bbchien
Touchdown! Greaser!
You will find, with the more ratings and more capable aircraft, the decision gets more and more complex.....
Go/No-Go Decision Thread
- Thread starter Ted
- Start date
AdamB
Pre-takeoff checklist
+1000
Ted
The pilot formerly known as Twin Engine Ted
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2007
- Messages
- 29,900
- Display Name
Display name:
iFlyNothing
Which is my point, and the idea behind this thread - share experiences and thought processes that are often skipped over during training and difficult to learn anyway.
gprellwitz
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2005
- Messages
- 12,762
- Location
- Romeoville, IL
- Display Name
Display name:
Grant Prellwitz
To a point. Then you're suddenly flying 747's and 777's, and not only is the decision easier, it's even made by dispatch instead of you!
Ted
The pilot formerly known as Twin Engine Ted
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2007
- Messages
- 29,900
- Display Name
Display name:
iFlyNothing
To a point. Then you're suddenly flying 747's and 777's, and not only is the decision easier, it's even made by dispatch instead of you!
Dispatch can shove it if they want me to take off into a hurricane.
EdFred
Taxi to Parking
I don't launch into KI, and I don't mess around mesos. Small TS are easy enough to avoid if I can get on top. I don't like embedded TS. Other than that, I'm pretty much always a go. My last go/no go decision I launched when the weather was below minimums at my destination (home field) - about a 45 minute flight or so from Milwaukee across the lake, in a single, and I didn't die!!! I shot the approach anyway, and broke out about 50' above them. No AW/SOS on the field, so it was a guessing game based on 3 surrounding TAFs and FA all showing different predicted ceilings. It was one of those 2000' stratus layers so it was smooth and sunny most of the way.
gismo
Touchdown! Greaser!
I think I know you well enough to realize that you also meant to include:
4) I know my passengers won't have a problem with the ride.
While many pilots can almost ignore any turbulence that doesn't result in significant cranial impacts with the cabin roof, all but the most experienced non-pilot passengers are far less tolerant of a bumpy flight, especially one where the bumps continue throughout the flight and some (again, not Ted) pilots fail to realize this until their passengers crawl out of the plane and kiss the ground after landing.
Ted
The pilot formerly known as Twin Engine Ted
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2007
- Messages
- 29,900
- Display Name
Display name:
iFlyNothing
Correct, Lance, thanks for adding as that's a very important point.
When I got back to Williamsport, I was chatting with a couple I know who owns an Aztec as well. The husband is ATP-AMEL, couple thousand hours, very good pilot. The wife is an experienced passenger, but hates bumps. She asked how the flight was and I said "It was pretty bad, you really wouldn't have liked it." She said "When you two [referring to her husband and me] say it's bad then I know it's bad!" Good perspective.
When I got back to Williamsport, I was chatting with a couple I know who owns an Aztec as well. The husband is ATP-AMEL, couple thousand hours, very good pilot. The wife is an experienced passenger, but hates bumps. She asked how the flight was and I said "It was pretty bad, you really wouldn't have liked it." She said "When you two [referring to her husband and me] say it's bad then I know it's bad!" Good perspective.
Hello,
First post here, Very good thread.
I am a CFII with 3600 hours and have been flying 91 corporate for a year now in a C421B and believe it or not I am still a virgin to heavy weather flying, although weather that all the commercial guys are flying in in larger aircraft like mine and up. I consider myself to be proficient on instruments and very knowlageble of the system.
I live in the Monterey bay area of California and it is mostly very fair weather here. All of my flights in the C421 have been in excellent weather other than fog and other than flying a Twin Otter for a skydiving operation The first larger than single engine Cessna aircraft I have piloted.
So now as far as the go/no go here: The clients want to go down to Santa Ana John Wayne with a stop in Santa Maria on the way down on Wed/Thu of next week 1/20 and 1/21 and the weather models look like this.
60 Knot winds at 5,000 and upwards of 70 to 80 knots at 10,000 is the main issue. This is an El Nino enhanced storm system and these usually contain copious amounts of Icing. The freezing level should be above the MDA's and we are fully certified so am not anticipating much of an issue there. My main concern is the turbulence. These winds interacting with terrain can cause severe turbulence and even if it is only moderate plus I worry about the PAX. These people are high level executives and need to make the meeting, the classic dillema. We are also a start up and they have not been flying with us for very long.
Ceilings and visibilities are usually above minimums during these events so that does not look like much of an issue.
http://www.rap.ucar.edu/weather/model/gfs180hr_850_wnd.gif
This is the 850mb forecast chart for winds, as you can see during this flight it is supposed to be very windy at 5,000 feet.
http://www.rap.ucar.edu/weather/model/gfs180hr_sfc_prcp.gif
And a look at copious amounts of precip at our time of landing in LA. This usually means clear ice just above the freezing level.
Not trying to defer this descision to anyone else, I just do not have any experience flying in wind and weather like this. My inclination is to think that if this forecast plays out like predicted the turbulence may be too much. Does anyone have any pilot reports flying aircraft like mine in conditions like this in mountainous terrain.
There could even be imbedded T storms and we do have radar, but I have no experience using it (it's pretty intuative though). Just my luck, nature does not allow me to break into this real flying stuff gradually.
First post here, Very good thread.
I am a CFII with 3600 hours and have been flying 91 corporate for a year now in a C421B and believe it or not I am still a virgin to heavy weather flying, although weather that all the commercial guys are flying in in larger aircraft like mine and up. I consider myself to be proficient on instruments and very knowlageble of the system.
I live in the Monterey bay area of California and it is mostly very fair weather here. All of my flights in the C421 have been in excellent weather other than fog and other than flying a Twin Otter for a skydiving operation The first larger than single engine Cessna aircraft I have piloted.
So now as far as the go/no go here: The clients want to go down to Santa Ana John Wayne with a stop in Santa Maria on the way down on Wed/Thu of next week 1/20 and 1/21 and the weather models look like this.
60 Knot winds at 5,000 and upwards of 70 to 80 knots at 10,000 is the main issue. This is an El Nino enhanced storm system and these usually contain copious amounts of Icing. The freezing level should be above the MDA's and we are fully certified so am not anticipating much of an issue there. My main concern is the turbulence. These winds interacting with terrain can cause severe turbulence and even if it is only moderate plus I worry about the PAX. These people are high level executives and need to make the meeting, the classic dillema. We are also a start up and they have not been flying with us for very long.
Ceilings and visibilities are usually above minimums during these events so that does not look like much of an issue.
http://www.rap.ucar.edu/weather/model/gfs180hr_850_wnd.gif
This is the 850mb forecast chart for winds, as you can see during this flight it is supposed to be very windy at 5,000 feet.
http://www.rap.ucar.edu/weather/model/gfs180hr_sfc_prcp.gif
And a look at copious amounts of precip at our time of landing in LA. This usually means clear ice just above the freezing level.
Not trying to defer this descision to anyone else, I just do not have any experience flying in wind and weather like this. My inclination is to think that if this forecast plays out like predicted the turbulence may be too much. Does anyone have any pilot reports flying aircraft like mine in conditions like this in mountainous terrain.
