Another week and Sean Spicer is still in and the judges get more indignant each week. I love it.

Funny as hell. Spicer is the shittiest dancer out there and he keeps getting saved by the fans. 

Just curious Stan.  I know you fly warbirds on the side.  When you got checked out in the PT-22 (?) are you done?   Will the group you’re flying with not require any additional training?

It’s a Fairchild PT-26 Cornell, and yes, the CAF required an annual checkride to commercial PTS standards.  We also take an annual ground school with a written test.  The standards are high because of what we are flying - we fly pieces of history. Also, let’s be honest. The biggest driver of our standards is the CAF insurance policy. Still, those requirements haven’t prevented some people from doing really stupid stuff like running out of fuel.

My greatest fear in flying a CAF Warbird is not dying in a crash; it’s being “that guy” who wrecks a piece of history.

Except for some multi-engine aircraft, we are restricted to day VFR.

Required crew members are also required to wear Nomex flight suits, and its recommended but not required for all pax.

So let me ask a question:  It is proven that Nomex flight suits help you survive a crash by minimizing the pain and agony of a flash fire from burning 100LL giving you time to get out alive.

So, why don’t we wear them when we fly a 172?  Certainly having 100LL sitting in a wing above your head is not ideal for survivability, as an 18-year old CAP cadets found out when she crashed on a golf course and succumbed to fire.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1960964/Video-18-year-old-pilot-dies-crash-landing-golf-course.html

We don’t because we make a calculated risk that we would rather not look like dorks stepping out of a Skyhawk and sauntering into an FBO than if we were to burn to death in a crash.

So we take safety steps relative to the risk involved. We also do have substantial training and recurrent training for flying IFR  (via 6 in 6 or IPCs, as well as BFRs) to help prevent us from becoming smoking holes in the ground. I just don’t think MORE government-mandated requirements are needed to move the needle in IR safety. Your NTSB examples are anecdotal and don’t reveal the actual causes of a crash in IMC.

So trust me, I’m all for training and taking measures steps to improve safety. I just don’t think an annual written test will do anything. 

First of all, you;re trying to intertwine car accidents and politics into a discussion on GA pilots and the instrument rating.  Then you're trying to claim there is no need, everything is hunky dory even though we still have pilots ending up in smoking holes.

 The FAA sets a minimum standard. When it comes to GA, much of it is on the honor system, and we see the results.  If you're fine with that, then proceed.

 Finally, I find it amusing when mentioning training to a GA pilot they get defensive.

Flying in the Air Traffic Control system, which is what you do every time you fly on an IFR flight plan, you most certainly not just on the honor system. Your entire flight, short of a visual approach to landing, is under the watchful eye of ATC. Have a significant departure in altitude, heading, or instrument approach and you just may be asked to copy a phone number after you land.

Because of that, most instrument pilots take their 6 in 6 responsibilities seriously. Further, flying in IMC involves more risk than other aviation activities, and I have yet to know of a pilot who is anxious to be the first person on the scene of their own death.

Regarding your last comment, that’s BS. Many of us got our IR in order to make us better pilots, even if we don’t plan to fly a lot of IMC. We incurred significant time and significant cost in order to improve ourselves. Yet in a different thread you said getting the instrument rating is less than worthless if you don’t fly on instruments. Make up your mind.

What GA pilots DO reject is incurring unreasonable costs with little demonstrable benefit. Annual written testing is just that.

When I was a student pilot Scott Crossfield ripped the wings off his Cessna 210 (I believe) in a thunderstorm over the Appalachians.  I sincerely doubt a written test would have changed his decision making process. Somethings, shit happens.

But like most conservatives, pilots don’t want a “feel good” fix that is otherwise meaningless.

https://americanlookout.com/next-to-drop-out-kamala-harris-closes-campaign-offices-throughout-new-hampshire/

The funny thing is, she appears to be blaming democrat primary voters for being racist and sexist. You can’t make this stuff up.


“I have also started to perhaps be more candid talking about what I described and what I believe to be the elephant in the room about my campaign,” Harris said. “Electability. You know, essentially, is America ready for a woman and a woman of color to be president of the United States?”


https://dailycaller.com/2019/10/28/kamala-harris-sexism-racism-electability/

I stopped using charts when I started using the iPad and Foreflight for navigation.  You guys can be Luddites, I like situational awareness.  Read some of the elder accident reports.  Lots of guys got lost, ran out of gas, crashed and died.

You’re not a Luddite if you use charts. Most of us use Foreflight as well. And more than once my iPad on my kneeboard or a mount has gone black because it overheated in a Warbird with a canopy. 

But good to know that Foreflight will prevent me from running out of gas. I’ve got to check to se if that’s part of my subscription.

How many still fly with paper charts, and use a rhumb line and a compass and a clock?

Yes.  Especially when flying a Warbird. Paper charts fit nicely in the shin pocket on my Nomex flight suit. Pull it out, check a freq., put it back.

I'm fully aware of what's required for an IPC for the person giving it and the person receiving. 

 Most of GA at the private pilot level is an honor system type of arrangement.  True, while the FAA does provide IPC guidance, it's not mandatory a CFII follow it.   A good competent CFII would most certainly use it, bit this is not always true.  For an IPC all the pilot needs is a CFII to fill out his logbook indicating it took place.  As to the quality?  Again, very subjective.

 The 6/6 rule is again, on the honor system, and again what was the quality of those approaches and time spent in IFR?

 Don't kid yourself that some of these guys flying around out there in the system are competent.  Spend enough time on frequency and you'll hear all sorts of buffoonery going on.   I applaud those who take this seriously and try to comply with the regulations, and common sense, but you do have those who look for anyway they can find to work around the system.  Which is back to my point of standardizing the training and currency requirements.

 The NTSB files will fill up this winter with a few of those who get in to something they can't handle.

Geeze. Ok Lucifer, I get it. You want Uncle Sugar to implement new mandatory regulations for anyone flying in the system.

Personally, I think the current regulatory requirements, including biennial flight reviews, is sufficient. The idiot who takes his family in night IMC over the Smokey Mountains who isn’t on top of his game will always exist. New regs won’t help that.

The IR makes you a more precise pilot. Even if you never use it to fly in IMC it's by no means worthless. But I agree you have to stay current and proficient or you will find yourself in trouble. And if you fly GA, especially single engine, you need to install a good IR platform in the cockpit.

Exactly. Precise flying is required for the IR, so precision is a learned skill that you can exercise with every flight you ever take, even (and especially) a Saturday morning pancake run.