I know what you are saying but either I was very lucky or very well pre-paired
Probably a bit of each. I too flew that low level route to Lucca, last November. ATC are happy with 500ft all the way along that coast.
There is no “airway” at 500ft – you just flew below it, in the same way one can fly below Y803 at 500ft or whatever, despite its MEA being 6000ft (which is Class A). Airways are just lines on the map – what matters is the airspace class.
A lot of stuff “just works on the day”… but the uncertainty makes some people nervous. It makes me nervous, because when one does that, and ATC say No, one may have no viable Plan B. But then many people (not suggesting it’s you) just jump in and fly, and say you live only once 
No prize for guessing which group I think gets killed more…
My more serious concern (in the spirit of promoting GA) is that the 2nd group eventually ends up going almost nowhere, because they gradually get fed up with various enroute surprises. Of course a cynic could turn that around and say that I am saying that without an IR you can’t go anywhere, which is nonsense. The reality is that VFR needs a lot more planning if you are prepared for the No at some point.
It’s probably also time for a change in mindset.
While I can understand that ATC could be reluctant to let someone through controlled airspace navigating on one ADF and VOR and landmarks, nowadays everybody and his/her dog can get either a portable GPS or a tablet and can achieve navigation accuracy that is better by many degrees of magnitude.
If you quote IFR waypoints alog your route they are far more likely to know what trajectory you will follow and either approve or suggest amendments / doglegs. As opposed to “I… umm… ahhh… we… ahhh fly south ummm to….(unintelligible) airfield in… ummm….ahhh (unintelligible)” pronounced in a heavy swiss german accented English that was hard to understand even for those on the frequency who spoke swiss german, much less a French controller….
And if you can navigate vor-to-vor, or point your plane towards a landmark, you can certainly point it to a IFR point as well :-)
There is no “airway” at 500ft – you just flew below it, in the same way one can fly below Y803 at 500ft or whatever, despite its MEA being 6000ft (which is Class A). Airways are just lines on the map – what matters is the airspace class
OK, you got me (:-))
I think IFR and VFR are simply tools. You select the correct one for the job on any given day.
If the weather is IMC, then VFR isn’t an option.
If you want to do low level flight in mountainous terrain, then IFR isn’t an option.
In most other circumstances both options are open to you.
If you want a hassle free trip to an intended destination, without having to plan and negotiate every airspace crossing then IFR seems like a good tool. If the destination is key then IFR seems like a good way of getting there.
If you want a trip, where the flight is more important than the destination, and you don’t mind having to do a lot of preparation work, don’t mind having to re-plan ‘on the hoof’ and want to see lots of scenery, then VFR would seem to be the right tool.
In most cases either can work, but come with advantages and disadvantages. Of course for many of us, IFR isn’t an option, and we have no choice but accept the disadvantages (and advantages) of VFR.
The important thing is to choose the right tool for the job, for that particular flight.
A good example of this was last year when Peter visited me in Dublin. He came from the UK to Dublin IFR. The purpose of that flight was to get to Dublin to meet up with me. He didn’t want to have to speed time figuring what clearances would be needed etc, and he wanted a high probability of making it here.
While here we did a tour of the west coast of Ireland. In that case, being low enough to see, appreciate and photograph the scenery was most important. There was a risk that we wouldn’t be able to do the trip, but there was little point in doing it if we couldn’t see the scenery. So the three flights we did that day were all done under VFR at low to medium level (in VFR terms).
With the main purpose of his visit done, he returned, hassle free, to the UK under IFR.
The right tool was chosen for the job at hand on each flight, and that’s the way it should be.
By the way, you can see that trip report here if you’re interested.
Click here
Colm
@dublinpilot nearly perfekt, only one more, sometimes you must mix it IFR-VFR-IFR-VFR to complete the mission :-)
I´m a friend of every gizmo, but the best flight was VFR from Grenoble to Berlin with no alternator. No gizmos, no AP, no ATC, no TXP, youst me, AVGAS and a running engine. Perfekt :-)
I think we are a bit nostalgic here, just like a lot people having grown up in by now “gone” countries are nostalgic of their then very unpopular regimes……
Yes, those magnificent men in their flying machines of days gone by did great things with the very crude old equipment they had, no question, and they deserve respect for that. Flying those airplanes across the world was a huge thing then, without navigation equipment and without autopilot.