There could even be imbedded T storms and we do have radar, but I have no experience using it (it's pretty intuative though). Just my luck, nature does not allow me to break into this real flying stuff gradually.
As far as go/no go descisions, I am so used to no going a flight lesson, even IFR when it looks like this since the student always understands and no one ever needs to go anywhere.
Breaking into a new world.
Breaking into a new world.
wabower
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2008
- Messages
- 12,013
- Display Name
Display name:
Wayne
Any old heads around there that you might use as a sounding board? Or even fly with you if you think it's going to be sufficiently snarly to need some help? I have found that most owners are quite willing to have the insurance if the pilot thinks they should buy it.
Hello,
First post here, Very good thread.
I am a CFII with 3600 hours and have been flying 91 corporate for a year now in a C421B and believe it or not I am still a virgin to heavy weather flying, although weather that all the commercial guys are flying in in larger aircraft like mine and up. I consider myself to be proficient on instruments and very knowlageble of the system.
I live in the Monterey bay area of California and it is mostly very fair weather here. All of my flights in the C421 have been in excellent weather other than fog and other than flying a Twin Otter for a skydiving operation The first larger than single engine Cessna aircraft I have piloted.
So now as far as the go/no go here: The clients want to go down to Santa Ana John Wayne with a stop in Santa Maria on the way down on Wed/Thu of next week 1/20 and 1/21 and the weather models look like this.
60 Knot winds at 5,000 and upwards of 70 to 80 knots at 10,000 is the main issue. This is an El Nino enhanced storm system and these usually contain copious amounts of Icing. The freezing level should be above the MDA's and we are fully certified so am not anticipating much of an issue there. My main concern is the turbulence. These winds interacting with terrain can cause severe turbulence and even if it is only moderate plus I worry about the PAX. These people are high level executives and need to make the meeting, the classic dillema. We are also a start up and they have not been flying with us for very long.
Ceilings and visibilities are usually above minimums during these events so that does not look like much of an issue.
http://www.rap.ucar.edu/weather/model/gfs180hr_850_wnd.gif
This is the 850mb forecast chart for winds, as you can see during this flight it is supposed to be very windy at 5,000 feet.
http://www.rap.ucar.edu/weather/model/gfs180hr_sfc_prcp.gif
And a look at copious amounts of precip at our time of landing in LA. This usually means clear ice just above the freezing level.
Not trying to defer this descision to anyone else, I just do not have any experience flying in wind and weather like this. My inclination is to think that if this forecast plays out like predicted the turbulence may be too much. Does anyone have any pilot reports flying aircraft like mine in conditions like this in mountainous terrain.
There could even be imbedded T storms and we do have radar, but I have no experience using it (it's pretty intuative though). Just my luck, nature does not allow me to break into this real flying stuff gradually.
No old heads.
A buddy of mine says he flies in that kind of stuff but he is in a Skywest EMB145. The dillema in a 421 is the climb rate sucks when heavy and on such a short flight climbing to on top is just impractical when the tops are at 240. These storms are thick with stratocu and a LOT of moisture, which means Allot of icing in the tops. Going under with the freezing level at 9000 seems prudent to me, or at a mid altitude in the teens and if the ice overpowers the system I can always go down to the MEA. Problem down there would be all that turbulence w/n 5,000 feet of the mountains.
A buddy of mine says he flies in that kind of stuff but he is in a Skywest EMB145. The dillema in a 421 is the climb rate sucks when heavy and on such a short flight climbing to on top is just impractical when the tops are at 240. These storms are thick with stratocu and a LOT of moisture, which means Allot of icing in the tops. Going under with the freezing level at 9000 seems prudent to me, or at a mid altitude in the teens and if the ice overpowers the system I can always go down to the MEA. Problem down there would be all that turbulence w/n 5,000 feet of the mountains.
Ted
The pilot formerly known as Twin Engine Ted
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2007
- Messages
- 29,900
- Display Name
Display name:
iFlyNothing
Welcome!
I believe that. I have a friend with 8000 hours, flies King Airs and Twin Otters and really knows his stuff. He was asking me (the 600-hour kid) for some tips on dealing with icing, because he hadn't spent a lot of time dealing with it. I said "When I figure them out I'll let you know!" We had a good discussion.
The winds you're talking about sound very similar to winds I flew in a few weeks ago. It was 60 kts 6000-7000, I didn't pay attention much to the winds elsewhere. On landing, winds were 310 @ 22G38. It was one of those trips where I had to drop off someone on a schedule, similar to what you're talking about. It was very bumpy and not a "fun" flight but we made it. You're right that winds like that can produce severe turbulence, but turbulence I've found can be very isolated. One evening, I was flying along in the Aztec with the guys above me (mostly Dash trash) reporting moderate icing and severe turbulence at 8,000-12,000 ft, with their voices noticably shaken. I was happily bumming along at 6,000 ft with a little light chop and no ice (freezing level was about 1000 ft above). ATC would call me up regularly and say "Aztec, are you ok?" "Yep, we're fine!" I think he couldn't figure out how I was fine when these other guys were panicing. Another evening a few weeks ago I was flying along at 6,000 feet getting the snot beat out of me, climbed up to 8,000 and perfectly smooth. Since you have a lot of options with altitude being in the 421, that does help, even if you can't necessarily get above the weather.
Sounds like a really good example of a go/no-go scenario. Since you've got a few days until it actually comes, let us know how it turns out and why.
Also, I haven't seen those graphics you posted before. Do you have a link for where one might find them? Getting wind predictions and things like that that far out would be useful for a lot of the flying I do.
One of the most interesting things with the on-board radar is that it shows you in 3D what the weather is doing. Since you have the advantage of pressurization and turbos, you can climb higher which can sometimes allow you to get above weather. On more than one occasion I've managed to pick an altitude that puts me above (or below) the weather, leaving me with a pretty smooth ride and not much to deal with.
Just my luck, nature does not allow me to break into this real flying stuff gradually.
Your luck sounds much the same as mine!
Last edited:
Ted
The pilot formerly known as Twin Engine Ted
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2007
- Messages
- 29,900
- Display Name
Display name:
iFlyNothing
Oh, I suppose to answer one of your questions I fly in strong winds in my Aztec and don't really think much about it. I'll fly into potential icing conditions so long as I have reason to believe it'll be light with moderate at worst, and then pick an altitude that will minimize my exposure. The Aztec also handles turbulence and ice very well. I don't know much about the 421... other than I want one.
But I also only know about weather out here. In a few weeks I'm flying to Utah (and potentially LA after... not sure yet), but I'm only making the trip if I can get in VFR. A good part of the reason for that is the lack of familiarity with the area, and also the fact that I don't have turbos, i.e. altitude is not that great of an option for me, especially loaded up.
But I also only know about weather out here. In a few weeks I'm flying to Utah (and potentially LA after... not sure yet), but I'm only making the trip if I can get in VFR. A good part of the reason for that is the lack of familiarity with the area, and also the fact that I don't have turbos, i.e. altitude is not that great of an option for me, especially loaded up.
bbchien
Touchdown! Greaser!
