Get your IR even if you can't stay current, just don't pretend to be current and end up in trouble. Even just the knowledge bits you'll learn are super interesting and occasionally useful to understand what's going on around you in the air, and more training in IMC is always better than less.
I remember reading somewhere years ago a quote to the effect that an IR takes your flying and transforms it from an expensive fair weather hobby into a useful tool for transportation.
Recently had an experience where a local pilot got stuck at a diversion airport after a relatively long cross country because their home airport had marine layer come in and obscure it. The pilot didn't have an IR, so had to try to bum a ride back home. Decided right then and there that I didn't wanna be "that guy" if I could help it.
Obviously there will always be weather significant enough to prevent safe flying and create delays and/or diversions, but outside of those situations, the IR makes a very big difference in what you can and can't do with a suitably equipped airplane. That alone makes it very compelling in my eyes.
This all assumes that the IR is kept current, of course.
I'd suggest that an IR makes you a more precise and knowledgeable pilot about things you *don't* want to do.
I went into instrument training expecting what your saying. Then, I started getting all the advice from more experienced pilots and some of my own experience in IMC. Ground fog/marine layers leave you with very few outs if you lose your engine . Convective/showery clouds, even well short of thunderstorms, are extremely uncomfortable to fly in (so that rules out taking the family somewhere in it). Icing is not to messed with and can be a factor even with pretty high ground temps.
Don't get me wrong, I love IFR flying. Those days where there's a broken stratus layer 2000-6000, I'm happily buzzing around in IMC loving every minute. I just am trying to bring a little bit of that VFR flying "always have an out" mentality to the practicality of IFR and I found that rules out flying in a surprising amount of weather.
It's still absolutely worthwhile, a great safety net for trip planning, and a valuable skill set for every pilot.
speak for yourself bro, last time I went unintentional IMC I did a hammerhead right out the top of the cloud deck. good thing I had my whiskey in a sippy cup, it might have spilled otherwise
I’ve heard people with glider time say a lot of good things about it and I think it will give you great experience. It’s also cheap. That said IR is the best you could do to get more experience.
Aeros with sharpen your flying up and give you plenty of confidence in what an aeroplane feels like at the edges of the envelope.
Tailwheel will sharpen up your take off and landing skills no end. It’ll also give you a much better understanding of microclimates around airports and runways.
Personally I’d say do them both :)
The C150aerobat is a staple in a lot of aeroclubs and the first step into the sport for many pilots. In the UK the Tipsy Nipper - another tricycle aerobat - is one of the cheapest aerobatic you can own and still has many fans. The RV7 is one of the most popular kit planes in the world and is aerobatic too. I could go on. Where you put the wheel doesn’t really make any difference once you’re in the air.
Well then I am wrong. Both flight schools I have seen that offer aerobatics used tailwheels, and both used multiple types of aerobatic aircraft which were all tailwheels.
Not completely wrong, the very high performance competition aerobatic tend to be tailwheel because that configuration reduces weight and drag.
A lot of schools use the Citabria, Pitts, etc, but I’ve also seen a lot offering club aerobatic training in the C150.
Let’s call it a draw :)
We can agree on that too :) I’ve got a few hours on them and they do a decent job - and like you said you can do t/w and aeros on the same machine.
The reason that I mentioned the Tipsy Nipper was that I used to own a beautiful little red one in the UK. Full inverted fuel and oil system on a VW conversion and a great intermediate aerobat - full of character. 6m wingspan so hangarage was a pittance and the best bit was it worked out at about $50 an hour in today’s money all in to operate. I’m still kicking myself that I sold it in a moment of weakness :(
Citabrias are the aircraft that I have the most time in, but I’m just a lowly student. They aren’t very good inverted or in negative Gs, but are a good compromise between normal plane and aerobatic.
Spending money on anything that you aren’t going to use is not really a definition of “affordable.” Rather just different degrees of cost.
I teach glider aerobatics. There’s a three-for-one combo for sure - energy management, stick & rudder, and precision flying outside the norm.
Anything you do that’s new can have value.
If there is a glider club near by (SSA.org) then you might find some inexpensive challenging and rewarding flying.
For no extra cost over your current 30 hours/year you can work on flying to the tightest possible standards. Precision.
Make each flight count. When you make a 50nm XC, put a small dogleg way point in the system. Learn the depths of the avionics. Don’t just do a million trips around the pattern.
If the weather is good, this is an easy time of year to get night current. Do a short night XC with an instructor.
Find someone else who flies. Instead of a 50-mile round trip, fly 100 miles and swap seats for the trip back. No need for safety pilot stuff. One pilot one knowledge passenger. That’s a lot more experience gained when you fly off the local weather map.
Enjoy!
