I can jump in on these.
1200 feet AGL typically, but 700 feet in some places.
No. A circling approach is entirely on the gauges, on an approved path. A contact approach is by visual reference to the ground, with pilot’s discretion as to path.
Not much radar down there, right? Do you even *have *CL-A airspace?
The basic ones you need to just fly the aircraft are standard. Most of those other dinguses are for operating all the gizmos and systems specific to the airplane. An airline pilot transitioning to a new airplane will take a few weeks of training, largely devoted to learning the “switchology”.
Thanks. Now that I’m in the PNW, when I get ‘back into the saddle’ it’s good to know.
Psst… Don’t tell anyone, but they’re mostly for show. We want people to think we’re awesome. 
Actually, the Shuttle is a bit more complex than what most of us fly. Still, I think most of us have peeped into an airliner cockpit and thought, ‘OK, I recognise that…’ There are basic flight instruments, and aerodynamics are aerodynamics. That’s not to say that someone can just jump into any airplane and fly it; even going from a Cessna 172 to a Cessna 182 requires some training. So we won’t know ‘what all those are for’, but many will be familiar – even if we can’t fly the particular aircraft.
EDIT: How did I miss ElvisL1ves’s post from half an hour ago? (OK, I know. Just got out of bed. I think I heard the coffee finish…
How do you get on flying into an uncontrolled aerodrome via a flight path cleared by ATC when there is also VFR traffic that ATC may not be aware of?
Right. Do you have a “visual approach” then? That’s pilot discretion for flight path and altitude by visual reference to the ground but you need a lot more than 1 mile vis.
We may be talking about the same thing with regards to a “circling approach”, here it is done at the bottom of an instrument approach and you may maneuver as required within the circling area to line up with the runway. You are supposed to keep the “runway environment” in sight. We tend not to do them except for practice as most runways have at least a GPS approach.
There’s not much radar across the country but the east coast where the main population centres are is covered and there is quite good ADSB coverage now.
It’s all class A above FL245. What we don’t have is class B airspace. There are some uncontrolled aerodromes that have significant airline traffic and no controlled airspace up to FL180, so the B737, B717, F100, E170s etc are all blasting into the circuit trying to dodge flocks of C210s as well as self separating from each other. It actually works reasonably well.
Re class E airspace, there are also vast areas in the Western US and Alaska where class E airspace begins at 14500’ MSL, with only class G airspace underneath. These are typically very remote areas without adequate communication and navigation signal coverage.
There are some non-towered airports with a class E surface area (4 NM radius of class E to the ground). These are airports that are busy enough to justify the increased VFR weather minimums for a surface area (1000’ ceiling and 3 SM visibility, instead of clear of clouds and 1 SM for day VFR in class G less than 1200’ AGL), but not enough to justify a control tower.
Well you see, the sky is a very big place… 
Seriously though, it is basically just “see and be seen”. Operating on an ATC clearance under IFR does not relieve the crew of the duty to look out for other aircraft. Unless in class B and C airspace, separation service is not provided between VFR and IFR aircraft. Ideally, if everyone is obeying the law like they should, the required VFR weather minimums should theoretically give everyone a chance to see and avoid running into each other. Self announcements on the advisory frequency should also help.
Yes. Visual approach is only authorized if either the airport or the preceding aircraft to be followed is in sight. ATC can volunteer a visual approach without being specifically requested by the pilot. Whereas a contact approach must be requested by the pilot, and the airport does not need to be in sight when the clearance is issued.
Yes, a rated pilot can fly VFR on top. A student pilot cannot.
This is an important distinction. I had a former student go flying one day, and he found himself above an overcast. While his destination was VFR, he didn’t realize he could legally fly VFR on top. So he declared an emergency and got ATC to take him through the clouds to land at a nearby airport. Turns out none of that was necessary.
I’m in between flights right now, so no time to do multiple questions. I’ll do one per post as time permits.
Lots of times a larger plane has so many bells and whistles because their are multiple engines. That means that many of the instruments are just duplicate readouts, one for each engine. The first time I flew a twin-engine plane I was intimidated, but then I realized they were all the same instruments, just twice over.