Rothbard, go here, in the three to five hours prior to departure http://rucsoundings.noaa.gov/plot_s...a-based plots;hydrometeors=false&start=latest
and that'll give you the three hour prediction for ksmx; you can also get it for SNA. These RUC interpolations of the vertical slice atmosphere are pretty accurate.
If you get temperature= dewpoint on the cold side of the zero line, watch out! If the slope is more negative than the wet adiabiat, it's a day to stay down. It's also pretty good at tellin where the tops are going to approximately be, look fo the divergence between the dry bulb and the wetbulb temps above a convergence.
Check the thermal cloud tops from the NWS satellite and if they match the RUC SkewT plot, that probably IS where the tops are.
The Guru is Scott Dennenstaedt, who posts here with some regularity. His CDs are well worth the coin.
Sign me, once gave order to "prepare to ditch" a P3 in the Bering sea, in a far off galaxy in a a different time....
and that'll give you the three hour prediction for ksmx; you can also get it for SNA. These RUC interpolations of the vertical slice atmosphere are pretty accurate.
If you get temperature= dewpoint on the cold side of the zero line, watch out! If the slope is more negative than the wet adiabiat, it's a day to stay down. It's also pretty good at tellin where the tops are going to approximately be, look fo the divergence between the dry bulb and the wetbulb temps above a convergence.
Check the thermal cloud tops from the NWS satellite and if they match the RUC SkewT plot, that probably IS where the tops are.
The Guru is Scott Dennenstaedt, who posts here with some regularity. His CDs are well worth the coin.
Sign me, once gave order to "prepare to ditch" a P3 in the Bering sea, in a far off galaxy in a a different time....
ifly,
http://www.rap.ucar.edu/weather/
Home page here, the GFS is the longer range and next to the ECMWF (which they don't let us see for some reason) seem to be the main, most consistent 7 day models.
bbchien,
Thanks, I have not seen these skew t's from this site, in fact I have not needed to look at these for a while, very usefull.
Will update, looks like a rare setup for the west coast, possible pineapple express with a twist of polar and a dash of Asia.
http://www.rap.ucar.edu/weather/
Home page here, the GFS is the longer range and next to the ECMWF (which they don't let us see for some reason) seem to be the main, most consistent 7 day models.
bbchien,
Thanks, I have not seen these skew t's from this site, in fact I have not needed to look at these for a while, very usefull.
Will update, looks like a rare setup for the west coast, possible pineapple express with a twist of polar and a dash of Asia.
Great, Thanks, I have not seen this CPC discussion before. I am also getting re familiarized with the skew t-log p charts again. That forecaster looks cold, do you guys have heat in there? Or do you want the forecasters to be more in tune with what is going on outside?
David
Pre-takeoff checklist
Thanks for posting that MOS site. What a great resource!
I'm just reading this thread for the first time after canceling the same flight two days in a row due to icing. It takes very little to persuade me not to go. Canceling yesterday's flight was particularly annoying because it looked like we could have made it but better safe than sorry
I'm just reading this thread for the first time after canceling the same flight two days in a row due to icing. It takes very little to persuade me not to go. Canceling yesterday's flight was particularly annoying because it looked like we could have made it but better safe than sorry
Ted
The pilot formerly known as Twin Engine Ted
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2007
- Messages
- 29,900
- Display Name
Display name:
iFlyNothing
The other night I had a flight down to Charlotte, NC from Albany, NY that I thought would be a good one.
I had another animal transport planned, and was bringing a friend south with me on the trip who also had to get her dog to an appointment at the spay/neuter clinic on time. Checking the MOS forecasts, it looked like it was going to be IFR conditions for a bit more than the last half of the trip, including over some mountainous areas of Virginia and North Carolina (I know, baby hills). The MOS forecasts were reporting very close to minimums at my approximate time of landing.
As it got closer to the flight, the TAFs were reporting IFR ceilings, but in the range of 400-800 ft OVC. While this likely wouldn't work well for the originally planned field (14A - which has a short runway and a GPS approach with minimums of 500), it would work fine for JQF with an ILS down to 200.
Perhaps a bigger concern was icing. Temperatures on the ground for a good portion of the trip were below freezing with freezing rain reported. Icing PIREPs were showing in the 3-4,000 ft range, and in the 8,000+ ft range. I checked out the Skew-Ts for various points along the route, which showed what I suspected - a temperature inversion that had temperatures above freezing from about 5,000-7,000 ft, getting better as we approached Charlotte. Roanoke had the worst Skew-T.
However most showed temperatures more above freezing at 6,000 ft, around 5C or so.
6,000 ft was going to be the best altitude to fly at for sure, and looked like it would keep us out of the ice for the duration of the trip. By the time we got to North Carolina, temperatures would be well above freezing all the way to the ground. My thought was that we might have a few places where we'd get ice, but that it would overall fine, and if we did get any ice we'd be out of it before long. Added into the decision making was that my plane has full de-ice, and the single engine service ceiling at our load would easily keep us at 6,000 in case of an engine failure until we could get to an appropriate airport (barring a good sum of ice simultaneous with an engine failure).
As I figured, we entered the soup over northern Virginia. Temperatures were above freezing the whole way from Albany, even into the night. The lowest temp we saw was 1C. Once we entered the soup I hit the pitot heat, windshield, and props, and left them on for the duration of the trip. Temperatures fluctuated between 1 and 5C, generally around 3C or so. When it got around 1C we'd pick up a very, very thin layer of frost on the boots, which would immediately go away when it hit 2C. By the time we hit North Carolina it was well above freezing, in the high 30s and low 40s (F).
The night IMC with icing around and freezing rain below definitely would've been good reasons to not go. While the trip technically would have been doable without de-ice (I really didn't need it), I personally would not have done it in anything less than a de-iced twin. Even an alternator failure in such a situation would have been problematic in a single, as the avionics were definitely needed (although I do keep a handheld GPS as backup), and a vacuum pump failure wouldn't have been good either, although more managable.
I had another animal transport planned, and was bringing a friend south with me on the trip who also had to get her dog to an appointment at the spay/neuter clinic on time. Checking the MOS forecasts, it looked like it was going to be IFR conditions for a bit more than the last half of the trip, including over some mountainous areas of Virginia and North Carolina (I know, baby hills). The MOS forecasts were reporting very close to minimums at my approximate time of landing.
As it got closer to the flight, the TAFs were reporting IFR ceilings, but in the range of 400-800 ft OVC. While this likely wouldn't work well for the originally planned field (14A - which has a short runway and a GPS approach with minimums of 500), it would work fine for JQF with an ILS down to 200.
Perhaps a bigger concern was icing. Temperatures on the ground for a good portion of the trip were below freezing with freezing rain reported. Icing PIREPs were showing in the 3-4,000 ft range, and in the 8,000+ ft range. I checked out the Skew-Ts for various points along the route, which showed what I suspected - a temperature inversion that had temperatures above freezing from about 5,000-7,000 ft, getting better as we approached Charlotte. Roanoke had the worst Skew-T.
However most showed temperatures more above freezing at 6,000 ft, around 5C or so.