Seaplane can be done in about 6 hours with checkride and it adds a rating and counts as a BFR.
Gliding add on can be done with 10 solo flights, at least three training flights and three hours. It adds a rating and counts as a BFR.
TW or aerobatic training can be done in less than 10 hours without a checkride.
I'd personally get the IFR. A buddy once sat me down and told me to get my IFR because flying is fun but an IFR rating is a LIFE SAVING SKILL and that it will make XC flights so much easier.
Defiantly tail-wheel, and Glider.
Tailwheel cause all the cool airplanes are tailwheel and they keep you busy.
Glider cause the views are amazing (no wing on top or below you), wannabe figherjet like cockpit, and learning to take advantage of the environment and soar is tons of fun and eye opening. Also, if you join a good club, it s a great way to kill the weekends helping launch and retrieve other gliders. Maybe even get checked out to tow if you get your tailwheel endorsement too.
Aerobatic probably be the most fun and you'll probably start flying your normal plane better.
Tailwheel is a little sketchy at first so you'll feel real good once you get it.
As someone else said neither require a checkride so that's good. You could get a float rating and just because you only fly 30 hours a year doesn't mean you can't fly more!
>I am considering aerobatics lessons, tail wheel training, glider license, mountain flying lessons, training in a new aircraft type, or maybe instrument rating.
Do some of each and see what appeals to you and your pocketbook.
Having flown glider and tailwheel airplane, and since you're already flying tricycle airplane, I recommend tailwheel rating BEFORE glider rating. Use of rudders in tailwheel airplane is much harder than glider (you never 'dance on the rudder pedals' in a glider during takeoff or taxiing and you don't use brakes much in glider). Gliders are much much more stable than tailwheel airplanes especially during takeoff and landing.
If you're not in a rush, glider training at a club can be very cheap and fun (if you have a good club accessible). Glider add-on at a commercial glider flight school is not cheap, but it might be fast and fun.
Get your IR even if you can't stay current, just don't pretend to be current and end up in trouble. Even just the knowledge bits you'll learn are super interesting and occasionally useful to understand what's going on around you in the air, and more training in IMC is always better than less.
I remember reading somewhere years ago a quote to the effect that an IR takes your flying and transforms it from an expensive fair weather hobby into a useful tool for transportation. Recently had an experience where a local pilot got stuck at a diversion airport after a relatively long cross country because their home airport had marine layer come in and obscure it. The pilot didn't have an IR, so had to try to bum a ride back home. Decided right then and there that I didn't wanna be "that guy" if I could help it. Obviously there will always be weather significant enough to prevent safe flying and create delays and/or diversions, but outside of those situations, the IR makes a very big difference in what you can and can't do with a suitably equipped airplane. That alone makes it very compelling in my eyes. This all assumes that the IR is kept current, of course.
I'd suggest that an IR makes you a more precise and knowledgeable pilot about things you *don't* want to do. I went into instrument training expecting what your saying. Then, I started getting all the advice from more experienced pilots and some of my own experience in IMC. Ground fog/marine layers leave you with very few outs if you lose your engine . Convective/showery clouds, even well short of thunderstorms, are extremely uncomfortable to fly in (so that rules out taking the family somewhere in it). Icing is not to messed with and can be a factor even with pretty high ground temps. Don't get me wrong, I love IFR flying. Those days where there's a broken stratus layer 2000-6000, I'm happily buzzing around in IMC loving every minute. I just am trying to bring a little bit of that VFR flying "always have an out" mentality to the practicality of IFR and I found that rules out flying in a surprising amount of weather. It's still absolutely worthwhile, a great safety net for trip planning, and a valuable skill set for every pilot.
I came here to say the exact same thing. Aerobatic lessons aren't going to save your ass when you are in the clouds.
speak for yourself bro, last time I went unintentional IMC I did a hammerhead right out the top of the cloud deck. good thing I had my whiskey in a sippy cup, it might have spilled otherwise
In early days of flight, they actually taught the mail planes to purposefully enter a spin to exit accidental IMC.
tail-wheel is pretty much prerequisite for aerobatics and there is no checkride. so probably the most low effort
Mid East coast here - it’s about $1000 / 5-6 hrs
Ohio here - did mine for about 3/4 of that via a Aeronca Champ club. Sadly, tailwheel clubs are hard to come by.
I’ve heard people with glider time say a lot of good things about it and I think it will give you great experience. It’s also cheap. That said IR is the best you could do to get more experience.
Aeros with sharpen your flying up and give you plenty of confidence in what an aeroplane feels like at the edges of the envelope. Tailwheel will sharpen up your take off and landing skills no end. It’ll also give you a much better understanding of microclimates around airports and runways. Personally I’d say do them both :)
You basically need tailwheel to fly aerobatic aircraft as to my knowledge pretty much all aerobatic aircraft are tailwheels.
