It’s good practice to follow IFR Procedures Even When Operating VFR.
The FAA has released Change 3 to the Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM), effective July 9, 2026. While this update includes only a handful of revisions, it’s a good reminder to make sure you’re always referencing the latest guidance—and Sporty’s makes that easy.
The updated AIM is now available in the Sporty’s course portal at Sportys.com/MyCourses, where it’s included as part of your Pilot Training account alongside FAA handbooks and other reference materials. Keeping these publications current is one more way Sporty’s helps you stay prepared.
One revision that’s particularly relevant for instrument pilots appears in AIM 5-1-2, “Follow IFR Procedures Even When Operating VFR.” The FAA has added a recommendation to preload your intended GPS waypoints while the aircraft is still on the ground. While many pilots already follow this practice, the new guidance reinforces its value: reducing cockpit workload during critical phases of flight while improving situational awareness.
The updated section also encourages pilots to maintain IFR proficiency during VFR flights by using many of the same habits that lead to safer instrument flying, including obtaining a thorough preflight briefing, filing a flight plan, using current charts, practicing precise navigation, maintaining accurate altitudes, and flying practice approaches.
These are simple habits, but together they help sharpen instrument skills while making every flight more disciplined and efficient.
https://media.ifrfocus.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/10123130/New-AIM-Now-Available-Highlights-a-Simple-Way-to-Improve-IFR-Proficiency.png10001250Eric Radtkehttps://media.ifrfocus.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/14115136/IFR-Focus-Logo_White_Blue_Web-01.pngEric Radtke2026-07-21 08:55:172026-07-21 09:30:22New AIM Now Available, Highlights a Simple Way to Improve IFR Proficiency
Want to see some mumbling and hand waving? Ask a dozen instrument-rated pilots to explain “… for climb in visual conditions …” in the textual departure procedures for an airport.
It’s not their fault. Departures, in general, are the overlooked middle child of instrument procedures, which makes the Visual Climb Over Airport (VCOA) akin to the weird uncle who shows up at Thanksgiving and gets politely ignored.
The key is that a VCOA is an alternative to the obstacle departure procedure (ODP). You do one or the other, but not both. You must also inform ATC you’re planning on flying the VCOA when you request your clearance. Step one on that planning process is determining if obstacles are even an issue.
A Diversity of Departures
Every airport that has a published instrument approach has also been surveyed for departures. It’s assumed that an aircraft will cross the departure end of the runway (DER) at 35 feet AGL, and climb to 400 feet AGL on runway heading, with a climb gradient of 200 feet per NM.
This creates a point in space. The survey then asks, if the aircraft continues to climb at 200 feet/NM, could it turn in any direction on course and maintain required obstacle clearance? For airports in the middle of Nebraska and other level places, the answer is usually, “yes.” This means the runway qualifes for a “diverse vector area,” and no departure procedure is published. This older term for this is a “diverse departure,” and that makes more sense from a pilot’s perspective. You can depart in any of a diversity of directions, so long as you keep climbing at least 200 feet/NM.
The survey is done for every potential departure runway, and if all qualify for a diverse departure, the airport might not even appear in the departures section of the terminal procedures.
If a departure runway fails this test, a remedy is published. This simplest fix restricts how early the aircraft can turn, such as the procedure for Runways 6 and 24 at Hoquium, Washington (KHQM). Both runways require climbing to 600 feet before you can diversely fly in any direction you want. From Runway 24, that’s climb on runway heading to 600 feet. From Runway 6, it’s a climbing right turn to 600 feet.
Wait: Does that mean you’re supposed to start a right turn as soon as you get airborne? No. It’s still assumed you don’t change from runway heading until 400 AGL, but then it’s a right turn to heading 110° for the next 200 feet—if you even get that big a heading change in only 200 feet. Regardless of the runway though, from 600 feet AGL and up, it’s a diverse departure.
That second part is key: Almost all ODPs get you to a point from which you can continue to climb at 200 feet/NM up to your assigned altitude.
Another remedy is defining a higher required climb gradient. Hoquium has this as well from Runway 6: You must do that climb to 400 and then continue climbing to 600 while turning right, all while climbing at least 260 feet/NM.
You can see why the defaults of runway heading to 400 feet and 200 feet/NM really matter. The standard stuff will not be repeated. You’re left to fill in the missing bits.
If a simple fix won’t do, a more complex departure procedure might be published. Sometimes this is a fully charted procedure, which is worthy of its own article. However, that departure is usually a textual procedure.
They can still be pretty complicated.
Take a look at McMinnville, Oregon (KMMV). You’ll see the takeoff mins specify some greater-than-standard climb gradients. Okay. If you’re flying a 152, you might need to run some numbers on hot day to make sure you can do that up to 1400 feet or so. (Kidding.)
But then there’s the route you must fly. You might want to get out a pencil to draw that out. No, seriously. It’s great to annotate your Sectional Chart in your EFB to make sure you understand the climbs, turns, course, and holds before you can “cross the UBG VOR/DME at or above [the] MEA for route of flight.”
There must be a simpler way—and there is if the weather is good enough and you can depart Runways 17 or 22. Back in takeoff minimums section you’ll see “or 1900-3 for climb in visual conditions.”
The VCOA is listed for those two runways just below the departure procedure. It says, “cross the airport at or above 1900 feet before proceeding on course.” At what climb gradient? You guessed it: 200 feet/NM. Where the VCOA ends, the diverse departure begins. Or, put differently, the VCOA raises the floor of the diverse departure to a point you must reach visually before continuing in IMC. So, if you have at least 1900-foot ceilings and 3 SM visibility, you can spiral up instead of fly the ODP. Just make sure you get ATC approval, like it says in the text.
What about Runways 4 and 35? No VCOA is published. Under Part 91 you could depart that runway, climb in visual conditions to cross the airport above 1900 and then go. But there’s some reason the there’s no VCOA. So, I wouldn’t recommend it, but at least your estate can claim you didn’t break any rules.
Before we leave McMinnville, look up to where it says “Diverse Vector Area.” There’s a whole ‘nuther climb gradient here, and it’s a hefty 350 feet/NM. The key is the text “heading as assigned by ATC.” If you are giving a heading to fly off the airport in your clearance (which would be after reaching 400 AGL) this is the climb gradient you need. Can’t do that? You should decline that clearance and negotiate to fly the ODP or VCOA instead.