6,000 ft was going to be the best altitude to fly at for sure, and looked like it would keep us out of the ice for the duration of the trip. By the time we got to North Carolina, temperatures would be well above freezing all the way to the ground. My thought was that we might have a few places where we'd get ice, but that it would overall fine, and if we did get any ice we'd be out of it before long. Added into the decision making was that my plane has full de-ice, and the single engine service ceiling at our load would easily keep us at 6,000 in case of an engine failure until we could get to an appropriate airport (barring a good sum of ice simultaneous with an engine failure).
As I figured, we entered the soup over northern Virginia. Temperatures were above freezing the whole way from Albany, even into the night. The lowest temp we saw was 1C. Once we entered the soup I hit the pitot heat, windshield, and props, and left them on for the duration of the trip. Temperatures fluctuated between 1 and 5C, generally around 3C or so. When it got around 1C we'd pick up a very, very thin layer of frost on the boots, which would immediately go away when it hit 2C. By the time we hit North Carolina it was well above freezing, in the high 30s and low 40s (F).
The night IMC with icing around and freezing rain below definitely would've been good reasons to not go. While the trip technically would have been doable without de-ice (I really didn't need it), I personally would not have done it in anything less than a de-iced twin. Even an alternator failure in such a situation would have been problematic in a single, as the avionics were definitely needed (although I do keep a handheld GPS as backup), and a vacuum pump failure wouldn't have been good either, although more managable.
Ted
The pilot formerly known as Twin Engine Ted
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2007
- Messages
- 29,900
- Display Name
Display name:
iFlyNothing
The flight heading out west on Friday seemed like a good one to add.
The trip was a long one, from Edenton, NC (KEDE) to Kanab, UT (KKNB). This was the first day in my long weekend in which I transported a total of 55 dogs. I had made it very clear to all parties involved that this was subject to be canceled or delayed at the last minute if weather did not cooperate.
Specifically, what I was concerned about was weather in the mountains out west. While the weather in the east could just as easily keep me on the ground, having never flown out west did not leave me wanting to have my first flight be going in at night and in IMC. My no-go for New Mexico and west was that I would not go if it didn't look like it was going to be perfect for the trip. Well, a big H resided right on the four corners and visibility and ceiling were forecasted to be clear and a million.
The weather on the eastern half of the country was less good. Directly on my route was heavy snow with significant icing potential, nevermind the fact that the snow would probably shut down most of the runways. Obviously a straight route wouldn't cut it. Delaying a day would make for an easier flight once I got to about Arkansas (it seemed), but all that bad weather was going to come to North Carolina by then, which I didn't want to fly through. So if I was to make the flight on Friday, I had a choice of a northern or southern route. My primary concern with a northern route was that it looked like the weather was going to stretch further north, and potentailly give me more snow issues along a northern route of flight, and add additional miles. The southern route had thunderstorms through Louisiana, but once I hit Texas looked like it would probably be fine. I came to this conclusion mostly using the MOS forecasts, which showed a 30% chance of thunderstorms over Mississippi and Louisiana during the time I was going to fly there, but minimal precipitation over Texas, with a medium overcast that would make for easy ILSs. The area forecasts looked like the tops once I got about halfway through Texas would probably be low enough that I could get on top.
The flight went about as I figured. Through Mississippi and Louisiana I had thunderstorms (especially Mississippi). They were sparse enough that I was able to use the XM to get around the weather, but kept the real radar on to try to see anything developing in front of me. Mostly it wasn't a big deal, however there was enough IMC where embedded thunderstorms could hide. Probably not a good idea to go unless you had both onboard radar and XM.
While flying towards my planned first stop in Louisiana, I saw some very large thunderstorms that were obviously making their way towards the planned stop. I was currently flying through a hole that was going to keep on going to the other side of the storms, and decided that I was going to blast through the hole so that I could have a quick turnaround rather than having to wait some undetermined amount of time for the storms to pass. The XM showed the storms were pretty much over past the hole.
Made it through, landed at the new airport about 50 miles later. A recheck of the weather showed icing sigmets, but didn't show any PIREPs for ice around the areas I was flying through on the next leg of the trip. I figured we might pick some up once we hit the Dallas area (where the temp dipped below the freezing level), but shortly after that was where I figured we'd be able to get above the layer.
Yep, played out as predicted. We took off and were in solid IMC for the next 2.5 hours or so. A bit before Dallas into Texas we started picking up ice very slowly. I kept a close eye on it and looked for all the outs, while continuing to get updates from ATC on where the ice was reported to be and making diversions around those areas. In a few cases, the XM showed areas of precipitation that corresponded to icing areas, so we diverted around those areas. Somewhere west of Dallas we broke out at 6000, but the tops started to climb, so we did as well. I wanted to keep above the layer if possible. Center was kind enough to give us a block altitude, so I just steadily climbed to stay above the clouds. We picked up about 1/2" total, which the boots easily took care of, at least on their surfaces. On the surfaces without boots the ice remained, but it was clean and didn't have a significant effect on performance. Total time in icing conditions was probably no more than about an hour, although such time always feels longer than it is. Still, that gives an idea of how little the overall accumulation was.
We shot the GPS approach into Plainview, TX (KPVW) and landed on their iced over runway from the freezing rain (fortunately a long one with snow on top of it). Fueled up and knocked the remaining ice off, and by then we could already see the skies clearing up in the west. We climbed out and had 0 time in the clouds on the remainder of the trip. I originally hadn't wanted to land in Utah at night, but I figured that if I had any doubt in my mind, I would request the GPS approach and shoot that.
As luck had it, it was not only a perfectly clear night (other than some low fog over Albuquerque and the Grand Canyon), it was the brightest moon of the year, so it was practically like flying in daylight. We saw the airport from 30 miles out, and it was an easy visual approach in.
The first leg of the flight was something that was fairly doable in most aircraft to me, provided you had radar with you, preferably both XM and onboard. The onboard radar is good for showing what's right in front of you, but the XM is what provided me with tactical information for long-term planning, and also planning like seeing that the airport I was planning on landing at was about to get socked in with storms. For the second half, obviously it wouldn't have been doable without a FIKI plane, but it wasn't bad at all.
The trip was a long one, from Edenton, NC (KEDE) to Kanab, UT (KKNB). This was the first day in my long weekend in which I transported a total of 55 dogs. I had made it very clear to all parties involved that this was subject to be canceled or delayed at the last minute if weather did not cooperate.
Specifically, what I was concerned about was weather in the mountains out west. While the weather in the east could just as easily keep me on the ground, having never flown out west did not leave me wanting to have my first flight be going in at night and in IMC. My no-go for New Mexico and west was that I would not go if it didn't look like it was going to be perfect for the trip. Well, a big H resided right on the four corners and visibility and ceiling were forecasted to be clear and a million.
