An excercise for instrument pilots

[Aztec Driver]

The flight:
KLNS > KINT
Time 04/01/2011 1330 Z
Aircraft: "somewhat" de-iced Piper Aerostar. New boots all around, prop de-ice, alcohol windshield.

122 kt climb AS; 750-1000 fpm with the expected load. 10,000 foot limit.

Go-nogo? What route and altitude? See if you folks all jive with me.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Before I even look at the weather... What's your climb/descent profile look like (rates & speeds), and how high can you go?

 

[Aztec Driver]

Before I even look at the weather... What's your climb/descent profile look like (rates & speeds), and how high can you go?

original post edited.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

The flight:
KLNS > KINT
Time 04/01/2011 1330 Z
Aircraft: "somewhat" de-iced Piper Aerostar. New boots all around, prop de-ice, alcohol windshield.

122 kt climb AS; 750-1000 fpm with the expected load. 10,000 foot limit.

Go-nogo? What route and altitude? See if you folks all jive with me.

So, I'm presuming a non-pressurized Aerostar then, and a Part 135 passenger-carrying flight...

I punched in KLNS KINT into ForeFlight and hit "ATC Routes" - It gave me LRP DELRO V39 at 8000 feet, with no specified airway exit - Presumably that's to keep you out of the way of Potomac Approach, so you could probably head direct after Martinsburg (MRB) VOR. However, you don't have many options WRT altitude - For direct MRB -> KINT you'd be able to go at either 8000 or 10,000 (lots of 6500-foot OROCAs along that route). If you add MRB V143 GSO to the route, you can *mostly* stay at 6000 - There's a 14-mile chunk of airway just south of Montebello (MOL) with a 6400-foot MEA.

Weather in the area of the destination looks pretty good - For your arrival, a bit breezy but VFR with SCT040 and P6SM. For the departure, your weather looks like crap. -RASN concerns me a bit - precip that can't make up its mind what it's gonna be is the kind of stuff that makes ice, in my mostly-uninformed opinion (that is, when I see that stuff I stay on the ground). If your pax are OK with it being a "game time decision" then it's worth waiting to see what actually happens.

Anyway, it appears that you're going to be in the muck the first half of the trip no matter what - Tops are forecast in the neighborhood of 15,000, and if TAF's are to be believed, you might pop out the bottoms around KCHO or afterwards. Temps aloft along the route vary from -2 to -10 at 6,000 or -6 to -13 at 9,000. Freezing levels 1,000-3,000 along the entire route.

Not sure what you mean by "somewhat de-iced." Sounds like you have all the components to me? Of course, the Aerostar has that wing that looks something like a knife, so I would imagine that it doesn't take much ice for it to really not work well? How much icing experience do you have in the plane, and how does it handle ice? Either way, since you'll be in the muck for probably half the trip, and you don't have a whole lot of places to go if you do end up picking up a lot of ice, I'd lean toward a no-go, though if you can save the decision for as late as possible, hopefully PIREPs will tell you the story. If you decide it's a "go" I would think that going as high as possible (10K in this case) is probably the best bet, at least until you get to the point where the lower MEA's meet improving weather, like CLYFF or ELLON.

FWIW, the icing products show low risk of SLD, and somewhere between 25-50% chance of moderate icing at some altitude. Skew-T for LNS would seem to indicate that the tops forecast is correct. Probably gonna get ugly in the climb, but temps at 10K about -13C.

Anyway... Kinda dicey IMO. If you were pressurized and could get on top, maybe it'd be a different story, but between this being a mission to get somewhere and only having 8K and 10K available for altitude, combined with the likelihood of being in the muck for 45 minutes or so with no good options...

So, I've laid it out there... Now it's time for Scott D to come along and tell me I'm wrong. I look forward to the learning experience, thanks for posting this!

 

[bbchien]

Cold side of a very moist cyclone. If you can get to 15K where the temp will be -18 or so, no ice- see the FIP at 12 and 15K. The Skew Ts for 0600 local don't look good yet for LNS so it really is a matter of "getting on top".

If your 135 op specs prohibit known ice, get the pax to wear O2 or cancel. A couple hours later, you may be okay at 9K.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Another potential route option: KLNS ENO V16 RIC V20 SBV V266 GSO KINT, if you can get it from ATC anyway - It starts out shooting between the PHL and BWI airspaces, but then takes you farther from the mountains but closer to the water. That does give you 6000 and 4000 as altitude options as well.

It does not, however, improve the weather picture much, it simply gives you more altitude options. Temps aloft will be warmer, so on this route low might be better than high.

I am also assuming for all of this that you're GPS-equipped.

Let's see what the PIREPs say in the morning!

 

[GMascelli]

Just a quick look……I enjoy the planning almost as much as the flight. Good Post Bryon!

I gave this a look last night and thought that my route of choice would be a bit longer but temps and wx looked better east of DC than the west side. This morning, while finishing up my second medium tea from dunkin donuts and giving wx a quick look I would take the western route LRP V143 LEAKS V20 PROVE at 8000. A 1330 start still has you in the crap until Martinsburg so a delay wouldn’t hurt my feelings. Then again I am not flying for hire and this is supposed to be fun flying for me.