Now slide over to Cody, Wyoming (KCOD) by Yellowstone (I hear there are some hills around there), and you’ll see the less common “routed VCOA,” meaning it has a departure you follow even after you enter the clouds. Spiral up over the airport to 9400 feet MSL (in visual condition) and then proceed via the COD VOR 189 radial inbound to cross the COD VOR at or above the MEA. Note that the second part on R-189 can be IMC. And, you guessed it, climbing 200 feet/NM.
KCOD also shows how a VOCA can really pay off. The ODP climb gradients are 400 or 420 feet/NM to altitudes of 8000 feet MSL or 7400 feet MSL, respectively. This requires an 800 foot-per-minute climb, if you have a 120-knot groundspeed. Many light aircraft can’t maintain that climb at 8000 feet MSL. The VCOA has no required climb gradient until you reach routed, second part. Take as long as you need to climb. Enjoy the view — and use it to stay off the rocks.
Don’t let the VCOA ceiling of 4400 feet and the spiraling up to 9400 feet phase you. KCOD’s airport elevation is 5102 feet. But, you say, that means there’s a 100-foot of VCOA that might be IMC. Yeah, that happens on some of these VCOAs. Just stay generally over the airport. There isn’t much to hit there.
Quick Poll
Estimating Required Climb Rates
We don’t have climb gradient instruments in our aircraft. Instead, we have climb rate instruments.
Luckily, some EFBs have fields for climb gradient you can use to get a real-time read for how your climb is doing. If you’re doing departures in hilly areas, I recommend making this one of the fields on your map page. Put up and terrain and obstacle warnings too.
You can also do the math. It’s groundspeed/60 multiplied by the climb gradient. For a groundspeed of 90 knots, the standard climb gradient of 200 feet/NM converts to 300 feet/min (90/60 * 200).
If you know your climb rate for the standard gradient, you can do a quick estimate for non-standard ones. If the required gradient is 375 feet/NM, round up to 400 feet/NM, which is twice standard. Assume you’ll need 600 feet/min, if you expect 90 knots groundspeed.
Just remember that it’s groundspeed, not airspeed that matters. You must factor winds into your departure planning. It’s also average climb rate that matters. If the departure requires 600 fpm while you climb and you see 700 fpm initially that drops to 590 fpm for the last 1000 feet.
Not that you could do much about it at that point anyway.
https://media.ifrfocus.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/13121508/ODP-Versus-VCOA-Visual-Climb-Over-Airport.png10001250Jeff Van Westhttps://media.ifrfocus.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/14115136/IFR-Focus-Logo_White_Blue_Web-01.pngJeff Van West2026-07-15 08:55:242026-10-20 09:45:18Practical IFR: ODP Versus VCOA (Visual Climb Over Airport)
Modern avionics have made it easier than ever to fly stabilized descents on instrument approaches—but only if you understand the different types of vertical guidance available and when you can rely on them.
Join instructor instructor and IFR Focus contributing author Bruce Williams as he explains the three primary types of vertical guidance used on today’s IFR approaches. You’ll learn the differences between approved and advisory vertical guidance, how various avionics systems display each type, and the limitations every instrument pilot should understand before flying the approach.
Based in Seattle, Williams specializes in IFR training, flight simulation, and technically advanced aircraft. In addition to writing for IFR Focus, he is the author of the IFR Tip column for AOPA Pilot and AOPA Flight Training magazines and a contributor to the PilotWorkshops IFR Mastery Series.
https://media.ifrfocus.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/19122054/Why-Advisory-Glideslope-V-Can-Get-You-in-Trouble.png10001250IFR Focus Teamhttps://media.ifrfocus.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/14115136/IFR-Focus-Logo_White_Blue_Web-01.pngIFR Focus Team2026-07-13 08:55:172026-07-10 09:35:46Webinar Video: Understanding Vertical Guidance on IFR Approaches with Bruce Williams
One of the most challenging aspects of IFR flying is that the “best” route isn’t always obvious.
Terrain, weather, winds, aircraft performance, and alternate airports all influence the decision, and improving one part of the equation often makes another part worse.
That’s the dilemma in this month’s IFR Mastery scenario, “West Coast Direct.”
After an easy VFR flight to Oregon, the return trip home presents a very different picture. Marginal weather has moved in, headwinds have picked up, and every available route comes with tradeoffs. Do you fly direct over the mountains? Follow the airways? Take a longer route with better weather but more challenging terrain? Or simply wait another day?
Before reading any further, watch the free scenario briefing below and decide what you would do.
Learn by thinking like an instrument pilot
IFR Mastery from PilotWorkshops is built around a simple idea: the best way to improve your instrument flying is to work through realistic scenarios before you’re faced with them in the airplane.
Each month, you’ll analyze a new real-world IFR flight, make your decision, and then compare your thinking with experienced instructors during a detailed debrief and roundtable discussion. It’s practical, scenario-based training that develops judgment—not just procedural knowledge.
Subscribers also gain access to a growing library of scenarios, making it easy to keep your instrument skills sharp between flights.
Ready to see how your decision compares?
Watch the free briefing above, then start a free trial to access the complete scenario, instructor analysis, and the full Mastery library.
https://media.ifrfocus.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/08112353/New-IFR-Mastery-Scenario-Which-Risk-Will-You-Accept.png10001250Eric Radtkehttps://media.ifrfocus.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/14115136/IFR-Focus-Logo_White_Blue_Web-01.pngEric Radtke2026-07-10 08:54:022026-07-10 08:56:18New IFR Mastery Scenario: Which Risk Will You Accept?
Whether taking a personal trip or out practicing, “logging actual” is a valued bonus to IFR flying. Those times when we’re in the clouds, though, are often brief – sometimes a few seconds to climb above a layer for the smooth, clear skies above. By contrast, departing into low ceilings or visibility followed by prolonged flight in IMC is a whole different experience. It requires a good handle on instrument skills – and awareness of the physiological hazards, which don’t get much attention even for approaches, much less departures. It might be because for many flights, the weather is decent and the procedures are simple, like a heading and altitude after takeoff. And takeoffs are easier than landings, right? In addition, we devote much brainpower to reaching the destination. Obtaining preflight briefings, clearances, and loading routes and charts takes time and effort. With all that, the risks of spatial disorientation during instrument departures might not come to mind.