The weather on the eastern half of the country was less good. Directly on my route was heavy snow with significant icing potential, nevermind the fact that the snow would probably shut down most of the runways. Obviously a straight route wouldn't cut it. Delaying a day would make for an easier flight once I got to about Arkansas (it seemed), but all that bad weather was going to come to North Carolina by then, which I didn't want to fly through. So if I was to make the flight on Friday, I had a choice of a northern or southern route. My primary concern with a northern route was that it looked like the weather was going to stretch further north, and potentailly give me more snow issues along a northern route of flight, and add additional miles. The southern route had thunderstorms through Louisiana, but once I hit Texas looked like it would probably be fine. I came to this conclusion mostly using the MOS forecasts, which showed a 30% chance of thunderstorms over Mississippi and Louisiana during the time I was going to fly there, but minimal precipitation over Texas, with a medium overcast that would make for easy ILSs. The area forecasts looked like the tops once I got about halfway through Texas would probably be low enough that I could get on top.
The flight went about as I figured. Through Mississippi and Louisiana I had thunderstorms (especially Mississippi). They were sparse enough that I was able to use the XM to get around the weather, but kept the real radar on to try to see anything developing in front of me. Mostly it wasn't a big deal, however there was enough IMC where embedded thunderstorms could hide. Probably not a good idea to go unless you had both onboard radar and XM.
While flying towards my planned first stop in Louisiana, I saw some very large thunderstorms that were obviously making their way towards the planned stop. I was currently flying through a hole that was going to keep on going to the other side of the storms, and decided that I was going to blast through the hole so that I could have a quick turnaround rather than having to wait some undetermined amount of time for the storms to pass. The XM showed the storms were pretty much over past the hole.
Made it through, landed at the new airport about 50 miles later. A recheck of the weather showed icing sigmets, but didn't show any PIREPs for ice around the areas I was flying through on the next leg of the trip. I figured we might pick some up once we hit the Dallas area (where the temp dipped below the freezing level), but shortly after that was where I figured we'd be able to get above the layer.
Yep, played out as predicted. We took off and were in solid IMC for the next 2.5 hours or so. A bit before Dallas into Texas we started picking up ice very slowly. I kept a close eye on it and looked for all the outs, while continuing to get updates from ATC on where the ice was reported to be and making diversions around those areas. In a few cases, the XM showed areas of precipitation that corresponded to icing areas, so we diverted around those areas. Somewhere west of Dallas we broke out at 6000, but the tops started to climb, so we did as well. I wanted to keep above the layer if possible. Center was kind enough to give us a block altitude, so I just steadily climbed to stay above the clouds. We picked up about 1/2" total, which the boots easily took care of, at least on their surfaces. On the surfaces without boots the ice remained, but it was clean and didn't have a significant effect on performance. Total time in icing conditions was probably no more than about an hour, although such time always feels longer than it is. Still, that gives an idea of how little the overall accumulation was.
We shot the GPS approach into Plainview, TX (KPVW) and landed on their iced over runway from the freezing rain (fortunately a long one with snow on top of it). Fueled up and knocked the remaining ice off, and by then we could already see the skies clearing up in the west. We climbed out and had 0 time in the clouds on the remainder of the trip. I originally hadn't wanted to land in Utah at night, but I figured that if I had any doubt in my mind, I would request the GPS approach and shoot that.
As luck had it, it was not only a perfectly clear night (other than some low fog over Albuquerque and the Grand Canyon), it was the brightest moon of the year, so it was practically like flying in daylight. We saw the airport from 30 miles out, and it was an easy visual approach in.
The first leg of the flight was something that was fairly doable in most aircraft to me, provided you had radar with you, preferably both XM and onboard. The onboard radar is good for showing what's right in front of you, but the XM is what provided me with tactical information for long-term planning, and also planning like seeing that the airport I was planning on landing at was about to get socked in with storms. For the second half, obviously it wouldn't have been doable without a FIKI plane, but it wasn't bad at all.
Ted
The pilot formerly known as Twin Engine Ted
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2007
- Messages
- 29,900
- Display Name
Display name:
iFlyNothing
Here's a good one. This was yesterday's flight to Pennsylvania from Iowa.
The past week has been a long one. At the end of my travels, I was in a different state every night except for one, and was ready to be home. I got dropped off at the airport and started doing my pre-flight planning.
The icing PIREPs were not a good place to start, because they told me that my entire route from 10,000 MSL down to the surface was solid ice. Light to moderate was reported in the same areas at all altitudes. Great.
Of course, the icing PIREPs don't tell the whole story. Looking at the area forecasts and Skew-Ts, it looked like for the first half of the flight tops could easily be as high as FL180. Well, I'm not getting above that, and that may or may not have ice in it. The winds were such that the trip would take about 5 hours non-stop. I carry 6 hours of fuel, but that can easily get eaten into when you have to shoot an ILS (even an easy one) and pick up ice that slows you down.
I looked for a fuel stop in Indiana that would take me away from the Great Lakes (the ice machines that they are). Additinally, that route would allow me to stay below the clouds (mostly OVC030 from Iowa to Indiana). From Indiana, though, I knew I would have to shoot up through the cloud layer to get on top of it, hopefully by 11,000 ft. Of course by 7,000 ft my climb rate really starts to drop off, and climb is the first thing that you lose once you start building up ice. And I was tired, having gotten in late the night before.
Doable? Perhaps. Good idea? Nope, especially not when I had a place to stay in Iowa and the weather for the next day looked much better. So, I made a no-go decision and stayed another night. Having icing along an entire route of flight without a good way to stay out of it is not a good idea, even in a FIKI plane. Generally my criteria is looking at being in it for short periods, and ultimately just getting out of it. If certain altitudes have ice and others don't, I can shoot for the altitudes without ice. When the entire route at all altitudes I can fly at has it, that's when it's time to stay put. Being tired was less of a concern for me, but that's because I know my personal limits with regards to being tired and how it impacts my performance.
I was rewarded by staying another night. Flying home today was perfect - I was above the cloud layer the entire trip (took off into perfect VMC) and had a tailwind, making it home in a bit over 4 hours. I didn't even technically need to file, logging 0.0 actual IMC. That's the flight that one wants to make.
Yes, I actually make no-go decisions. No plane can get you anywhere anytime under any conditions.
The past week has been a long one. At the end of my travels, I was in a different state every night except for one, and was ready to be home. I got dropped off at the airport and started doing my pre-flight planning.
The icing PIREPs were not a good place to start, because they told me that my entire route from 10,000 MSL down to the surface was solid ice. Light to moderate was reported in the same areas at all altitudes. Great.
Of course, the icing PIREPs don't tell the whole story. Looking at the area forecasts and Skew-Ts, it looked like for the first half of the flight tops could easily be as high as FL180. Well, I'm not getting above that, and that may or may not have ice in it. The winds were such that the trip would take about 5 hours non-stop. I carry 6 hours of fuel, but that can easily get eaten into when you have to shoot an ILS (even an easy one) and pick up ice that slows you down.
I looked for a fuel stop in Indiana that would take me away from the Great Lakes (the ice machines that they are). Additinally, that route would allow me to stay below the clouds (mostly OVC030 from Iowa to Indiana). From Indiana, though, I knew I would have to shoot up through the cloud layer to get on top of it, hopefully by 11,000 ft. Of course by 7,000 ft my climb rate really starts to drop off, and climb is the first thing that you lose once you start building up ice. And I was tired, having gotten in late the night before.
