It was his first airplane trip at age seven that made Eric decide to become a pilot. "While boarding the airplane, a flight attendant noticed my interest in the flight deck and urged me to go talk to the pilot. I give a lot of credit to that pilot for my career choice." Eric earned a bachelor’s degree in finance and went on to an airline career. He learned to fly at Sporty’s as part of the University of Cincinnati’s Professional Pilot Program, an initiative he later directed. Eric now manages Sporty’s media network including IFRFocus.com. In addition, Eric serves as a Captain in a Cincinnati-based corporate flight department.
January is a natural reset point for pilots. Logbooks flip to a new page and many of us quietly resolve to be better in the cockpit this year. For instrument pilots, that resolution often comes down to one word: proficiency.
Most pilots think of personal minimums as static numbers, but winter is a reminder that they should be dynamic. Rather than simply raising ceilings and visibility across the board, start by identifying the risks winter uniquely adds—and then build buffers around them.
Winter brings some of the most challenging — and rewarding — IFR flying of the year. Cold, dense air offers excellent aircraft performance and crisp climb rates, and many days feature crystal-clear ceilings above a thin cloud layer. But the season also introduces hazards that demand a more disciplined approach: icing, contaminated runways, sluggish engines, and unpredictable low-level weather.
Modern IFR panels are incredibly capable, but they’re still computers—and sometimes they glitch at the worst possible moment. When automation stumbles in IMC or during a high-workload phase, I fall back on a simple sequence: stabilize, simplify, and strategize.
Departures can be one of the riskiest phases of flight, especially in instrument conditions (IMC) or mountainous terrain. Even experienced pilots benefit from a structured approach to departure planning that accounts for terrain, obstacles, aircraft performance, and weather.
Think you know your IFR charts? In our “Chart Smart” series, we’ll put your instrument knowledge to the test with real examples from approach plates and en route charts—then break down what each symbol really means.
I see more and more approaches labeled LPV in the GPS database, but I’ve heard pilots talk about them as ‘GPS ILS equivalents.’ What exactly is an LPV approach, how is it different from an ILS, and why should I care as an instrument pilot?
Remeber that IFR flying is built on the unglamorous basics. Hold heading, altitude, and airspeed precisely, and you’ll have the bandwidth to manage everything else—ATC calls, avionics, charts, and approaches.
Mastering back course approaches is an exercise in situational awareness and instrumentation discipline. Pilots who don’t understand reverse sensing can easily find themselves drifting further from the intended path while chasing a misleading CDI.
Unlike precision approaches that offer vertical guidance, nonprecision approaches require the pilot to manage descent rates and timing without the aid of a glide slope. This maneuver demands strong situational awareness, precise altitude control, and effective use of available navigation equipment—all essential skills for IFR proficiency.