Human Factors on Takeoff
That being said, “spatial disorientation” appears throughout the NTSB’s probable causes of IFR departure accidents. The narrative of a Cessna 182 crash in 2021 describes an erratic flight path “consistent with the pilot experiencing a type of spatial disorientation known as a somatogravic illusion.” The FAA Instrument Flying Handbook describes this illusion as the sensation of pitching up during aircraft acceleration, causing the pilot to pitch down. In a 2022 accident, a Cessna 210’s unusual attitudes during departure were “consistent with the pilot experiencing spatial disorientation in night instrument conditions…” Some reports note added aeromedical factors such as health conditions, medications, and fatigue. Those can make disorientation worse, or bring it on for a pilot who hasn’t had previous issues. Sometimes a lack of proficiency or recent experience emerge in the investigation. These are all elements worth considering in our own risk management.
The handbook’s guidance explains how the lack of a visual horizon can cause multiple sensory conflicts with our bodies, vision and inner ears, such as the somatogravic illusion described. Other forms include vertical acceleration during climbout (elevator illusion), which can lead a pilot to pitching the wrong way. Turning to a heading can cause inner-ear sensations that conflict with the instruments. Add in the inversion illusion of “tumbling backwards” while pitching for level flight and we have lots of ways to become disoriented – all in the first moments of departure. These are different for each person and will vary from no effects to severe disorientation. A solid instrument scan appropriate for the avionics and proficient flying are the antidotes; many pilots can’t eliminate the symptoms of disorientation.
Instrument departures demand more than procedural knowledge—they require trust in your instruments over your senses. Spatial disorientation can affect any pilot, even those with extensive experience.
Before we discuss automation, it’s important to point out that during takeoff and the initial climb phase, you’re hand flying. Same goes for missed approaches, which can require transitions from descents to climbs in solid IMC. In any case, departures have changes in speed and pitch along with roll and yaw. If uncoordinated, there’s more potential for disorientation. Another consideration for departures into IMC is that visibility worsens, rather than improves, unlike approaches when visual conditions (hopefully) get better as you descend or break out into VMC. Departing into low IFR conditions (ceiling less than 500 feet or less than one mile visibility), all the way down to “zero-zero,” can mean operating solely on instruments as you line up on the runway. There’s no minimum under 14 CFR Part 91, so the conditions in which you are willing to depart comes down to your personal limitations.
Be Situationally Aware
Same goes for nighttime instrument departures. Whether it’s an ocean, large lake, a remote landscape on a moonless night or even a well-lit city with deceiving horizon lines, flying at night, even in VMC, introduces a combination of disorientation risks. You’ll be hand-flying on a panel scan from the takeoff roll and often climbing from a brightly lit runway (sometimes too bright) into the dark. You’re climbing, turning and managing radios and navigation before your eyes have a chance to adjust. And if you haven’t turned down the panel lighting on all those screens, they won’t. (I’ve found that many screens don’t dim down enough.) Our eyesight isn’t all that great in the dark even after adapting, so it’s likely you’re flying a departure with multiple physiological factors working against you. Even at cruise, visual illusions continue to make it difficult to discern your aircraft position in space, or detect movement of other traffic, especially with haze or cloud layers.
Now, a word on autopilots: They are fantastic for reducing workload in IMC and their smooth, precise control can greatly decrease the chance of disorientation. But don’t allow your autopilot to take you away from the instrument scan. That’s still your job, and it’s important to be comfortable downgrading automation or taking full control at any time, not just when you’re planning to. Correct pre-programming for departure is a must – you don’t want a surprise change in flight path after activation, risking not only a deviation but disorientation, too. For example, mistrimming the aircraft during a hand-flown climbout, then activating the autopilot, can cause an abrupt, disorienting pitch change. Also know your autopilot’s altitude limitations for departures and approaches; 100–200 feet AGL is typical for light GA models. The numbers can vary depending on the phase of flight and include other limitations, so check the POH or flight manual supplement.
An autopilot can reduce workload, but it can’t replace a disciplined instrument scan. Stay engaged, know what the airplane is supposed to do, and always be ready to take control.
Departures Take Practice
Reducing the risks of disorientation on departure starts with maintaining instrument proficiency while building awareness of your own brain’s responses to actual IMC. Some tips for flying and training:
Know how your body responds to spatial illusions during various phases of flight including departure, preferably by training with an experienced instructor. When taking pilots through the rating, I’ve always had them work through climbs, turns and descents followed by other IFR tasks in the clouds so they know what it’s like. This is great for refresher training, especially for pilots with little actual time.
Stay proficient in instrument scans during both hand flying and autopilot engagement. During departures, know what’s supposed to happen in the transition between the two – it should be barely noticeable. Stay on the scan with the autopilot on and be ready for errors or malfunctions. Emergency training for partial panel, autopilot failure and other abnormals are great ways to stay sharp and alert to additional disorientation risks.
Include IFR departures in initial and recurrent training plans along with approaches, which tend to get more focus. Fly different procedures, such as SIDs and ODPs, in actual conditions as appropriate. Define personal minimums for departures as you would approaches, adjusting for factors such as recency of experience, weather conditions and unfamiliar procedures.
The ability to take off into the clouds is a great use of instrument privileges. As with any phase of flight, departures are made safer by knowing the risks. Those include spatial disorientation, which can be managed well with the knowledge and skills you need for “logging actual.”
https://media.ifrfocus.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/02123520/into-the-clouds.png10001250Elaine Kauhhttps://media.ifrfocus.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/14115136/IFR-Focus-Logo_White_Blue_Web-01.pngElaine Kauh2026-07-07 08:55:552026-07-08 11:45:56Into the Clouds: Hazards in Your Head
We’re thrilled to welcome Capt. Tim Decker as a contributor to IFR Focus. Tim brings an extraordinary depth of experience spanning military, corporate, and airline aviation, combined with a deep passion for mentoring general aviation pilots.
