Video SR22 shooting approaches in fog, icing and heavy snow.

P

PaulS

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
May 29, 2007
Messages
14,038
Location
New England
Display Name
Display name:
PaulS
Just found this on YouTube, I have an opinion but would like to hear some more experienced thoughts on this.

 
Looks like another day in the office.

What was the temperature? What was the icing condition..... snow, freezing fog, super cooled water droplets?

When I was on top of my IFR game that approach probably would not have bothered me...... much.
 
This wasn't me, but is this really weather you want to go out and practice in?
 
No comment on the siteview at minimums, RVR, and runway ice. But in the SR22T CHT it's a nogo below 240f. I assume there are min CHTs for the SR22 also. He was below that for much of the approach and dropped to 220f at touchdown. He also failed to changed his BARO to the field setting when the controller gave it to him. His was showing a higher setting.
 
Obviously a very capable aircraft.

I've seen a guy go fly practice approaches in a deiced Mooney in similar conditions. The same guy would go into IMC over the mountains. Some people have higher risk tolerance than others.
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
not a lot of room for error there
Click to expand...
The words freezing rain and freezing fog keep me on the ground. I don't really care if other folks can fly in it. That said I have no problem flying an approach to minimums and going missed. I did that my first time in actual IMC.
 
No way in hell. Even in my FIKI bird. And he is just doing it for fun.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
thanks for the case study video on risk homeostasis! Remember children, SV is not part of the "runway environment" at 100'....:D
 
Hmmmm... Did anyone see the lights after he called them?
 
Apparently he is seventeen years old, owns the airplane.
 
Cool I learned some IFR stuff from that video.....u must see the runway at minimums +20 seconds or so.
 
He might not live to 18 if he keeps it up...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
This is good practice but on the Cirrus with Synthetic Vision you can see the runway. Try that without it.
 
He claimed he had the lights, I didn't see em... And the RVR was reported below minimums... and snow and freezing fog? That's trusting the FIKI a bit too much.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
He claimed he had the lights, I didn't see em...
Click to expand...

The camera probably makes it seem worse than it was. Low light and all.


From the description: "Approach lights are very hard to see due to the camera. Runway came into sight just below 100' AG"
 
Even if he did see em, he was up in harsh icing weather with the reported weather at or below minimums and he is just tooling around for fun?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Just because we can't see the lights in the vid doesn't mean he couldn't see them.

Not an approach I'd do personally. I wouldn't even be in the air with those conditions. But this was interesting to watch.
 
weilke said:
The only thing questionable is that he would put it on youtube for the peanut gallery to comment.
Click to expand...
Really? The only thing questionable about that whole thing was the posting? You don't think there was a lot of risk taken on there? I couldn't have done what he did in my work airplane and it's fully Cat III capable. When people ask why GA has a much higher accident rate than the airlines, someone always bring up the idea of "well, if we just treated our GA decision making like the airlines do, we'd be better off." Part 91 is much less restrictive than Part 121, and I'm glad it is. It should be. But, Part 121 has some risk mitigation language written into the regulations to provide an extra layer of safety. In this case, we couldn't even start that approach with RVR reported at 1400. Then, he lands in +SN, and it sounds like he's going to go takeoff again in +SN & FZFG. You don't think that there was some unnecessary risk taken on here, for what?
 
I don't know anything about flying IFR but wow that was badass (even if it was stupid of him). Those Cirrus' are incredible machines. Must have a rich dad to own one of those at 17. Sub'd his channel

What is RVR?
 
CC268 said:
I don't know anything about flying IFR but wow that was badass (even if it was stupid of him). Those Cirrus' are incredible machines. Must have a rich dad to own one of those at 17.

What is RVR?
Click to expand...

Any airplane with deice and a good autopilot could do this. And a pilot with really extremely high tolerance for risk. Not anything particular about the Cirrus made this easier or smarter...

RVR = runway visual range - how far you can see at the runway in feet. The numbers were so low, commercial aircraft would be prohibited from even trying to land...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Sluggo63 said:
Really? The only thing questionable about that whole thing was the posting? You don't think there was a lot of risk taken on there?
Click to expand...

I see someone with a deiced aircraft fly an approach to minimums with the expectation that he would probably go missed. He saw the lights, descended further, saw the runway and landed.

Sure, it's not like he had to be there or deliver the diphtheria serum. He did this as a challenge, the same way how others will jump out of a plane or climb a mountain 'just because'. None of these things are necessary yet people opt to get out of their bubble and do them. No, you wouldn't be allowed to do this with a plane full of paying passengers, but you wouldn't fly a stick-pusher demo with them either, right ?

Just don't screw up. A once well known participant on beechtalk went out to shoot approaches in the fog a couple of years ago. He got ground contact and was so mesmerized by the black water below him that he lost track of altitude and hit the embankment at edge between lake and airport.

I wouldn't have done this training flight. But that's because I am a chicken, I don't own a go-pro and I'm old.
 
gsengle said:
Any airplane with deice and a good autopilot could do this. And a pilot with really extremely high tolerance for risk. Not anything particular about the Cirrus made this easier or smarter...

RVR = runway visual range - how far you can see at the runway in feet. The numbers were so low, commercial aircraft would be prohibited from even trying to land...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Ahh please accept my deep apologies I didn't know
 
gsengle said:
RVR = runway visual range - how far you can see at the runway in feet. The numbers were so low, commercial aircraft would be prohibited from even trying to land...
Click to expand...

From the radio traffic while he was en-route, an RJ had to divert to Cleveland. It wasn't clear whether they had tried or just never had the RVR to start the approach.
 
weilke said:
From the radio traffic while he was en-route, an RJ had to divert to Cleveland. It wasn't clear whether they had tried or just never had the RVR to start the approach.
Click to expand...

When I heard that part I thought the pilot was going to end up going around. Was kinda surprised he took it all the way down!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top