Having said that, the higher performance a plane is the more stuff you’re likely to have. The trainer I often fly has very basic engine instruments, while higher performance planes owned by my clients have things like exhaust gas temperature, cylinder head temperature, carburetor temperature, manifold pressure, cowl flaps, prop controls, etc.
Even in my trainer we have some fairly fancy navigation equipment, including a very good GPS. That could appear pretty space-age to someone unfamiliar with it.
Thank you for that. As I said, it’s not something I needed to consider in SoCal. If there was a ceiling I’d fly under it. (One thing I like about helicopters is that they are normally flown low.) As I think of it, there was only one time when I could have been VFR on top; the example I gave of taking off from VNY and the L.A. Basin was solid overcast (or undercast, from my POV). There was no point to that on that flight, as I was taking a passenger for a sight-seeing ride.
Let’s take a moment to be careful here with terminology between different countries.
While the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) tries to keep everything standardized, there are still some things that are particular to one place or another. For example, IFR is quite different in Great Britain. I believe they have two licenses for it, rather than the single rating issued in the States. Could anyone from the UK give us more information about that?
As for circling approaches, you must have the runway environment in sight. That’s not a procedure done on the gauges, at least in the States. Is there different terminology at work on this in other places?
I actually do execute circle-to-land approaches frequently. One airport I know is unusual in that it has only one instrument approach (caution - PDF file). It’s an ILS (which is very precise), with a mountain right next to the runway. So if you want to land on the other side, you have to circle. But only in one direction because of the terrain. Also because of the terrain, the minimums are much higher than usual for an ILS.
I would SOOOOO love to have a hole drilling certificate. I would like an IFR rating but I fly so little I would never be able to keep it active. I also don’t see myself flying in ground IFR conditions in a single engine plane. I’ve been in a twin engine glider at night and didn’t enjoy the experience.
I would love to be able to transition a cloud layer. It’s not rocket science. I’ve flown under a hood for 45 minutes at a time and don’t see why there isn’t a rating for transition.
Disclaimer: I’m not a UK pilot. However, I’ve done a bit of research into this before, mostly to satisfy my curiosity because it is so odd. Any UK pilot feel free to straighten me out.
The UK has an IMC rating and an instrument rating. The IMC rating is not up to ICAO standard and is not valid for international operation. The IMC rating also is restricted to uncontrolled airspace only (more on that below). The approach minimums authorized for IMC rating holders are also much higher than what is published for the procedures. The UK instrument rating is just like the instrument rating of other ICAO countries. However, things are set up such that it costs an enormous amount of money to get a UK instrument rating and keep it validated, so almost everyone who is not employed by a commercial operator only have an IMC rating.
The other oddity in the UK is that you don’t need an IMC or instrument rating to fly under IFR in uncontrolled airspace. You only need the rating if you are actually in IMC. Why would anyone want to do that, I don’t know.
The airspace is set up very differently than the US: The area around Heathrow, plus all the airway anywhere in the country, are class A. All the airspace above FL245 is class B. There’s no class C airspace. The area around what might be classified as a class B or class C airport in the US are class D in the UK. (e.g. Gatwick EGKK and Standed EGSS) Almost everywhere else is technically class G. However, there are also airports in class G airspace that have a control tower. Some even have their own radar approach control unit. (e.g. Southend EGMC) Communications with ATC is required, even though these are uncontrolled airspace. These look like airports that might be classified as class C or D in the US.
From the time I first set foot in a classroom, until the time I am free to fly without any restrictions (VFR), how long will it take (assume I pass all the tests and make average progress) and how much will it cost?
Suppose someone is of average or above-average intelligence, but struggles with mathematics. Is he/she at a disadvantage w/r/t flying an aircraft?
What is the general range of fuel economy of a single-engine private aircraft (say, a Cessna 182)?
Do you think group ownership of aircraft is a good deal?