Doable? Perhaps. Good idea? Nope, especially not when I had a place to stay in Iowa and the weather for the next day looked much better. So, I made a no-go decision and stayed another night. Having icing along an entire route of flight without a good way to stay out of it is not a good idea, even in a FIKI plane. Generally my criteria is looking at being in it for short periods, and ultimately just getting out of it. If certain altitudes have ice and others don't, I can shoot for the altitudes without ice. When the entire route at all altitudes I can fly at has it, that's when it's time to stay put. Being tired was less of a concern for me, but that's because I know my personal limits with regards to being tired and how it impacts my performance.
I was rewarded by staying another night. Flying home today was perfect - I was above the cloud layer the entire trip (took off into perfect VMC) and had a tailwind, making it home in a bit over 4 hours. I didn't even technically need to file, logging 0.0 actual IMC. That's the flight that one wants to make.
Yes, I actually make no-go decisions. No plane can get you anywhere anytime under any conditions.
tonycondon
Gastons CRO (Chief Dinner Reservation Officer)
it sure helps when you have a nice warm bed to sleep in wherever you are stuck
Ted
The pilot formerly known as Twin Engine Ted
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2007
- Messages
- 29,900
- Display Name
Display name:
iFlyNothing
it sure helps when you have a nice warm bed to sleep in wherever you are stuck
That does make getting stuck easier to cope with for sure.
270win
Filing Flight Plan
New guy here-
I think I might be a bit too conservative...when I had 300hrs TT I used to go if it was minimums or higher. I also did a 0/0 takeoff in a Warrior one night leaving GSP going to PDK. (Yes, that was stupid!) That all changed a few years later, I was sent by our FBO to get the flight school's Arrow which was socked in for several days just 45 minutes from our home base at PDK. Litterally for days it had been below minimums so when it finally got up to 200 3/4, a friend and I took a Warrior to get the Arrow. He kicked me out and I got in and blasted off for PDK. About 1/2 way back it occured to me that it was solid, VERY low IFR for several hours in every direction...then I noticed the building of Atlanta sticking up through the cloud tops below. As I was handed off to Approach they greeted me with, PDK is reporting 100 1/4 and a KA and a Hawker just missed...say intentions. I decided to shoot the approach and I did get in but it was nasty and dark by the time I pulled up to the ramp. I was pretty proud of myself...
The next day the cheif instructor called me to tell me I had to be the "luckiest" guy alive that night. Apparently the airplane had developed a significant oil leak and by the time I got back it had 3 quarts in it...I never saw any indication from the engine that it was bleeding to death. Had I needed to go to an alternate it would have been impossible to get there with that leak. It still makes me shudder to think about losing an engine at night in EXTREMELY low IFR.
Unfortunately, now I almost use VFR as my standards for SE IFR. I can still shoot an ILS to minimums no problem, but I cancel flights all the time now if the weather isn't pretty darn good...The thought of losing the only engine I have and only having 500' or so to find a place to put it down after breaking out is just something I've not been able to shake.
I feel like I'm betting my life that the engine won't quit every time...I do miss the feeling of shooting an ILS to minimums in actual at night though...just not enough to die trying it.
I think I might be a bit too conservative...when I had 300hrs TT I used to go if it was minimums or higher. I also did a 0/0 takeoff in a Warrior one night leaving GSP going to PDK. (Yes, that was stupid!) That all changed a few years later, I was sent by our FBO to get the flight school's Arrow which was socked in for several days just 45 minutes from our home base at PDK. Litterally for days it had been below minimums so when it finally got up to 200 3/4, a friend and I took a Warrior to get the Arrow. He kicked me out and I got in and blasted off for PDK. About 1/2 way back it occured to me that it was solid, VERY low IFR for several hours in every direction...then I noticed the building of Atlanta sticking up through the cloud tops below. As I was handed off to Approach they greeted me with, PDK is reporting 100 1/4 and a KA and a Hawker just missed...say intentions. I decided to shoot the approach and I did get in but it was nasty and dark by the time I pulled up to the ramp. I was pretty proud of myself...
The next day the cheif instructor called me to tell me I had to be the "luckiest" guy alive that night. Apparently the airplane had developed a significant oil leak and by the time I got back it had 3 quarts in it...I never saw any indication from the engine that it was bleeding to death. Had I needed to go to an alternate it would have been impossible to get there with that leak. It still makes me shudder to think about losing an engine at night in EXTREMELY low IFR.
Unfortunately, now I almost use VFR as my standards for SE IFR. I can still shoot an ILS to minimums no problem, but I cancel flights all the time now if the weather isn't pretty darn good...The thought of losing the only engine I have and only having 500' or so to find a place to put it down after breaking out is just something I've not been able to shake.
I feel like I'm betting my life that the engine won't quit every time...I do miss the feeling of shooting an ILS to minimums in actual at night though...just not enough to die trying it.
Me too. I have had too many mechanical things break over my lifetime to trust my butt totally to something mechanical and not leave me much of an out. Even right after a thorough inspection, things can go haywire.
Ted
The pilot formerly known as Twin Engine Ted
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2007
- Messages
- 29,900
- Display Name
Display name:
iFlyNothing
Doesn't sound to me like you're too conservative, sounds to me like you learned an important lesson and were fortunate that you learned it without dying.
There are reasons why a twin that has at least some sort of single engine capability is what I fly these days. I've shot enough approaches down to mins and spent enough time flying over significant areas of VLIFR that having one option when a fan quits is not at all my preference.
Even with two engines and full de-ice, you're sometimes on the ground. Case and point: I'm spending the night in New Hampshire. I don't like the idea of turning into an icile. I'll talk more about it later, my ride's here (AdamB).
270win
Filing Flight Plan
For what it's worth, I'm trying to work a deal on a 402 but I'm not sure if it'll pan out or not. The other big thing is that none of our trips are ever "gotta get there" kinda trips.
My old cheif instructor was a Delta Dagger test pilot back in the day. He told me to look at all of the parameters of the flight, the airplane, weather, my mental and physical state that day etc. and if there was any reason not to go, to ask myself how much not going would effect my life 12 months in the future. He also taught me to try to find a reason not to go, weather, preflight, everything...if there was no reason not to go then go. I think a lot of pilots assume they're going and just check to verify that all is well and go.
I appreciate the positive backup on my go/no go standards. My current criteria doesn't make for exciting hanger flying conversation...but the things I did to change my criteria DO!
Glad to hear you're on the ground and not chancing the ice tonight Ted!
Somorris-
I like to always have several outs, I try to fly like I'm playing chess...what outs do I have if this next move presents challenge X,Y or Z???
My old cheif instructor was a Delta Dagger test pilot back in the day. He told me to look at all of the parameters of the flight, the airplane, weather, my mental and physical state that day etc. and if there was any reason not to go, to ask myself how much not going would effect my life 12 months in the future. He also taught me to try to find a reason not to go, weather, preflight, everything...if there was no reason not to go then go. I think a lot of pilots assume they're going and just check to verify that all is well and go.
