Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net> (Marvin Kaye)
To: lml
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2002 18:13:54 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-1686252@logan.com>
From: RWolf99@aol.com
Subject: Light IFR
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<<Light IFR, huh?>>

The author is trying to tell us that IFR is IFR and you can either handle it 
or not.  There is no in-between.

I disagree.

To me, a low-time IFR pilot in Southern California with a Cessna 150, light 
IFR was a marine layer.  No turbulence, no rain, CAVU from 2000 AGL to 
infinity, but a solid overcast between 600 feet and 1800 feet, more or less.  
I felt quite comfortable in that, since I was only in it for about two 
minutes (700 fpm climb, remember?) and the nearest ice was either 6 months or 
1000 miles away.

"Hard IFR" was when there was rain.  I avoided that stuff unless I had an 
instructor on board.  Besides being overwhelmed from a piloting standpoint 
(it scared me silly), the capabilities of my airplane could easily be 
overwhelmed as well.

"Insanity" was embedded thunderstorms.  I could paste a picture of a 
Stormscope on my panel with lettering saying "If you need to look at me you 
should be on the ground" and it would have been as valuable to me as a real 
Stormscope or weather radar.

That was me, a newbie IFR pilot in an aeronautical skateboard.  Many of you 
guys have much more experience, and the Lancair is much more capable than a 
Cessna 150.  You guys can push into the "hard IFR" level and y'all can even 
use a Stormscope and weather radar to fly safely in nasty weather.  I suppose 
that to those guys, IFR is IFR and there's not much difference.

But, yeah, there's such a thing as "light IFR".

- Rob Wolf
LNC2 IO-360 50%