A retired U.S. Air Force pilot, Tim’s military career includes flying iconic aircraft like the U-2 and F-117 Nighthawk. Today, he serves as a Boeing 757 Captain for FedEx, accumulating more than 16,000 total flight hours over his career. But despite his extensive jet time, Tim remains deeply rooted in the general aviation community as a longtime Cirrus SR22 owner, CFI, CFII, and MEI.
Tim specializes in helping owner-pilots transition safely and confidently into high-performance turbine aircraft. He is a Cirrus Vision Jet mentor pilot and instructor, an Epic E1000 factory-trained instructor, and a HondaJet type-rated pilot. His instructional focus bridges the gap between different worlds, taking the rigorous standardization, risk management, and disciplined decision-making found in airline and military cockpits and making them practical for single-pilot Part 91 operations.
Based in Nashville, Tennessee, Tim is dedicated to helping pilots develop true operational mastery in the real-world IFR system. We are proud to feature his unique perspective at IFR Focus, and we know our readers will benefit immensely from his insights in this and future articles.
The Checkride Was the Easy Part: Moving Beyond Certification to Operational Mastery
Passing the checkride proves you can fly the airplane. Operating it safely in the real world is a different challenge altogether.
by Tim Decker
Passing a checkride is a significant accomplishment. Whether it’s an instrument rating, a commercial certificate, a type rating, or an ATP, the successful applicant has demonstrated the knowledge, skill, and judgment required to meet established standards. Most pilots understand that earning a certificate doesn’t mark the end of their development. What often comes as a surprise, however, is how different real-world operations feel from the controlled environment of a practical test or simulator session.
A checkride demonstrates proficiency under evaluation standards. Real-world flying requires pilots to apply those same skills while managing changing weather, passenger expectations, operational pressures, unfamiliar airports, and evolving ATC clearances. This boundary between demonstrated proficiency and operational proficiency is where some of aviation’s most valuable learning occurs.
I was reminded of this recently when a fully qualified pilot who had just completed training in a high-performance turbine aircraft asked me to accompany him on a cross-country flight. The summer weather featured widespread convective activity along the route—nothing unusual for IFR flying, but enough to require some tactical thought.
Before filing, he asked me to review his flight plan, which was routed direct to the destination. Looking at the weather, I saw an area of green and yellow precipitation with an occasional patch of red along his line. There was no lightning, but it was an area that would almost certainly require tactical decision-making in IMC.
I suggested an alternate route via a VOR located approximately 30 degrees off course. It added only a modest amount of distance but kept us completely clear of the weather.
His response was reasonable: “Why don’t we just go direct and ask for deviations if we need them? There’s no lightning showing.” He wasn’t wrong; that plan probably would have worked. But I told him that wasn’t how a professional dispatcher would file the flight for an airline crew.
A dispatcher wouldn’t intentionally launch a flight toward an area where deviations are likely. Instead, they file the route most likely to produce an uneventful flight from the beginning. The goal isn’t simply to complete the flight safely; it is to do so while minimizing workload, reducing uncertainty, preserving options, and enhancing passenger comfort.
The revised route was a perfect example of what good aeronautical decision-making should accomplish. It was safe, legal, and efficient. Several hours later, while cruising comfortably along our weather-free route, the pilot looked toward his original path and simply said, “I’m glad we’re not over there.” The flight was uneventful, and that’s exactly the point. The best decisions prevent problems from developing in the first place.
Beyond the Checkride
The FAA’s training standards do an excellent job evaluating whether a pilot can perform specific tasks, like flying an approach or managing an emergency. These skills form the essential foundation of safe flight. But real-world IFR flying involves the gap that exists between certification and operational proficiency.
Training programs teach pilots how to meet established standards. Real-world flying requires them to apply those skills in dynamic environments where the correct answer is rarely obvious and judgment becomes just as important as aircraft control. The question isn’t just whether you can fly the approach, but whether you can safely manage everything happening around it. Can you recognize a weather threat early? Stay ahead of changing clearances? Identify when your workload is exceeding capacity?
Throughout my career—whether flying military aircraft, corporate jets, airliners, or mentoring owner-pilots—I’ve observed the same pattern: Most mistakes don’t begin with a loss of aircraft control. They begin with a loss of operational control.
Managing Workload, Automation, and Situational Awareness
Many pilots think of workload as something that happens to them, but professional pilots view it as something to be managed or prevented. Consider how things unravel during an IFR flight: a pilot becomes occupied with weather, falls behind the avionics, rushes the approach briefing, misses a radio call, and suddenly finds himself reacting to events instead of anticipating them. The airplane may still be under control, but the operation is no longer being managed.
One of the most effective ways to improve safety is to reduce workload before the flight ever begins, just like our weather-routing decision. Professional pilots constantly look for ways to simplify the operation because they understand that mental capacity is a finite resource.
The same principle applies to automation. Today’s owner-pilot has access to technology—flight directors, synthetic vision, datalink weather, and sophisticated autopilots—that airline crews a generation ago could only dream about. But automation is still just a tool. The challenge isn’t learning how to use it; it’s learning how to manage it.
A pilot transitioning into turbine aircraft once shared a great observation: the most important skill isn’t mastering a specific procedure, but maintaining situational awareness throughout every phase of flight. Success ultimately comes down to consistently answering three questions:
What is the airplane doing?
What is the automation doing?
What should happen next?
In the airline world, we refer to this as Flight Path Management. Pilots who can consistently answer these questions are rarely surprised by the aircraft or the operation.
The Missing Link: Mentorship
Experience and judgment are difficult to teach in a classroom. They develop through exposure. In military aviation, new pilots fly alongside experienced flight leads who help them develop decision-making skills, followed by a detailed debrief.
Civilian airline aviation follows a similar model. A pilot may arrive with 1,500 hours, but they still undergo rigorous simulator training and then enter Initial Operating Experience (IOE), flying alongside a Line Check Airman before being released to fly with a regular Captain. The industry understands that certification does not equal mastery.
Yet, owner-pilots often complete training and immediately begin operating sophisticated aircraft single-pilot in busy airspace and challenging weather with no Captain sitting next to them. As a result, Single-Pilot Resource Management (SRM) becomes one of the most critical skills an owner-pilot can develop.