‘Single-engine private aircraft’ covers a lot of ground, so to speak. It could be a 65 hp Cub, or a 450 shp kerosene-burner. But for a Cessna 182 Skylane has a cruise speed of about 145 knots (167 mph) and burns 12-14 gph. That comes out to about 12-14 statute miles per gallon. A Cessna 172, the most-produced airplane ever, burns about 8 gph and cruises about 120 kts (138 mph); so about 17 smpg.
Of course that’s airspeed. Actual miles covered will depend on winds. There are also other factors including which specific model we’re talking about (the Cessnas have been made for half a century), weight, atmospheric conditions, time spent climbing and descending, and on and on. Also, I was using approximate maximum cruise speeds. You can reduce the power and fly more slowly to get a lower rate of fuel consumption.
I’ll let the flight instructors here handle that one.
It was not a problem for me - and math is definitely a weakness for me. I had to spend some extra effort on some parts of the curriculum, and at one point I spent a few extra bucks to spend an hour with a CFI going over some of the points I found more difficult to make sure my understanding was complete. I had no problem passing my required tests, nor have I had a problem with handling the practical computations involved. There are a lot of computational aids used by all pilots in order to reduce workload in the cockpit, and between those and thorough flight planning my less than stellar math abilities have not been a hindrance.
Your mileage may vary, of course, but you don’t need to be a math genius to master VFR flight in a single engine airplane.
Johnny covered that one.
Depends on the group - if you’re with good people it’s a good deal. If you’re with a bunch of freeloading jerks it can be a nightmare.
Assuming you’re doing it on weekends, figure roughly 6 months and $10K on average. There’s obviously a wide variation.
A little, but most of the thinking required is visual. Math is an issue for an instrument rating, but not a barrier.
A plane that size will burn on the order of 10-12 gallons per hour at cruise typically. You don’t talk of “mileage” since the wind affects it.
Compared to sole ownership, it costs a fraction. But you can’t necessarily get the plane when you want it, other people may be less careful than you, and coordination of decisionmaking can be a problem. It may or may not be more economical than renting. But it’s an option, and a common one.
Some of these have been handled already, but here’s my contribution:
Depends on your study habits and the weather. Flying more frequently is great for retention. I’d suggest not doing less than once a week, preferably two or three times. I think I mentioned earlier in the thread that I recommend students plan for $8-10k.
Relatively few people who begin training actually complete a license. I don’t have the stats here, but I seem to recall it’s something less than half. Common reasons for stopping include money, work schedule, money, family issues, and money. Did I mention money? Plan your finances accordingly before you start.
I think it’s a misconception that math plays a big role in piloting. Arithmetic yes, but that’s not the same thing as math.
As Broomstick said, there are computations to be made at times, but that’s not mathematics in the same sense as trigonometry and algebra. It’s helpful if a student can add 2+2, knows what parallel and perpendicular mean, and understands what 45 and 90 degree angles look like. But if they don’t, I’ll teach them. I’ve had two students who didn’t know left from right, and they got along OK.
There’s also a very scary looking aviation slide-rule called an E6B computer. I gulped when I first saw it. But if it’s taught properly, you find out it’s just a calculator without batteries.
This was covered already, but I’ll add one thing. Questions of aircraft range always make me laugh because it has less to do with traveling, and more to do with your bladder.
A Cessna 182 RG that I sometimes fly carries over 6 hours of fuel. But we rarely do legs of more than 3-4 hours because we need the bathroom by then!
No, it’s almost never a good deal in terms of money. But it is a good deal in terms of flying whenever you want to without having to ask anyone. Also, you get to equip it however you want and leave your headset and stuff set up inside for your next flight.
I’ve never owned an airplane, and ironically, I probably never will if I continue to work as a pilot.
The cheapest way to fly is to join a flying club which gives you a choice of planes depending on the size of the club.
I am co-owner of a plane and the arrangement works very well for me. All parties have to be on the same wave length when it comes to maintenance and modifications. If all the owners show up to wash the plane and individually stand back to admire it then you are in the right group. Chances are you will end up flying to places together anyway and splitting the flying/fuel. That means the $100 hamburgers are only $50.