Unfortunately I have to get back to work, so no more flying through others adventures for me today. Looking out my office window it's ugly wet with some snow mixed in at times. I would be happy to drive rather than fly it today!

Ok, back to playing with my airplane models on my desk and making airplane noises….and somewhere in that mix I’ll get a few contract estimates out. Stay dry...stay safe!

 

[bbchien]

Pretty icy up to at least 13,000 both at 1300 and 1400Z at LNS....Ceilings too low to run under, and surface perilously close to Zero.....

If I HAD to go somewhere in a FIKI ship, I'd limb on top and wear O2. At about 1730Z I'll be passing through at 15000.

 

[Ted]

Radar's not looking bad, and all the icing PIREPs are showing eastern PA. Yes, getting on top would be best. I'd probably try for 10,000 or higher if possible.

FlightAware says Bryon's in the air now. Looks like it might not be the most fun thing in the world, but he should get through it fine.

 

[jason]

Radar's not looking bad, and all the icing PIREPs are showing eastern PA. Yes, getting on top would be best. I'd probably try for 10,000 or higher if possible.

FlightAware says Bryon's in the air now. Looks like it might not be the most fun thing in the world, but he should get through it fine.

Looks like he's just a few miles out at this point. I guess that answers that.

 

[Aztec Driver]

OK, so you all know I went. I'll give you my rundown.

On top was not an option as our pt 135 ops limit it to 10K.

Forecasts last night and this morning put a very large chance of light to moderate icing all over the route until after MRB.
TAFS showed ovc020 over most of the area, with no tops reports.
The radar, however, looked like things were improving at around launch time.
Precipitation slowed and almost stopped by launch time.
Ceiling was 1700-2000 at time of launch, enough to allow a return if there were any problems.
I did have the benefit of a pilot report from a company plane on a trip from LNS to CXY, showing no ice and clear on top at 4000.

I launched and climbed to 6000. No Ice at all, and mostly in the clear on top. After MRB I started to pick up some ice at the tops, so I climbed to 8000 for a clear ride the rest of the way.

Thanks for the discussion. I do have experience with ice, but am uncomfortable with it, as well as miserable IMC. I usually get just trace or light icing, with the exception of hitting freezing rain once and having to divert and land. I wanted to see what others thought as I worked it out for myself. Being a charter pilot, my decisions get a little more difficult, because the flights are not for my pleasure.

Maybe after I do enough of these kinds of flights, I might get comfortable with them.

 

[GMascelli]

.....Thanks for the discussion. I do have experience with ice, but am uncomfortable with it, as well as miserable IMC. I usually get just trace or light icing, with the exception of hitting freezing rain once and having to divert and land. I wanted to see what others thought as I worked it out for myself. Being a charter pilot, my decisions get a little more difficult, because the flights are not for my pleasure. Maybe after I do enough of these kinds of flights, I might get comfortable with them.

Bryon,

Thanks for posting. Fun stuff working through the planning and getting to see the final decision and comparing your flight to what my thoughts were. Besides, I sat looking out the window nice and dry while you got to fly in the soup....... AND...you gave us a PIREP to follow up.

 

[Ted]

Interesting that the OpSpecs limit you to 10,000 ft max - is that just for your operation? I'd think that should get removed for a number of reasons.

It sounds like what you were looking at was pretty typical. Glad you made it there fine. More icing PIREPs in the area on the flight home, but still looks like you should be able to do just fine (assuming you're getting home tonight).

Icing takes some practice to get comfortable with.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I launched and climbed to 6000. No Ice at all, and mostly in the clear on top.

Well. So much for forecasts.

 

[Aztec Driver]

Interesting that the OpSpecs limit you to 10,000 ft max - is that just for your operation? I'd think that should get removed for a number of reasons.

It sounds like what you were looking at was pretty typical. Glad you made it there fine. More icing PIREPs in the area on the flight home, but still looks like you should be able to do just fine (assuming you're getting home tonight).

Icing takes some practice to get comfortable with.

Hoping to head back home around 21Z. Lots of pireps for light to mod icing, but I should be able to top them at 9K, and only deal with some ice in the descent. Looks like a doable ceiling at LNS at arrival time. Of course, that relies on forecasts, and we know from this morning how accurate they can be.

Practice with ice is not really a nice thing. Most times it is benign, but it only takes once to scare the crap out of you.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Interesting that the OpSpecs limit you to 10,000 ft max - is that just for your operation? I'd think that should get removed for a number of reasons.

That's the part 135 non-oxygen limit. 14 CFR 135.89(a). Depending on how the airplane is equipped, 135.157(a) may preclude getting approved to fly with a mask anyway.

 

[Ted]

Practice with ice is not really a nice thing. Most times it is benign, but it only takes once to scare the crap out of you.