I appreciate the positive backup on my go/no go standards. My current criteria doesn't make for exciting hanger flying conversation...but the things I did to change my criteria DO!
Glad to hear you're on the ground and not chancing the ice tonight Ted!
Somorris-
I like to always have several outs, I try to fly like I'm playing chess...what outs do I have if this next move presents challenge X,Y or Z???
Aztec Driver
Line Up and Wait
OK, lets keep hashing go/no go trips. Feel free to chime in with opinions and suggestions.
Equipment:
Non de-iced light twin, full IFR
Pilot:
Current, if not rusty, Instrument rated commercial multi-engine.
Route:
KLNS-KJWN; close to direct, but on low airways. 6000 MEA's for most of the route.
Proposed date and time:
Sunday, March 14, 1800 UTC.
Let's see what everyone comes up with.
Equipment:
Non de-iced light twin, full IFR
Pilot:
Current, if not rusty, Instrument rated commercial multi-engine.
Route:
KLNS-KJWN; close to direct, but on low airways. 6000 MEA's for most of the route.
Proposed date and time:
Sunday, March 14, 1800 UTC.
Let's see what everyone comes up with.
Ted
The pilot formerly known as Twin Engine Ted
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2007
- Messages
- 29,900
- Display Name
Display name:
iFlyNothing
Well Bryon, I'll admit to being a chicken when it comes to flying non de-iced aircraft in potential icing conditions. Basically, if I think I might get ice (other than a descent through a very thin layer) it means the trip is off.
On your route of flight, the temps aloft look like you're hovering right around or slightly below the freezing mark at 6,000 for the whole route of flight. Precip is looking quite probable, along with ceilings that require an instrument approach of some sort. If tomorrow is anything like today, I'd expect a decent amount of instrument flight. And if your luck is anything like mine, the second you're in a cloud below freezing, you'll start building up ice.
Tomorrow the main thing I'd be looking for would be whether or not the clouds are actually thick and as dense as I figure they will. If it's anything more than a quick climb/descent through a layer, I'd probably not be too interested in going (climbs better be really quick). Of course, tomorrow you can also look at the Skew-Ts and get a better idea for what's going on, so tonight's guesses are just that.
This is also just weather, and the bigger issue is always what you're personally comfortable with. Your personal minimums are sometimes more important than what the weather will allow.
I'm in Manchester tonight, and hopefully I'll get home tomorrow, but it should be doable at some point in the Aztec (not looking likely in a non de-iced plane). I'm sure Adam's really hoping that I can get home tomorrow.
On your route of flight, the temps aloft look like you're hovering right around or slightly below the freezing mark at 6,000 for the whole route of flight. Precip is looking quite probable, along with ceilings that require an instrument approach of some sort. If tomorrow is anything like today, I'd expect a decent amount of instrument flight. And if your luck is anything like mine, the second you're in a cloud below freezing, you'll start building up ice.
Tomorrow the main thing I'd be looking for would be whether or not the clouds are actually thick and as dense as I figure they will. If it's anything more than a quick climb/descent through a layer, I'd probably not be too interested in going (climbs better be really quick). Of course, tomorrow you can also look at the Skew-Ts and get a better idea for what's going on, so tonight's guesses are just that.
This is also just weather, and the bigger issue is always what you're personally comfortable with. Your personal minimums are sometimes more important than what the weather will allow.
I'm in Manchester tonight, and hopefully I'll get home tomorrow, but it should be doable at some point in the Aztec (not looking likely in a non de-iced plane). I'm sure Adam's really hoping that I can get home tomorrow.
270win
Filing Flight Plan
Okay, it's 1pm, looking at everything I would not go without any anti/de-ice capability. The ceilings aren't horrible and it appears to be trending toward improvement enroute....it's getting out of PA that would concern me the most. I didn't see any pireps for tops either, that would help.
If the temps were above 0 I'd do it in a full IFR twin...in a single forget it!!!
If the temps were above 0 I'd do it in a full IFR twin...in a single forget it!!!
Aztec Driver
Line Up and Wait
Dang that was a long drive. But the ice threat and the pireps of icing back up my no go decision.
AdamZ
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2005
- Messages
- 14,866
- Location
- Montgomery County PA
- Display Name
Display name:
Adam Zucker
A dang smart decision it was Bryon!
Aztec Driver
Line Up and Wait
Thanks, but that doesn't make it any less brutal. I had an opportunity to use a deiced Aztec, but I just could not be sure there wasn't going to be significant SLD threat, and my wife hates IMC, especially IMC with turbulence and ice. She feels ill with it, and she says I get way too crabby anyway.
The granddaughter was happy to see us, even if it was later than expected.
Aztec Driver
Line Up and Wait
You get back home yet?
Ted
The pilot formerly known as Twin Engine Ted
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2007
- Messages
- 29,900
- Display Name
Display name:
iFlyNothing
Those all sound to me like good reasons to stay on the ground.
Yeah, I looked at the weather coming home from Manchester yesterday around noon and it looked like other than some nasty turbulence coming out of Manchester it should be fine. It was pretty bumpy until 4,000 ft, then smoothed out for the rest of the trip. No ice to speak of, either.
flyersfan31
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2006
- Messages
- 14,269
- Display Name
Display name:
Freiburgfan31
Yesterday mid-morning I was planning to fly up/back to Quonset RI. Windy, wet, fairly low clgs but not to mins. It would be bumpy, possible ice, but doable. Forecast for possible CB but nothing really showing up. As I start pre-flight, it starts to pour, but clgs still ok. Then, as I'm loading new databases before start-up, lightning and crash of thunder. Uh oh. Disbelief Brains sez, well, time to go. Reality Brain sez, you don't have radar, you don't know where that came from, and those babies are embedded because you won't be able to see a thing. Walked back to the FBO to check radar. Enough returns to give pause.
Stood outside for a while talking to one of the lineguys. Seemed to be clearing, even though my analysis told me it would take an hour or more for the CBs to clear out. I'm thinking to myself "Hmm, it's clearing, maybe I should go." Another flash of lightning and crash of thunder chased that stupid thought away.
Stood outside for a while talking to one of the lineguys. Seemed to be clearing, even though my analysis told me it would take an hour or more for the CBs to clear out. I'm thinking to myself "Hmm, it's clearing, maybe I should go." Another flash of lightning and crash of thunder chased that stupid thought away.
Ted
The pilot formerly known as Twin Engine Ted
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2007
- Messages
- 29,900
- Display Name
Display name:
iFlyNothing
Yesterday was not a fun day to fly at all.
By the way, I found out why I never get the good routing going over NY. Apparently the JFK routing is a single engine route only, and twins they either route over the water or up the west side by HAR or LHY. Maybe I should tell them I'm a PA-24 instead of a PA-23...
By the way, I found out why I never get the good routing going over NY. Apparently the JFK routing is a single engine route only, and twins they either route over the water or up the west side by HAR or LHY. Maybe I should tell them I'm a PA-24 instead of a PA-23...
