VFR-into-IMC Accident Trends: Perceptions of Deficiencies in Training

Abstract

Pilots who operate under visual flight rules (VFR) and in visual meteorological conditions, who then continue flight into instrument meteorological conditions (IMC), remain as one of the leading causes of fatal aircraft accidents in general aviation. This paper examines past and current research initiatives, in seeking to identify causal factors and gaps in training that lead to VFR-into-IMC aircraft accidents, using a mixed methods approach. The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association Air Safety Institute database and the National Transportation Safety Board database search engines were used to identify accident reports associated with VFR flight into IMC/deteriorating weather conditions for a 10-year time period (2003 to 2012). A national survey was also conducted to gain deeper insight into the self-identified training deficiencies of pilots. There is evidence that situational awareness is linked to decision-making, and there is a lack of proper training with regards to weather and weather technology concepts, making it difficult for pilots to gain these knowledge areas, skills, and abilities throughout their initial flight training and subsequent experience.

Visual Flight into Instrument Meteorological Condition: A Post Accident Analysis

“…This contradicted the proposed research hypothesis that flight experience should have a positive influence. Previous research [3] reported the proportions expected for 2000-5000 h was 11.7%, while this dataset had 26% of occurrence at this level of experience. CASA notes that Australia has less risk due to weather and low values for lowest safe altitudes.…”

“…A comparison of the accidents involving instrument-rated and non-instrument-rated pilots indicated that 67.4% of the total number of accidents were caused by pilots without an instrument rating. Further, the total number of flight h was associated with continuing VFR2IMC, with 23.4% of the pilots involved having less than 250 h total flight time, 17.7% (250-500 h), 20.3% (500-1000 h), 13.3% (1000-2000 h), 11.7% (2000-5000 h), 6.3% (5000-10,000 h), and 7% having more than 10,000 h of total flight time [3]. These results suggest that pilots with less than 1000 total flight hours are more likely to continue VFR2IMC in deteriorating weather conditions.…”

“…Accidents caused by pilots who continue a VFR flight into adverse weather conditions have been linked to errors in assessing the situation, as such, the continued flight into IMCs is due to the inaccurate assessment of the hazard [3]. Of the accidents analyzed, 22% were caused by human errors due to diagnostic errors, and these accidents were more serious than those caused by aircraft-handling errors.…”

“…Major et al [3], used a mixed-method approach to identify causal factors that led to VFR2IMC aircraft accidents using data from the NTSB and the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association Air Safety Institute databases. The findings showed that over the ten-year period, there were 1100 weather-related accidents and that the number of accidents classified as VFR2IMC averaged 31.9 per year.…”

“…GA pilots flying into instrument meteorological conditions (IMCs) whilst operating under visual flight rules (VFRs) and being restrained to visual meteorological conditions (VMCs) remains a leading and continuing cause of accidents [3]. According to the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association [4], this is "one of the most consistently lethal mistakes in all of aviation" with 86% of occurrences resulting in fatalities.…”