Talk:Instrument rating in the United States

Operations requiring an instrument rating
I changed it back to what it was before, as it is quite legal to operate an aircraft in class G airspace in weather below VFR minimums without an IFR clearance. An instrument rating (and a complete lack of sense) is required for such operation, though whether you could actually call that "operating under instrument flight rules" (which to me implies an IFR clearance) is debatable.

On a related note, this article needs some serious cleanup, and when someone (probably me) gets around to it, I don't think this paragraph will be an issue any longer.--chris.lawson 04:43, 18 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't think your assumption that 'IFR' implies an IFR clearance is correct - specifically in Class G operations under IMC, IFR flight is legal (though not very sensible), but will receive no ATC clearance. Thus the wording should be: "A pilot must have an instrument rating in order to act as Pilot in Command of a flight under IFR. The rating is also required:...". The part before the 'also' specifically includes Class G IMC operations. Crum375 05:39, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Technically one can still fly IFR without an "Instrument Rating" in the limited case that they hold a Commercial license and are flying an airship. This might be splitting hairs.

There is no distinction in this article between airplane and helicopter instrument ratings. Also it might be noted that in recent years the FAA has made a distinction between single and multiengine airplanes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.169.14.9 (talk) 14:24, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Cleanup?
I'm removing the cleanup tag because it looks OK and there is no description on this talk page about what needs further cleanup. RJFJR (talk) 14:50, 14 August 2011 (UTC)