Looking over my records, I was astonished to realize I had a 100% despatch rate in 2017 flying VFR only. Now I didn’t fly a lot (about 73 hours—the plane was down months for maintenance and avionics upgrades) but most of it was international cross countries. Yes, there were times I delayed departure a few hours. I will also fly marginal VFR when conditions are improving. But there was not a single trip I planned to take which I didn’t. (Jan-Feb and June-July were the months I did not fly.)
I flew my simple SEP to multiple Greek islands, Sicily, Croatia, Venice, Germany, throughout the Balkans, etc. So maybe there is more utility in VFR than the IFR propagandists 
on this board are willing to admit?
Typically I planned flights weeks in advance. I do recall thinking several times (esp in the Fall) “wow, I lucked out again with the weather.”
Is it a question of how far in advance you planned the trips? I mean, did you only think of going when the weather looked like it was going to be OK?
Despite being a Board Member of PPL/IR, I am a huge advocate of flying VFR, when possible, for a number of reasons, with avoiding Eurocontrol charges, constraints such as slots and routing, more direct routes and more choice of levels high on the list.
But my advocacy of VFR is predicated on the pilot having the skills and knowledge to recover safely if the weather gets worse. So, for example, I would advocate flying VMC on top, at VFR levels, in straight lines, but only if the pilot knew how to get down and onto a runway if the weather got worse. (The tragedy at Gloucester yesterday may turn out to support that view, who knows?) Of course, as far as I am concerned, that might only mean an IR(R) or IMCR even in Europe – Flesh, Metal, Paper – so long as recovery is achievable.
I must say that looking back over the last year, the proportion of my flights that would have been achievable under VFR is far lower than yours. That rather depends on what you consider your VFR minima of course, for example, on my very most recent flight, at the weekend, we decided that crawling back to Biggin under a low and decreasing cloudbase was not on, and we turned away for an ILS . The cloudbase on ATIS was 800’, but we were getting down to towards 500’ AAL (though higher AGL, seeing how Biggin is, eponymously, on a hill). That is legal, and doable, but is it really wise?
But I have landed way below VFR minima on many of my flights over the last year. I hesitate to put a number on it, but I would guess 30% of my flights. Indeed I have done three go arounds at ILS minima. My dispatch and successful arrival rate would be much worse than yours.
I doubt whether my rate would have been close that that flying out of the UK.
I hope to finish up an IR before long. I do feel that proficiency on instruments should make VFR flying safer.
Looking over my records, I was astonished to realize I had a 100% dispatch rate in 2017 flying VFR only.
I am not surprised. I have done loads of IFR trips, including Greece and back, after which I noted that it was 100% VMC.
Also, often, one climbs under IFR to say FL180 to stay VMC on top, and to avoid icing conditions, while one could be flying VFR at 3000ft.
My first 4 years with the TB20, 2002-2005, were PPL+IMCR, and I got as far on those (Crete 2004, Santorini 2005) as I have ever gone IFR.
Obviously there are exceptions where IFR really scores. Like this morning, OVC006 and haze, so no way to legally fly VFR anywhere really except a really bad scud run at 501ft AGL, but the layer was about 2000ft thick and with blue skies above. Typical winter high pressure conditions.
The rest of the time one can often argue about it.
And I am not even talking about flying VFR in IMC. I think most long distance VFR pilots do that fairly readily. I certainly used to…
My IFR despatch rate is about 90-95% based on allowing 2-3 consecutive days to get away from the UK. On a given single (randomly chosen) day it would be about 75%. In reality someone with a relatively flexible work etc timetable looks at the MSLP chart and picks a likely good day and then the despatch rate can be very good.
Peter wrote:
based on allowing 2-3 consecutive days to get away from the UK
I think that that is a large part of the difference. Every single flight I make (except for odd test flight and positioning for maintenance) is timed to the minute, and I would consider any substantial delay to be a despatch rate fail.
Now is it despatch or dispatch? Or either?
I hedged when I saw I couldn’t edit the title.
For the record (and it’s the truth too), all was legal VFR.
WhiskeyPapa wrote:
Now is it despatch or dispatch? Or either?
Either, but despatch is more English than American. Dispatch is always perfectly acceptable and gaining ground to the point of making despatch obsolete.
Fixing mis-spelt subject is the mod’s job so I googled on it when I originally saw it, and according to the internet, “dispatch” is the more modern version. That is probably why I always use “despatch” 
Personally I could not care less except that I try to make the subject line descriptive so that searches work better.
“Despatch” is more poetic, high brow and expressive of what we do.
So feel free to edit the title line. Writing “dispatch” was a momentary lapse of sophistication and good taste on my part!
My dispatch rate has been awful this year. No Dresden to begin with. Several shorter flights cancelled or postponed to the next day, despite being planned only few days in advance.
But we were lucky for our two club fly-outs where we had absolutely perfect weather in the spring, and quite decent in the late summer.