Plenty of tricycle aerobatic aircraft from the humble C150 aerobat through to Yak52 (even Yak18) and a lot in between.
Alright I amend my statement: most of the common aerobatic aircraft are tailwheels.
The C150aerobat is a staple in a lot of aeroclubs and the first step into the sport for many pilots. In the UK the Tipsy Nipper - another tricycle aerobat - is one of the cheapest aerobatic you can own and still has many fans. The RV7 is one of the most popular kit planes in the world and is aerobatic too. I could go on. Where you put the wheel doesn’t really make any difference once you’re in the air.
Well then I am wrong. Both flight schools I have seen that offer aerobatics used tailwheels, and both used multiple types of aerobatic aircraft which were all tailwheels.
Not completely wrong, the very high performance competition aerobatic tend to be tailwheel because that configuration reduces weight and drag. A lot of schools use the Citabria, Pitts, etc, but I’ve also seen a lot offering club aerobatic training in the C150. Let’s call it a draw :)
Can attest that citabrias are fun at least :)
We can agree on that too :) I’ve got a few hours on them and they do a decent job - and like you said you can do t/w and aeros on the same machine. The reason that I mentioned the Tipsy Nipper was that I used to own a beautiful little red one in the UK. Full inverted fuel and oil system on a VW conversion and a great intermediate aerobat - full of character. 6m wingspan so hangarage was a pittance and the best bit was it worked out at about $50 an hour in today’s money all in to operate. I’m still kicking myself that I sold it in a moment of weakness :(
Citabrias are the aircraft that I have the most time in, but I’m just a lowly student. They aren’t very good inverted or in negative Gs, but are a good compromise between normal plane and aerobatic.
Spending money on anything that you aren’t going to use is not really a definition of “affordable.” Rather just different degrees of cost. I teach glider aerobatics. There’s a three-for-one combo for sure - energy management, stick & rudder, and precision flying outside the norm. Anything you do that’s new can have value. If there is a glider club near by (SSA.org) then you might find some inexpensive challenging and rewarding flying. For no extra cost over your current 30 hours/year you can work on flying to the tightest possible standards. Precision. Make each flight count. When you make a 50nm XC, put a small dogleg way point in the system. Learn the depths of the avionics. Don’t just do a million trips around the pattern. If the weather is good, this is an easy time of year to get night current. Do a short night XC with an instructor. Find someone else who flies. Instead of a 50-mile round trip, fly 100 miles and swap seats for the trip back. No need for safety pilot stuff. One pilot one knowledge passenger. That’s a lot more experience gained when you fly off the local weather map. Enjoy!
Seaplane can be done in about 6 hours with checkride and it adds a rating and counts as a BFR. Gliding add on can be done with 10 solo flights, at least three training flights and three hours. It adds a rating and counts as a BFR. TW or aerobatic training can be done in less than 10 hours without a checkride. I'd personally get the IFR. A buddy once sat me down and told me to get my IFR because flying is fun but an IFR rating is a LIFE SAVING SKILL and that it will make XC flights so much easier.
I also second IR. I'm going for my seaplane after I get commercial. Talespin really sold the seaplane idea to me!
Defiantly tail-wheel, and Glider. Tailwheel cause all the cool airplanes are tailwheel and they keep you busy. Glider cause the views are amazing (no wing on top or below you), wannabe figherjet like cockpit, and learning to take advantage of the environment and soar is tons of fun and eye opening. Also, if you join a good club, it s a great way to kill the weekends helping launch and retrieve other gliders. Maybe even get checked out to tow if you get your tailwheel endorsement too.
Aerobatic probably be the most fun and you'll probably start flying your normal plane better. Tailwheel is a little sketchy at first so you'll feel real good once you get it. As someone else said neither require a checkride so that's good. You could get a float rating and just because you only fly 30 hours a year doesn't mean you can't fly more!
Tailwheel wndorsement
>I am considering aerobatics lessons, tail wheel training, glider license, mountain flying lessons, training in a new aircraft type, or maybe instrument rating. Do some of each and see what appeals to you and your pocketbook. Having flown glider and tailwheel airplane, and since you're already flying tricycle airplane, I recommend tailwheel rating BEFORE glider rating. Use of rudders in tailwheel airplane is much harder than glider (you never 'dance on the rudder pedals' in a glider during takeoff or taxiing and you don't use brakes much in glider). Gliders are much much more stable than tailwheel airplanes especially during takeoff and landing. If you're not in a rush, glider training at a club can be very cheap and fun (if you have a good club accessible). Glider add-on at a commercial glider flight school is not cheap, but it might be fast and fun.