From: mhg@delilah.ccsf.caltech.edu (Marc Goroff)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Re: In the "System"
Date: 23 Jan 1993 04:26:33 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Distribution: world
Reply-To: mhg@ivy.isc.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: delilah.ccsf.caltech.edu

(Sorry if this appears twice, but the first site I sent it from is
having problems posting to the net)

I should know better than to step into the middle of this :-), but...

In article <742@oscar.UUCP>, hurvitz@oscar.UUCP (Dennis Hurvitz) writes:
|> In article <19930119.074022.19@almaden.ibm.com>, martinl@torolab6.VNET.IBM.COM writes:
|> > 
|> > Aerobatics and IFR flying are two different types of skills, and it's
|> > my opinion that aerobatics involves the 'raw pilot ability' that you
|> > refer to, whereas IFR flying involves cockpit management, and the ability
|> > to take in a lot of information at the same time, and still find time
|> > to fly the airplane.
|> >	....
|> time to step up to the plate my friend. a person can learn alot more
|> about flying aerobatics in 20 hours of dual, than one can learn about
|> flying ifr in the same 20 hours.

Having both my IFR ticket and a fair amount of aerobatic time I would agree
with Martin on this one. They are very different skills. I think aerobatics
(done seriously) involves more elements of aircraft control and pushing the
limits of plane and pilot than IFR flight, i.e. 'raw pilot ability'. While
it is true a person can learn basic aerobatics in 20 hours of dual, and
learn enough IFR skills to kill themselves in the same amount of time,
serious competition aerobatic skills usually take *much* longer to develop.
The level of aerobatic skills learned in 20 hours is probably about the same
(on some arbitrary scale) as the level of IFR skills learned in that time;
most 20 hour IFR students probably wouldn't survive in hard IMC solo, but
then most 20 hour aerobatic pilots probably wouldn't survive low altitude
manuevers!

|> without that instrument ticket your pilot skills are severely limited.
The same can be said for a lack of aerobatic training.

|> taking 40 hours of ifr training may give one the basics of ifr flying,
|> but everyone i know was scared sh--less the first time they got their
|> ticket wet, solo.
Very true! However, a pilot's first solo torque roll, or tail slide,
or ...,  is likely to produce the same effect, just for a shorter period of
time :-).

|> i'm not saying ifr pilots are better. i'm saying they have more 
|> capabilities, and i refuse to accept the rationalization from those non 
|> rated that they are just as good. i think they are lacking an important 
|> foundation. bite the bullet and finish your training.  
It depends what you want to do with your ticket. For me, the IFR ticket is
a way to let me use GA as a more reliable means of transportation, but
aerobatics is *definately* my prefered mode of flying! (Probably why I own a
VFR only aerobatic plane!)  The IFR ticket gives a pilot a certain set of
capabilities, but so does aerobatics.  They are different aspects of flying,
with some useful overlapping skills.

Dennis also seems to be implying that aerobatics and the IFR ticket are
mutually exclusive.  Most of the aerobatic pilots I know have the IFR ticket
also. In fact, a large fraction of competition pilots seem to be Big Iron
pilots.

----------------------------------
Marc Goroff			N80DD - a Mudry CAP 10B
Interactive Systems Corp.
Calabasas, CA
mhg@ivy.isc.com