health, love and happiness!

[@DanFrederiksen]

Just look at the artificial horizon and heading. and GPS map. what's the issue. and all planes should have large clear synthetic vision. such a miss for GA

[@DoctorShocktor]

Maybe just a little update in the title? “Canadian Multi IFR”? There is no such rating as Multi IFR in the U.S., and I would guess possibly other places? Or is it just referring to Multi IFR training? Haven’t gotten to the end of the video yet.

[@FlightChops]

After getting to the end of the video, do you see any reduction in value of the learning moments of this content having watched it from an American perspective?

[@louissanderson719]

@@FlightChopsthat’s the only perspective Americans can see 😂

[@jspalla]

So under FAA, if you're IR in SEL & add MEL, the IR applies to the ME add on?

[@flyguy437]

As a retired airline pilot i dont recommend the average private pilot get an instrument rating unless they are prepared to fly a significant amount of instrument practice AFTER receiving the instrument rating. Never fly ifr and do ifr approaches without expecting to know the specific procedure, missed approach and operation of every aspect of your airplane because when its down to minimums, and on missed approach, is not the time to press the wrong button. Staying proficient will cost $$. Be absolutely committed. Professional pilots are.

[@GamespikeTV]

3rd

[@goatflieg]

Somehow I never expected 3rd to require a translation. 🤪

[@XXfea]

What would Chuck Yeager do?

[@EJWash57]

Brag.

[@FlyingNDriving]

Weird that you need a separate instrument multi add on, i can't see anything being different from SEL instrument

[@2025at]

Huge difference! If you fly in IMC and one of the engine is out you not only have to pay attention to properly keep flying according to IFR but also you have to “fight” with controls and settings to keep an airplane under control using just one engine. It is not easy in small twins. A mistake can kill you within seconds.

[@FlyingNDriving]

@@2025at if the engine is already out then it is secured feathered and you are trimmed, and you just need to add appropriate amount of rudder input with changes in power, again there's nothing fundamentally different about flying in imc with a single or a twin. An ILS is an ILS. Airplane responds the same losing an engine if your in the clouds or in the clear.

[@AC-jk8wq]

There is enough of a difference… That the FAA wants us to train on the differences…. In place of figuring it out on your own… Single engine ops in a twin… requires serious dedication to holding airspeed. Crummy things happen when airspeed dwindles away… 😃

[@DoctorShocktor]

Training yes, Multi IFR rating, no. The is NO separate “IFR” rating for multi-engine from the FAA. However, you do need an IFR rating in order to not receive a “VFR only” limitation on your multi-engine rating, as you will have a small amount of IFR TESTING on the multi-engine rating if you already have your IFR rating..

[@DoctorShocktor]

There is NO separate Multi IFR rating in the United States, must be Canadian (as I know Flight Chops is)

[@Hedgeflexlfz]

Tecnams are horrible mutlis. underpowerered, no single engine performance, and maintenance nightmares.

[@FlyingNDriving]

And the book numbers are gross exaggerations

[@llaughridge]

You realize that people have gotten multiengine training in Apaches and other horrible twins for decades, right? If they learn to maintain directional control and not rely on the remaining engine to keep them aloft, then the plane has fulfilled its role as a basic trainer.

[@FlyingNDriving]

@@llaughridge and this manages to be much, much worse

[@AC-jk8wq]

Makes a great trainer… Like C152… Who does intentional single engine ops… in their real airplane? 😃

[@DoctorShocktor]

@@llaughridgeLoads of people have also DIED training in underpowered twins. I think in the real world, you want to use equipment that prolongs your lifespan the best, not the cheapest.

[@stefflus08]

I don't understand why IFR is speaked about with such hushed voices. I much prefer radio navigation to reading landmarks. Same thing at sea, I much prefer night navigation with radar and light beacons. During the day you have a lot of clutter to filter out and visual references are small and hazy. Beacons identify themselves clearly and there aren't too many to choose from.

[@CaptSugman]

I’m mostly with you but there are some extremely challenging approaches out there and a whole spectrum of user friendliness of panels. Multiply flying a very challenging VOR-A approach where the MAP is only a mile or two after passing over a VOR (with a drop from the FAF to circling minimums of over 800 feet) with having to fly needles on traditional gauges and you could be in for an extremely humbling experience. That said I prefer IFR flying to VFR and overall I agree with your sentiment.

[@jcran8352]

Lame brain writes checks your body can't cash!!!

[@AB-kd9mk]

Autopilot shouldn't even be a thing at this level of training

[@jmizzonini]

Why? As pilot you are trained to use all resources available to you. Is the autopilot a resource you can leverage to move attention to other matters? Then yes you should use it if it is installed

[@PrinceAlhorian]

@@jmizzonini Correct, key emphasis should be on the management of it's use. Use the autopilot as a tool and not a crutch, keep the pilot proficient in its use but not over reliant on it.

[@thatguy7085]

?…. No such thing in America. Fixed wing instrument, and helicopter instrument are different tests. Never heard of a single engine and / or multi engine instrument test or rating.

[@DoctorShocktor]

There isn’t a Multi IFR in the U.S. He’s Canadian, and should really clarify that in his titling as yes, the world is not just the U.S., but a huge part of the KZbin audience IS U.S. pilots, students and enthusiasts.

[@aerobaticflying]

„You can’t maintain altitude with one engine when the gear is extended.“ Really? So the P2006 is not a real multi-engine airplane. Maybe switch to a DA-42 …

[@AC-jk8wq]

How does one define real airplane…? Single engine ops at seal level, or in Denver? Turbocharged engines, or normally aspirated? Is a P2006 ever going to be considered a real airplane? Looks like a great economical, trainer… If you can’t make it to the airport, with the gear down… A real pilot can choose to use the second engine or leave the gear up… Is a C152 a real airplane? The only thing not real in Steve’s video… is the simulator…. 😃

[@FlightChops]

Yeah, this airplane in my opinion is a good dedicated multi engine trainer. It is small and economical and has all the complexity you’d need to think about in any twin; However, due to its minimal power, it requires total precision with your hand flying to get good (any?) single performance. Would I buy one as a utility aircraft to fly around with my family? No. 😂

[@igclapp]

I'm doing my multi training in a DA42, and if we lose an engine after liftoff and the gear is still down, we have to abort the takeoff.

[@igclapp]

@@aerobaticflying Yesterday I was in the DA 42 sim and tried flying on one engine with flaps up and gear down. About 3,000 feet and 20 degrees C. It sank about 200 feet per minute.