That does not make me want to do that though. First of all, they mostly were a whole crew who could take turns, they did have not a lot of the time pressure we have today and they did not get busted and fined for missing one of thousands of little airspace limits all over the place.
Yes, you can fly like that today, but I would say in Central Europe that is bloody hard work and not much fun.
I am now pretty much where I want to be with my plane for the first time in my life. 2 Axis AP, a good GPS plus 2 portable backups and a relatively fast airplane which will deliver 145-150 kts. Could I do without the EFIS and the AP? Sure, I’ve done it, but I did not much enjoy it. Doing my Bulgaria trip a few years back handflying the whole thing was fun but in the end a very exhausting adventure. So maybe I don’t have the “right stuff” (well, the airlines thought so….) but I feel much better now that I can engage the AP and sort my paperwork or take pictures at my leasure, while the AP follows the GPS programmed course from the first VRP to the last at the destination, knowing to pretty much the minute my arrival time and being able to plan into 15 minute slot tolerance without sitting on edge during the whole trip. And then it is a joy of handflying the plane to a landing.
We have to take into account what flying was then and today. Even when I started in 1983 airspace was MUCH less complex and therefore exact navigation was neither expected to this extent nor required unless you were in controlled airspace, today you get busted for not following traffic circuits with the same precision you would follow an instrument approach. Then, pilots and fying in general was something most people looked at with wonder and sometimes even admiration, today we are considered by most people a nuissance and are about as popular as a fly in the bedroom. We are not wanted in CAS, we are not wanted flying low altitude over the countryside and we are certainly not wanted by the neighbours of just about any airport. So flying as it was then may be possible in places but not here.
One thing I learnt last weekend was that Sebastian is going to get a customer as soon as he gets his Android port done for his weather gizmo… going into ZRH proved impossible due to lack of up to date weather data, while it would have been perfectly feasible with a proper radar pic on board. No, honestly, I do not look back at the times when we did not even have the radar to watch on the ground favorably at all at all…
Times change. Nobody would want to cross the atlantic these days regularly on dinosaurs like the DC6 or Connie, even though we enjoy seeing them fly or even the occasional passenger flight, but to use these planes with their rather horriffic accident figures on a regular basis? No, thank you very much, but no thanks. I much prefer a modern airliner which, if operated by a good airline, delivers me to my destination on time and in a relatively high safety environment.
I like my steam gauges and will upgrade to an Aspen as soon my HSI or horizon needs replacement. Glass will not give me much advantage as my turbo conversion did.
Transatlantic:
Would you rather fly in a a big tube with 500 other people (A380) on a transatlantic journey for 8 hrs or revert to the past where Concorde whizzed through the air and did the job in 3,5 hrs.
Well after my experience see thread EBBU closed, I can surely say without an IR rating I wouldn’t have made the trip. At FL130 the OAT was -15 with clouds 1500 Ft below me till 12000 something. Having a good GPS tablet helped me to complete the mission VFR….I fly a 50 year old bird with a combination of glass and steam. I love my very capable old airframe and my new installed tip tanks, though still a turbo and TKS would make me less stressed for certain go/no go decision like yesterday. The last 10 days the weather was really crap in central Europe . And basically its always the same I can climb into the sunshine before reaching the mountains I go, If I can’t see a blue sky for more then 60 miles in that area above FL110 I turn back..without turbo and TKS your options are lower
I have done long trips VFR they are great if you have no time pressure…
I can’t afford TKS/Turbo or any of the C chute brand type so I live with that constraint…
If I can’’t afford flying IFR it anymore I will go back to VFR flying even with something I may build myself….like this Nando Groppo thing which I would love to build one day… Flying is great with whatever you fly!
The right tool was chosen for the job at hand on each flight, and that’s the way it should be.
Absolutely. My flying is in one of the busiest GA areas in the world, but with good weather and good airspace design there’s no need for IFR to make trips or anything else I want to do. Reading about IFR, constant chat with ATC and the like ever more convinces me that it’d be unpleasant, no way that I’d voluntarily spend my money… but to each his own. I call ATC en route when I need them, but it isn’t all that often.
Reading about IFR, constant chat with ATC
If there’s anything farther from the truth about IFR, it’s constant chat with ATC.
In any populated area I’ve ever flown, I had to talk a lot more with ATC when flying VFR, to get crossing clearances to avoid large detours.