Interestingly, aviation insurance underwriters have reached the same conclusion. When pilots transition into high-performance aircraft, insurance requirements often include mentor-pilot time and operational restrictions. These are not arbitrary; they are based on decades of actuarial data showing where pilots are most vulnerable. A mentor isn’t there to fly the airplane; they are there to help accelerate the development of judgment by teaching you how experienced pilots think.
Building Your Professional Development Program
Fortunately, owner-pilots don’t have to figure this out alone. Type clubs and type-specific organizations (such as COPA, BPPP, VPO, and CJP) provide access to experienced instructors, standardized operating practices, scenario-based training, and a community willing to share lessons learned.
My recommendation is simple: join them, attend their events, and fly with their instructors. More importantly, build ongoing relationships with mentors you trust. Call them when you’re planning a challenging trip, and consider hiring them periodically to accompany you on real-world flights where learning can occur in your actual operating environment.
Another significant difference between professional aviation and general aviation is the frequency of recurrent training. In the commercial world, proficiency is viewed as perishable. Yet many GA pilots receive little formal training beyond the legal requirement of a Flight Review every two years.
If you are routinely flying family, friends, or business associates through the IFR system, I encourage you to hold yourself to a higher standard. Seek training every six to nine months, use simulators when available, and schedule mentorship flights focused purely on improving operational decision-making.
The Real Goal
Pilots often pursue the next rating or credential believing it will inherently make them safer. Training and certificates matter, but the real goal is becoming the kind of pilot who consistently prevents problems from developing in the first place.
Whether you’re flying a Skyhawk, a Bonanza, a Cirrus, a turbine aircraft, or an airliner, the fundamentals remain the same: manage your workload, use automation wisely, stay ahead of the airplane, and train more often than the regulations require. A checkride demonstrates proficiency under evaluation standards, but the rest of your aviation career should be spent developing true operational proficiency in the real world.
https://media.ifrfocus.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/18104943/The-Checkride-Was-the-Easy-Part-Moving-Beyond-Certification-to-Operational-Mastery.png10001250Tim Deckerhttps://media.ifrfocus.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/14115136/IFR-Focus-Logo_White_Blue_Web-01.pngTim Decker2026-06-30 08:45:242026-06-29 08:50:38The Checkride Was the Easy Part: Moving Beyond Certification to Operational Mastery
New AIM Now Available, Highlights a Simple Way to Improve IFR Proficiency
/by Eric RadtkeIt’s good practice to follow IFR Procedures Even When Operating VFR.
The FAA has released Change 3 to the Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM), effective July 9, 2026. While this update includes only a handful of revisions, it’s a good reminder to make sure you’re always referencing the latest guidance—and Sporty’s makes that easy.
The updated AIM is now available in the Sporty’s course portal at Sportys.com/MyCourses, where it’s included as part of your Pilot Training account alongside FAA handbooks and other reference materials. Keeping these publications current is one more way Sporty’s helps you stay prepared.
One revision that’s particularly relevant for instrument pilots appears in AIM 5-1-2, “Follow IFR Procedures Even When Operating VFR.” The FAA has added a recommendation to preload your intended GPS waypoints while the aircraft is still on the ground. While many pilots already follow this practice, the new guidance reinforces its value: reducing cockpit workload during critical phases of flight while improving situational awareness.
The updated section also encourages pilots to maintain IFR proficiency during VFR flights by using many of the same habits that lead to safer instrument flying, including obtaining a thorough preflight briefing, filing a flight plan, using current charts, practicing precise navigation, maintaining accurate altitudes, and flying practice approaches.
These are simple habits, but together they help sharpen instrument skills while making every flight more disciplined and efficient.
For a complete list of revisions included in AIM Change 3, see the FAA’s Explanation of Changes document.
Practical IFR: ODP Versus VCOA (Visual Climb Over Airport)
/by Jeff Van WestWant to see some mumbling and hand waving? Ask a dozen instrument-rated pilots to explain “… for climb in visual conditions …” in the textual departure procedures for an airport.
It’s not their fault. Departures, in general, are the overlooked middle child of instrument procedures, which makes the Visual Climb Over Airport (VCOA) akin to the weird uncle who shows up at Thanksgiving and gets politely ignored.
The key is that a VCOA is an alternative to the obstacle departure procedure (ODP). You do one or the other, but not both. You must also inform ATC you’re planning on flying the VCOA when you request your clearance. Step one on that planning process is determining if obstacles are even an issue.
A Diversity of Departures
Every airport that has a published instrument approach has also been surveyed for departures. It’s assumed that an aircraft will cross the departure end of the runway (DER) at 35 feet AGL, and climb to 400 feet AGL on runway heading, with a climb gradient of 200 feet per NM.
This creates a point in space. The survey then asks, if the aircraft continues to climb at 200 feet/NM, could it turn in any direction on course and maintain required obstacle clearance? For airports in the middle of Nebraska and other level places, the answer is usually, “yes.” This means the runway qualifes for a “diverse vector area,” and no departure procedure is published. This older term for this is a “diverse departure,” and that makes more sense from a pilot’s perspective. You can depart in any of a diversity of directions, so long as you keep climbing at least 200 feet/NM.
The survey is done for every potential departure runway, and if all qualify for a diverse departure, the airport might not even appear in the departures section of the terminal procedures.
If a departure runway fails this test, a remedy is published. This simplest fix restricts how early the aircraft can turn, such as the procedure for Runways 6 and 24 at Hoquium, Washington (KHQM). Both runways require climbing to 600 feet before you can diversely fly in any direction you want. From Runway 24, that’s climb on runway heading to 600 feet. From Runway 6, it’s a climbing right turn to 600 feet.
That second part is key: Almost all ODPs get you to a point from which you can continue to climb at 200 feet/NM up to your assigned altitude.
Another remedy is defining a higher required climb gradient. Hoquium has this as well from Runway 6: You must do that climb to 400 and then continue climbing to 600 while turning right, all while climbing at least 260 feet/NM.
You can see why the defaults of runway heading to 400 feet and 200 feet/NM really matter. The standard stuff will not be repeated. You’re left to fill in the missing bits.
If a simple fix won’t do, a more complex departure procedure might be published. Sometimes this is a fully charted procedure, which is worthy of its own article. However, that departure is usually a textual procedure.
They can still be pretty complicated.