AdamZ
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2005
- Messages
- 14,866
- Location
- Montgomery County PA
- Display Name
Display name:
Adam Zucker
I was once trying a case in Williamsport and I had to travel from Montgomery County up to Williamsport quite a bit before and during the trial. I flew when I could but I have to say that when I made the nogo well not no go but no fly decision, I got a great deal of satisfaction when I got up to Williamsport after 3 hour drive in my mazda and saw all the mountains enveloped in thick ice bearing clouds
Ted
The pilot formerly known as Twin Engine Ted
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2007
- Messages
- 29,900
- Display Name
Display name:
iFlyNothing
Wow, kinda sad it's been almost 2 years since anyone's posted to this thread.
The idea with this thread initially was that people post some good go or no-go decisions they made, with the reasons behind it and the outcome.
Today, I made a No-Go.
Yeah, I know, who is this person and what has he done with Ted? Well, even I make no-gos sometimes.
The trip was a relatively routine dog flight from IPT to Rutherfordton, NC (KFQD), up to Newport, RI (KUUU), and then back home.
KFQD is usually the problem in this case. If Newport has problems, I can go to Providence, which isn't much problem. I've made the call to go there instead a few times, and told the receiving shelter with enough notice that they just drove there to meet me. No problem. The sending shelter, however, has KFQD as their closest airport (well, their 2nd closest - the actual closest doesn't even have approaches at all), with several hours drive to any other airport. It's not very well situated. The approaches are two GPS approaches and a LOC approach. In flying there probably about 10 times, the biggest problem is the clouds. Since the approaches don't get you down that low and the area is subject to low clouds and poor visibility, it can be difficult to get in. Going missed and going somewhere else ends up costing a lot of extra money (which means we have to raise more), so that's cause to cancel the trip unless I have good reason to believe I'll get in.
Checking the TAFs for the area (KAVL, KHKY, KCLT, KGSP) last night, it looked like the forecast was for about 2000-2500 AGL ceilings. That's plenty easy to get in. Checking the MOS forecasts, it looked like it was forecasted in the 1000-3000 ft range. However, 1000 ft is lower than I want to be, seeing as there's nothing reliable for that airport. While it could be in the middle of that 1000-3000 ft range, I had a feeling it might not be...
So then I checked the Skew-Ts. These showed that, as the day progressed, the Temp/Dew Point lines were going to converge, with a decreasing ceiling, right about 1000 AGL upon my time of arrival:
So now, here we are, pretty much at the time I'd be arriving, and here's the weather at the surrounding airports (again, the airports AWOS when I called reported ceiling and visibility as "missing").
[FONT=Monospace,Courier]KAVL 261454Z 17005KT 10SM OVC011 12/08 A3008 RMK AO2 SLP177 T01170083 58007[/FONT]
[FONT=Monospace,Courier]KGSP 261453Z 00000KT 10SM OVC008 12/08 A3008 RMK AO2 RAE08 SLP182 P0000 60000 T01170078 58008[/FONT]
[FONT=Monospace,Courier]KHKY 261453Z 00000KT 10SM OVC014 11/06 A3009 RMK AO2 SLP175 T01110056 58005[/FONT]
[FONT=Monospace,Courier]KCLT 261430Z 19006KT 2SM BR BKN004 OVC007 12/10 A3012 RMK AO2 SFC VIS 5[/FONT]
That's pretty close to minimums on the approaches. Could I have gotten in? Maybe. Given the visibility over the Aztec's nose (poor) and the features of the airport, it can be quite difficult to break out and see the runway reliably. The 310 would be better, simply because the nose leaves you a grand view out onto the world.
In this case, the en-route weather wasn't the problem. I didn't have concerns about getting back in at home, getting in at Newport. I wasn't concerned about icing, thunderstorms, or any of the like. It just came down to a simple concern about not being able to get in at my intended airport. And, given the fact that an alternate airport isn't practical in this case, I'm sitting in the kitchen drinking coffee, and watching the bird try to destroy the kitchen.
The idea with this thread initially was that people post some good go or no-go decisions they made, with the reasons behind it and the outcome.
Today, I made a No-Go.
Yeah, I know, who is this person and what has he done with Ted? Well, even I make no-gos sometimes.
The trip was a relatively routine dog flight from IPT to Rutherfordton, NC (KFQD), up to Newport, RI (KUUU), and then back home.
KFQD is usually the problem in this case. If Newport has problems, I can go to Providence, which isn't much problem. I've made the call to go there instead a few times, and told the receiving shelter with enough notice that they just drove there to meet me. No problem. The sending shelter, however, has KFQD as their closest airport (well, their 2nd closest - the actual closest doesn't even have approaches at all), with several hours drive to any other airport. It's not very well situated. The approaches are two GPS approaches and a LOC approach. In flying there probably about 10 times, the biggest problem is the clouds. Since the approaches don't get you down that low and the area is subject to low clouds and poor visibility, it can be difficult to get in. Going missed and going somewhere else ends up costing a lot of extra money (which means we have to raise more), so that's cause to cancel the trip unless I have good reason to believe I'll get in.
Checking the TAFs for the area (KAVL, KHKY, KCLT, KGSP) last night, it looked like the forecast was for about 2000-2500 AGL ceilings. That's plenty easy to get in. Checking the MOS forecasts, it looked like it was forecasted in the 1000-3000 ft range. However, 1000 ft is lower than I want to be, seeing as there's nothing reliable for that airport. While it could be in the middle of that 1000-3000 ft range, I had a feeling it might not be...
So then I checked the Skew-Ts. These showed that, as the day progressed, the Temp/Dew Point lines were going to converge, with a decreasing ceiling, right about 1000 AGL upon my time of arrival:
So now, here we are, pretty much at the time I'd be arriving, and here's the weather at the surrounding airports (again, the airports AWOS when I called reported ceiling and visibility as "missing").
[FONT=Monospace,Courier]KAVL 261454Z 17005KT 10SM OVC011 12/08 A3008 RMK AO2 SLP177 T01170083 58007[/FONT]
[FONT=Monospace,Courier]KGSP 261453Z 00000KT 10SM OVC008 12/08 A3008 RMK AO2 RAE08 SLP182 P0000 60000 T01170078 58008[/FONT]
[FONT=Monospace,Courier]KHKY 261453Z 00000KT 10SM OVC014 11/06 A3009 RMK AO2 SLP175 T01110056 58005[/FONT]
[FONT=Monospace,Courier]KCLT 261430Z 19006KT 2SM BR BKN004 OVC007 12/10 A3012 RMK AO2 SFC VIS 5[/FONT]
That's pretty close to minimums on the approaches. Could I have gotten in? Maybe. Given the visibility over the Aztec's nose (poor) and the features of the airport, it can be quite difficult to break out and see the runway reliably. The 310 would be better, simply because the nose leaves you a grand view out onto the world.
In this case, the en-route weather wasn't the problem. I didn't have concerns about getting back in at home, getting in at Newport. I wasn't concerned about icing, thunderstorms, or any of the like. It just came down to a simple concern about not being able to get in at my intended airport. And, given the fact that an alternate airport isn't practical in this case, I'm sitting in the kitchen drinking coffee, and watching the bird try to destroy the kitchen.
Attachments
Last edited: