For the most part, this is a list I’m generating for myself. The more problems there are with a syllabus, the more important it is that my coworkers and I have ways of getting around them. I’m currently working with my first instrument student to go through the system, and I’m finding issues as I go along.

First and foremost, the course we’re using was last updated in 2000. What could go wrong? It’s not like there’s been any new technology added to the general aviation world in the past eight years. The course doesn’t include things like WAAS GPS, or LPV approaches, and doesn’t even mention the possibility of glass cockpits.

Why have Cessna and the Kings generated their own rules of thumb for instrument flying? There’s an entire FAA bible on this stuff called the Instrument Flying Handbook. For example:

• Cessna suggests that when holding outbound, you double your inbound wind correction. The IFH says to triple it. Try both in the sim with the same wind and you’ll find that tripling consistently works much better. No wonder it’s what’s recommended by the FAA.
• The Kings constantly teach a one-size-fits-all approach to instrument flying. “For aircraft slower than 150 knots, start your turn about a half-mile early” is something that really set me off; choosing a distance from the arc to start your entry depends on groundspeed, not how fast your airplane flies. A 160 horsepower Skyhawk could easily be entering an arc at 100 knots and a groundspeed of 80 knots, while a 230 horsepower turbocharged Skylane going the other way could be cruising along at 140 knots but moving over the ground at 160 knots. That’s double the groundspeed, and double the turn radius, yet both Cessnas have an airspeed of less than 150 knots. The IFH recommends taking current groundspeed/200, which works very well. The Skyhawk from our example would therefore turn .4 nm from the arc, while the Skylane would turn at a distance of .8 nm.
• Then there’s the fact that they also use a ‘standard’ of leaving a DME arc 5° before your inbound/outbound radial. Do they not understand how VORs work? The closer you are, the narrower a radial is; at 60 miles from the VOR, one degree is one mile. Just flipping through the Northwest region’s approach plates I found arcs from 7 nm all the way up to 29 nm. 7 miles from the station, one radial is .1 nm wide. 29 miles from the station one radial is HALF A MILE WIDE. If you followed Cessna’s rule of thumb, in some cases you could start your turn nearly two miles early.
• Regardless of how they teach turning into and out of arcs, they teach arcing itself all wrong. Instead of using the tried-and-true ‘turn 10°, twist 10°’ method, they have students try to envision where the course is off their wingtip, then lead and lag by 5° at a time before turning 10°. Confused? I know I am, and I know why – they’re using the method you should use for an RMI in aircraft that are not equipped with RMIs.
• The course seems to be organized haphazardly. Half of the complex procedures are introduced in the aircraft when they should be covered first in the simulator or FTD. DME arcs require at least one lesson on the ground and in the sim, as do intersection holds. Departure and arrival procedures (SIDs and STARs) are often impossible to do in an aircraft, as not all airports have them. ADF holding is enough of a pain in the ass in the sim, where the flight can be repositioned; never mind in the airplane.