Take a look at McMinnville, Oregon (KMMV). You’ll see the takeoff mins specify some greater-than-standard climb gradients. Okay. If you’re flying a 152, you might need to run some numbers on hot day to make sure you can do that up to 1400 feet or so. (Kidding.)
But then there’s the route you must fly. You might want to get out a pencil to draw that out. No, seriously. It’s great to annotate your Sectional Chart in your EFB to make sure you understand the climbs, turns, course, and holds before you can “cross the UBG VOR/DME at or above [the] MEA for route of flight.”
There must be a simpler way—and there is if the weather is good enough and you can depart Runways 17 or 22. Back in takeoff minimums section you’ll see “or 1900-3 for climb in visual conditions.”
The VCOA is listed for those two runways just below the departure procedure. It says, “cross the airport at or above 1900 feet before proceeding on course.” At what climb gradient? You guessed it: 200 feet/NM. Where the VCOA ends, the diverse departure begins. Or, put differently, the VCOA raises the floor of the diverse departure to a point you must reach visually before continuing in IMC. So, if you have at least 1900-foot ceilings and 3 SM visibility, you can spiral up instead of fly the ODP. Just make sure you get ATC approval, like it says in the text.
What about Runways 4 and 35? No VCOA is published. Under Part 91 you could depart that runway, climb in visual conditions to cross the airport above 1900 and then go. But there’s some reason the there’s no VCOA. So, I wouldn’t recommend it, but at least your estate can claim you didn’t break any rules.
Before we leave McMinnville, look up to where it says “Diverse Vector Area.” There’s a whole ‘nuther climb gradient here, and it’s a hefty 350 feet/NM. The key is the text “heading as assigned by ATC.” If you are giving a heading to fly off the airport in your clearance (which would be after reaching 400 AGL) this is the climb gradient you need. Can’t do that? You should decline that clearance and negotiate to fly the ODP or VCOA instead.
Now slide over to Cody, Wyoming (KCOD) by Yellowstone (I hear there are some hills around there), and you’ll see the less common “routed VCOA,” meaning it has a departure you follow even after you enter the clouds. Spiral up over the airport to 9400 feet MSL (in visual condition) and then proceed via the COD VOR 189 radial inbound to cross the COD VOR at or above the MEA. Note that the second part on R-189 can be IMC. And, you guessed it, climbing 200 feet/NM.
KCOD also shows how a VOCA can really pay off. The ODP climb gradients are 400 or 420 feet/NM to altitudes of 8000 feet MSL or 7400 feet MSL, respectively. This requires an 800 foot-per-minute climb, if you have a 120-knot groundspeed. Many light aircraft can’t maintain that climb at 8000 feet MSL. The VCOA has no required climb gradient until you reach routed, second part. Take as long as you need to climb. Enjoy the view — and use it to stay off the rocks.
Don’t let the VCOA ceiling of 4400 feet and the spiraling up to 9400 feet phase you. KCOD’s airport elevation is 5102 feet. But, you say, that means there’s a 100-foot of VCOA that might be IMC. Yeah, that happens on some of these VCOAs. Just stay generally over the airport. There isn’t much to hit there.
Quick Poll
Estimating Required Climb Rates
We don’t have climb gradient instruments in our aircraft. Instead, we have climb rate instruments.
Luckily, some EFBs have fields for climb gradient you can use to get a real-time read for how your climb is doing. If you’re doing departures in hilly areas, I recommend making this one of the fields on your map page. Put up and terrain and obstacle warnings too.
You can also do the math. It’s groundspeed/60 multiplied by the climb gradient. For a groundspeed of 90 knots, the standard climb gradient of 200 feet/NM converts to 300 feet/min (90/60 * 200).
If you know your climb rate for the standard gradient, you can do a quick estimate for non-standard ones. If the required gradient is 375 feet/NM, round up to 400 feet/NM, which is twice standard. Assume you’ll need 600 feet/min, if you expect 90 knots groundspeed.
Just remember that it’s groundspeed, not airspeed that matters. You must factor winds into your departure planning. It’s also average climb rate that matters. If the departure requires 600 fpm while you climb and you see 700 fpm initially that drops to 590 fpm for the last 1000 feet.
Not that you could do much about it at that point anyway.
Webinar Video: Understanding Vertical Guidance on IFR Approaches with Bruce Williams
/by IFR Focus TeamBruce Williams – Understanding Vertical Guidance
Modern avionics have made it easier than ever to fly stabilized descents on instrument approaches—but only if you understand the different types of vertical guidance available and when you can rely on them.
Join instructor instructor and IFR Focus contributing author Bruce Williams as he explains the three primary types of vertical guidance used on today’s IFR approaches. You’ll learn the differences between approved and advisory vertical guidance, how various avionics systems display each type, and the limitations every instrument pilot should understand before flying the approach.
Based in Seattle, Williams specializes in IFR training, flight simulation, and technically advanced aircraft. In addition to writing for IFR Focus, he is the author of the IFR Tip column for AOPA Pilot and AOPA Flight Training magazines and a contributor to the PilotWorkshops IFR Mastery Series.
New IFR Mastery Scenario: Which Risk Will You Accept?
/by Eric RadtkeOne of the most challenging aspects of IFR flying is that the “best” route isn’t always obvious.
Terrain, weather, winds, aircraft performance, and alternate airports all influence the decision, and improving one part of the equation often makes another part worse.
That’s the dilemma in this month’s IFR Mastery scenario, “West Coast Direct.”
After an easy VFR flight to Oregon, the return trip home presents a very different picture. Marginal weather has moved in, headwinds have picked up, and every available route comes with tradeoffs. Do you fly direct over the mountains? Follow the airways? Take a longer route with better weather but more challenging terrain? Or simply wait another day?
Before reading any further, watch the free scenario briefing below and decide what you would do.
Learn by thinking like an instrument pilot
IFR Mastery from PilotWorkshops is built around a simple idea: the best way to improve your instrument flying is to work through realistic scenarios before you’re faced with them in the airplane.
Each month, you’ll analyze a new real-world IFR flight, make your decision, and then compare your thinking with experienced instructors during a detailed debrief and roundtable discussion. It’s practical, scenario-based training that develops judgment—not just procedural knowledge.
Subscribers also gain access to a growing library of scenarios, making it easy to keep your instrument skills sharp between flights.
Ready to see how your decision compares?