All good pilots know that, at least once, we survived on sheer luck. Yet, we keep going, hopefully smarter from the experience, and knowing how to get to the point where we survive less on luck and more on skill.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Practice with ice is not really a nice thing. Most times it is benign, but it only takes once to scare the crap out of you.

Ice always scares the crap out of me. Then again, I'm not flying de-iced airplanes.

I remember those pics of the Aztec. I'da been scared of that too.

 

[Ted]

Ice always scares the crap out of me. Then again, I'm not flying de-iced airplanes.

I remember those pics of the Aztec. I'da been scared of that too.

Yes, but then the question is what caused the ice, and why was it as bad as it was? What the practice should give you is some more information to help you get a better handle on what to expect. If you expect it, it shouldn't be as scary. Unless it's really, really bad, in which case that's another story.

Edit: And yes, those pictures of his Aztec after landing were pretty frightening.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Yes, but then the question is what caused the ice, and why was it as bad as it was? What the practice should give you is some more information to help you get a better handle on what to expect. If you expect it, it shouldn't be as scary. Unless it's really, really bad, in which case that's another story.

It's never been that bad - But without boots, it's a bit harder to get rid of, and always a bit nerve-wracking. The only time it wasn't scary was when I got a bit on a climb through a relatively thin layer to beautiful clear smooth sunny sky on top where it all sublimated off in fairly short order, and I knew the destination was VFR.

 

[Ted]

It's never been that bad - But without boots, it's a bit harder to get rid of, and always a bit nerve-wracking. The only time it wasn't scary was when I got a bit on a climb through a relatively thin layer to beautiful clear smooth sunny sky on top where it all sublimated off in fairly short order, and I knew the destination was VFR.

Well, you know my thoughts regarding your flight in icing. I was referring to people who fly planes properly equipped.

 

[Aztec Driver]

The flight back was more uneventful. Got some ice in the descent from 9000, but nothing of any consequence.

Actually got more ice on the trip from PIT to LNS on Wed afternoon than I got yesterday am. The lousy weather was just starting to move in, and i got off the ground just before the really bad icing started. The airliners were all getting de-iced before takeoff by the time I left. It was still above freezing, just wet snow that melted on contact with anything and rain. Any longer and I would have had to stay on the ground.

This exercise may not help with my trips with the Twinkie, though. Although there was an enormous chance for icing forecast, little to nothing materialized. How many flights have I cancelled or postponed due to forecasted chance of ice and no ice protection, that I could have made? On the other hand, with no ice protection, I have no desire to go up and actually find ice and wonder how I am going to see through the windscreen to land.

I knew how well the Aztec handled in ice. I have no real knowledge of how an Aerostar handles ice. Not well, I would imagine, but I do not know. I know the windshield de-ice is nearly an anecdote. I have found it is best to only use it if necessary to land. Any other time, it is just a waste of alcohol.

 

[SkyHog]

Wait....dammit, you were in town, and I didn't get a chance to meet ya.

Next time you're in KINT, let me know! As a fat guy, I know my way around good restaurants!

 

[Aztec Driver]

Wait....dammit, you were in town, and I didn't get a chance to meet ya.

Next time you're in KINT, let me know! As a fat guy, I know my way around good restaurants!

I ate at Jimmy the Greek at a little mall. Nice local flair. Packed with people.
Last week, I ate at Meltdown. Not a bad place either, but as the name suggests, everything has cheese, which I am not a huge fan of.
Either myself or my boss will likely be there every fews weeks all summer.

 

[Ted]

This exercise may not help with my trips with the Twinkie, though. Although there was an enormous chance for icing forecast, little to nothing materialized. How many flights have I cancelled or postponed due to forecasted chance of ice and no ice protection, that I could have made? On the other hand, with no ice protection, I have no desire to go up and actually find ice and wonder how I am going to see through the windscreen to land.

I think you have the right idea here. The Twinkie doesn't have the necessary equipment. While the Aerostar won't handle ice as well as the Aztec, it does have other advantages in terms of extra power and speed. The Aztec can slog through it better, the Aerostar can probably get out of it better. The 310 is similar, although I imagine the Aerostar handles ice worse than the 310.

There are probably trips you canceled with the Twinkie that you could have made, but the reality is you just don't know. But what you would have known quickly would have been if your guess that "Egh, it's probably not bad" was wrong.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

This exercise may not help with my trips with the Twinkie, though. Although there was an enormous chance for icing forecast, little to nothing materialized. How many flights have I cancelled or postponed due to forecasted chance of ice and no ice protection, that I could have made? On the other hand, with no ice protection, I have no desire to go up and actually find ice and wonder how I am going to see through the windscreen to land.

I was surprised when I read in that article Mari linked to that even when all the "right" conditions exist for icing, it only materializes 40 percent of the time. Then, there's the times when icing *isn't* forecast, and it appears anyway. So, those of us who fly non-FIKI airplanes just get to sit around on the ground a lot during the winter. I guess that gives us time to chair-fly an icing encounter so we stay good at getting the heck out of it when it does happen unforecast.