Breaking the Accident Chain

[flyingcheesehead]

On the other hand, if you had pushed to descend in the down flow (get out of it quickly - minimize the loss) . And pulled to climb in the up flow (get max altitude (that can be converted to speed), max time in lift) you would have arrived sooner and used less fuel.

But, of course, that would be contrary to the "maintain constant altitude for no apparent reason" rule.

No apparent reason? Try FAR 91.159:

§ 91.159 VFR cruising altitude or flight level.

Except while holding in a holding pattern of 2 minutes or less, or while turning, each person operating an aircraft under VFR in level cruising flight more than 3,000 feet above the surface shall maintain the appropriate altitude or flight level prescribed below, unless otherwise authorized by ATC:

(a) When operating below 18,000 feet MSL and—

(1) On a magnetic course of zero degrees through 179 degrees, any odd thousand foot MSL altitude +500 feet (such as 3,500, 5,500, or 7,500); or

(2) On a magnetic course of 180 degrees through 359 degrees, any even thousand foot MSL altitude +500 feet (such as 4,500, 6,500, or 8,500).

 

[dmccormack]

And BTW: Don't hesitate to make continent-jumping VFR flights. With today's technology, a 1000 nm cross country is only slightly more adventuresome than a 50 mile one was just a few years ago.

Just think of it as a series of ten 100-mile flights, and you'll do fine. The country is just waiting for you to explore it!

I think the lower, slower airplanes of yesteryear were more suitable for long XC flights... as long as time isn't a factor .

At 70 MPH ground speed it takes nearly three minutes to fly 3 miles -- plenty of time to see obstacles or decide to land if the clouds are lowering. And you won't be tempted to do some half-baked instrument flying with just a tach and a compass.

If you want GA to be transportation, get the IR, have an airplane that's fully instrument capable, and use it.

If you're flying for the journey, and are not bound to a schedule, please do fly VFR low enough to smell the fresh-mown hay.

Just avoid the dangerous nexus betwixt the two -- VFR only pilot trying to be self Air Transport service. That's a recipe for badness.

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

No apparent reason? Try FAR 91.159:

Irrelevant

person operating an aircraft under VFR in level cruising flight

If you are working wave you are, by definition, not in level cruising flight.

 

[Doggtyred]

In this case, the developing chain was long and insidious..

5. Wind. I will be facing a gusty 30-knot crosswind in Ingleside, our destination ahead. At the end of a long flight, in diminishing light, with low fuel deteriorating ceilings and visibility.

6. Get-There-Itis. We prepositioned our motor home on the island, and our truck at the airport. Atlas' nice, new hangar is all ready for him. All we have to do is just press on sixty more miles -- only 60! -- and save the hassle and expense of a motel and rental car. It's just SO close...

Jay.. Its been fogging in on the upper Texas coast the past two days.

You made the right choice. And it beats trying to fly back to Victoria on fumes after turning around in a fogbank.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Irrelevant



If you are working wave you are, by definition, not in level cruising flight.

I'd like to see an interpretation on that - I could see the FAA saying that "Level" means "Not climbing to or descending from your final cruising altitude." Could go either way - But I bet if you got in the way of an IFR aircraft or caused any issues, you might not win that battle.