Watch the free briefing above, then start a free trial to access the complete scenario, instructor analysis, and the full Mastery library.
Into the Clouds: Hazards in Your Head
/by Elaine KauhWhether taking a personal trip or out practicing, “logging actual” is a valued bonus to IFR flying. Those times when we’re in the clouds, though, are often brief – sometimes a few seconds to climb above a layer for the smooth, clear skies above. By contrast, departing into low ceilings or visibility followed by prolonged flight in IMC is a whole different experience. It requires a good handle on instrument skills – and awareness of the physiological hazards, which don’t get much attention even for approaches, much less departures. It might be because for many flights, the weather is decent and the procedures are simple, like a heading and altitude after takeoff. And takeoffs are easier than landings, right? In addition, we devote much brainpower to reaching the destination. Obtaining preflight briefings, clearances, and loading routes and charts takes time and effort. With all that, the risks of spatial disorientation during instrument departures might not come to mind.
Human Factors on Takeoff
That being said, “spatial disorientation” appears throughout the NTSB’s probable causes of IFR departure accidents. The narrative of a Cessna 182 crash in 2021 describes an erratic flight path “consistent with the pilot experiencing a type of spatial disorientation known as a somatogravic illusion.” The FAA Instrument Flying Handbook describes this illusion as the sensation of pitching up during aircraft acceleration, causing the pilot to pitch down. In a 2022 accident, a Cessna 210’s unusual attitudes during departure were “consistent with the pilot experiencing spatial disorientation in night instrument conditions…” Some reports note added aeromedical factors such as health conditions, medications, and fatigue. Those can make disorientation worse, or bring it on for a pilot who hasn’t had previous issues. Sometimes a lack of proficiency or recent experience emerge in the investigation. These are all elements worth considering in our own risk management.
The handbook’s guidance explains how the lack of a visual horizon can cause multiple sensory conflicts with our bodies, vision and inner ears, such as the somatogravic illusion described. Other forms include vertical acceleration during climbout (elevator illusion), which can lead a pilot to pitching the wrong way. Turning to a heading can cause inner-ear sensations that conflict with the instruments. Add in the inversion illusion of “tumbling backwards” while pitching for level flight and we have lots of ways to become disoriented – all in the first moments of departure. These are different for each person and will vary from no effects to severe disorientation. A solid instrument scan appropriate for the avionics and proficient flying are the antidotes; many pilots can’t eliminate the symptoms of disorientation.
Before we discuss automation, it’s important to point out that during takeoff and the initial climb phase, you’re hand flying. Same goes for missed approaches, which can require transitions from descents to climbs in solid IMC. In any case, departures have changes in speed and pitch along with roll and yaw. If uncoordinated, there’s more potential for disorientation. Another consideration for departures into IMC is that visibility worsens, rather than improves, unlike approaches when visual conditions (hopefully) get better as you descend or break out into VMC. Departing into low IFR conditions (ceiling less than 500 feet or less than one mile visibility), all the way down to “zero-zero,” can mean operating solely on instruments as you line up on the runway. There’s no minimum under 14 CFR Part 91, so the conditions in which you are willing to depart comes down to your personal limitations.
Be Situationally Aware
Now, a word on autopilots: They are fantastic for reducing workload in IMC and their smooth, precise control can greatly decrease the chance of disorientation. But don’t allow your autopilot to take you away from the instrument scan. That’s still your job, and it’s important to be comfortable downgrading automation or taking full control at any time, not just when you’re planning to. Correct pre-programming for departure is a must – you don’t want a surprise change in flight path after activation, risking not only a deviation but disorientation, too. For example, mistrimming the aircraft during a hand-flown climbout, then activating the autopilot, can cause an abrupt, disorienting pitch change. Also know your autopilot’s altitude limitations for departures and approaches; 100–200 feet AGL is typical for light GA models. The numbers can vary depending on the phase of flight and include other limitations, so check the POH or flight manual supplement.
Departures Take Practice
Reducing the risks of disorientation on departure starts with maintaining instrument proficiency while building awareness of your own brain’s responses to actual IMC. Some tips for flying and training:
The ability to take off into the clouds is a great use of instrument privileges. As with any phase of flight, departures are made safer by knowing the risks. Those include spatial disorientation, which can be managed well with the knowledge and skills you need for “logging actual.”
The Checkride Was the Easy Part: Moving Beyond Certification to Operational Mastery
/by Tim DeckerEditor’s Note: Welcoming Tim Decker to IFR Focus
IFR Focus welcomes Capt. Tim Decker
We’re thrilled to welcome Capt. Tim Decker as a contributor to IFR Focus. Tim brings an extraordinary depth of experience spanning military, corporate, and airline aviation, combined with a deep passion for mentoring general aviation pilots.
A retired U.S. Air Force pilot, Tim’s military career includes flying iconic aircraft like the U-2 and F-117 Nighthawk. Today, he serves as a Boeing 757 Captain for FedEx, accumulating more than 16,000 total flight hours over his career. But despite his extensive jet time, Tim remains deeply rooted in the general aviation community as a longtime Cirrus SR22 owner, CFI, CFII, and MEI.
Tim specializes in helping owner-pilots transition safely and confidently into high-performance turbine aircraft. He is a Cirrus Vision Jet mentor pilot and instructor, an Epic E1000 factory-trained instructor, and a HondaJet type-rated pilot. His instructional focus bridges the gap between different worlds, taking the rigorous standardization, risk management, and disciplined decision-making found in airline and military cockpits and making them practical for single-pilot Part 91 operations.
Based in Nashville, Tennessee, Tim is dedicated to helping pilots develop true operational mastery in the real-world IFR system. We are proud to feature his unique perspective at IFR Focus, and we know our readers will benefit immensely from his insights in this and future articles.
The Checkride Was the Easy Part: Moving Beyond Certification to Operational Mastery
Passing the checkride proves you can fly the airplane. Operating it safely in the real world is a different challenge altogether.
by Tim Decker
Passing a checkride is a significant accomplishment. Whether it’s an instrument rating, a commercial certificate, a type rating, or an ATP, the successful applicant has demonstrated the knowledge, skill, and judgment required to meet established standards. Most pilots understand that earning a certificate doesn’t mark the end of their development. What often comes as a surprise, however, is how different real-world operations feel from the controlled environment of a practical test or simulator session.
A checkride demonstrates proficiency under evaluation standards. Real-world flying requires pilots to apply those same skills while managing changing weather, passenger expectations, operational pressures, unfamiliar airports, and evolving ATC clearances. This boundary between demonstrated proficiency and operational proficiency is where some of aviation’s most valuable learning occurs.
I was reminded of this recently when a fully qualified pilot who had just completed training in a high-performance turbine aircraft asked me to accompany him on a cross-country flight. The summer weather featured widespread convective activity along the route—nothing unusual for IFR flying, but enough to require some tactical thought.
Before filing, he asked me to review his flight plan, which was routed direct to the destination. Looking at the weather, I saw an area of green and yellow precipitation with an occasional patch of red along his line. There was no lightning, but it was an area that would almost certainly require tactical decision-making in IMC.
I suggested an alternate route via a VOR located approximately 30 degrees off course. It added only a modest amount of distance but kept us completely clear of the weather.
His response was reasonable: “Why don’t we just go direct and ask for deviations if we need them? There’s no lightning showing.” He wasn’t wrong; that plan probably would have worked. But I told him that wasn’t how a professional dispatcher would file the flight for an airline crew.
A dispatcher wouldn’t intentionally launch a flight toward an area where deviations are likely. Instead, they file the route most likely to produce an uneventful flight from the beginning. The goal isn’t simply to complete the flight safely; it is to do so while minimizing workload, reducing uncertainty, preserving options, and enhancing passenger comfort.
The revised route was a perfect example of what good aeronautical decision-making should accomplish. It was safe, legal, and efficient. Several hours later, while cruising comfortably along our weather-free route, the pilot looked toward his original path and simply said, “I’m glad we’re not over there.” The flight was uneventful, and that’s exactly the point. The best decisions prevent problems from developing in the first place.
Beyond the Checkride
The FAA’s training standards do an excellent job evaluating whether a pilot can perform specific tasks, like flying an approach or managing an emergency. These skills form the essential foundation of safe flight. But real-world IFR flying involves the gap that exists between certification and operational proficiency.
Training programs teach pilots how to meet established standards. Real-world flying requires them to apply those skills in dynamic environments where the correct answer is rarely obvious and judgment becomes just as important as aircraft control. The question isn’t just whether you can fly the approach, but whether you can safely manage everything happening around it. Can you recognize a weather threat early? Stay ahead of changing clearances? Identify when your workload is exceeding capacity?
Throughout my career—whether flying military aircraft, corporate jets, airliners, or mentoring owner-pilots—I’ve observed the same pattern: Most mistakes don’t begin with a loss of aircraft control. They begin with a loss of operational control.
Managing Workload, Automation, and Situational Awareness
One of the most effective ways to improve safety is to reduce workload before the flight ever begins, just like our weather-routing decision. Professional pilots constantly look for ways to simplify the operation because they understand that mental capacity is a finite resource.
The same principle applies to automation. Today’s owner-pilot has access to technology—flight directors, synthetic vision, datalink weather, and sophisticated autopilots—that airline crews a generation ago could only dream about. But automation is still just a tool. The challenge isn’t learning how to use it; it’s learning how to manage it.
A pilot transitioning into turbine aircraft once shared a great observation: the most important skill isn’t mastering a specific procedure, but maintaining situational awareness throughout every phase of flight. Success ultimately comes down to consistently answering three questions:
What is the airplane doing?
What is the automation doing?
What should happen next?
In the airline world, we refer to this as Flight Path Management. Pilots who can consistently answer these questions are rarely surprised by the aircraft or the operation.
The Missing Link: Mentorship
Experience and judgment are difficult to teach in a classroom. They develop through exposure. In military aviation, new pilots fly alongside experienced flight leads who help them develop decision-making skills, followed by a detailed debrief.
Civilian airline aviation follows a similar model. A pilot may arrive with 1,500 hours, but they still undergo rigorous simulator training and then enter Initial Operating Experience (IOE), flying alongside a Line Check Airman before being released to fly with a regular Captain. The industry understands that certification does not equal mastery.
Yet, owner-pilots often complete training and immediately begin operating sophisticated aircraft single-pilot in busy airspace and challenging weather with no Captain sitting next to them. As a result, Single-Pilot Resource Management (SRM) becomes one of the most critical skills an owner-pilot can develop.
Interestingly, aviation insurance underwriters have reached the same conclusion. When pilots transition into high-performance aircraft, insurance requirements often include mentor-pilot time and operational restrictions. These are not arbitrary; they are based on decades of actuarial data showing where pilots are most vulnerable. A mentor isn’t there to fly the airplane; they are there to help accelerate the development of judgment by teaching you how experienced pilots think.
Building Your Professional Development Program
Fortunately, owner-pilots don’t have to figure this out alone. Type clubs and type-specific organizations (such as COPA, BPPP, VPO, and CJP) provide access to experienced instructors, standardized operating practices, scenario-based training, and a community willing to share lessons learned.
My recommendation is simple: join them, attend their events, and fly with their instructors. More importantly, build ongoing relationships with mentors you trust. Call them when you’re planning a challenging trip, and consider hiring them periodically to accompany you on real-world flights where learning can occur in your actual operating environment.
Another significant difference between professional aviation and general aviation is the frequency of recurrent training. In the commercial world, proficiency is viewed as perishable. Yet many GA pilots receive little formal training beyond the legal requirement of a Flight Review every two years.
If you are routinely flying family, friends, or business associates through the IFR system, I encourage you to hold yourself to a higher standard. Seek training every six to nine months, use simulators when available, and schedule mentorship flights focused purely on improving operational decision-making.
The Real Goal
Pilots often pursue the next rating or credential believing it will inherently make them safer. Training and certificates matter, but the real goal is becoming the kind of pilot who consistently prevents problems from developing in the first place.
Whether you’re flying a Skyhawk, a Bonanza, a Cirrus, a turbine aircraft, or an airliner, the fundamentals remain the same: manage your workload, use automation wisely, stay ahead of the airplane, and train more often than the regulations require. A checkride demonstrates proficiency under evaluation standards, but the rest of your aviation career should be spent developing true operational proficiency in the real world.