IFR just 5.4% of the time

Matt Whiting writes:

I didn't see any clear reference to VFR, just to flying at night and
seeing things.

Hmm.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Neil Gould wrote:

Recently, Andrew Sarangan posted:


On Mar 3, 7:28 am, "Neil Gould" wrote:

Recently, Andrew Sarangan posted:


Terrain avoidance at night becomes a problem only in unpopulated
areas under an overcast moonless sky. It has happened, so it is a
real issue, but most pilots fly in areas where there are at least
some ground lights, moon or stars, and it is really not that hard
to tell if you are heading towards a mountain. On the other hand,
unlit towers are a real concern, regardless of whether it is day or
night, and this is why they get NOTAM'd.

The above is an excellent example of bad pre-flight planning. All
one has to do to avoid terrain, day, night, IMC, etc. is stay above
the altitude of any obstructions in the sector. As this is plainly
listed on every sectional, it is not a difficult task.

Neil

If you insist on flying above the MEF for each quadrant, you will not
be able to do any GA flying in the mountain states. This is the very
definition of mountain flying - ie flying below the peaks. Please
don't flame my responses as "examples of bad preflight planning" when
it is your reponse that is not adequately thought out.


I would consider a "go" decision to fly in the mountains at night to be
*exceptionally* bad pre-flight planning. Exceptions do not invalidate a
rule.

Why? I've flown on full-moon nights where it was very easy to see the
terrain. A new moon night is an entirely different animal, however. I
don't think your blanket statement above is true.

Matt

On Mar 3, 10:59 am, "Neil Gould" wrote:
Recently, Andrew Sarangan posted:





On Mar 3, 7:28 am, "Neil Gould" wrote:
Recently, Andrew Sarangan posted:

Terrain avoidance at night becomes a problem only in unpopulated
areas under an overcast moonless sky. It has happened, so it is a
real issue, but most pilots fly in areas where there are at least
some ground lights, moon or stars, and it is really not that hard
to tell if you are heading towards a mountain. On the other hand,
unlit towers are a real concern, regardless of whether it is day or
night, and this is why they get NOTAM'd.

The above is an excellent example of bad pre-flight planning. All
one has to do to avoid terrain, day, night, IMC, etc. is stay above
the altitude of any obstructions in the sector. As this is plainly
listed on every sectional, it is not a difficult task.

Neil

If you insist on flying above the MEF for each quadrant, you will not
be able to do any GA flying in the mountain states. This is the very
definition of mountain flying - ie flying below the peaks. Please
don't flame my responses as "examples of bad preflight planning" when
it is your reponse that is not adequately thought out.

I would consider a "go" decision to fly in the mountains at night to be
*exceptionally* bad pre-flight planning. Exceptions do not invalidate a
rule.

Neil- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


No, these areas are not the exceptional areas. Large chucks of this
country falls ine areas where MEF is simply not attainable or
practical in small airplanes.

I can see the sprit of the 'rule' that was taught to you, but that is
by no means a rule. It is easy to follow that rule in the eastern and
midwestern states, but it is impossible in the west.

The field elevation of Colorado Springs Airport is about 6200ft. The
MEF is 12000 ft and higher. If you believe that, just go out there
some day and see for yourself how many night VFR operations are
conducted there well below the MEF.
This is just one example, and you can find hundreds of examples if you
browse the charts for the western states.

On Mar 3, 9:19 am, Mxsmanic wrote:
Andrew Sarangan writes:
If you insist on flying above the MEF for each quadrant, you will not
be able to do any GA flying in the mountain states. This is the very
definition of mountain flying - ie flying below the peaks.

If you are flying in the mountains below the peaks at night ...


It is done all the time, unless you think pilots who live in Colorado,
Arizona etc.. should not be flying VFR at night at all.

On Mar 3, 1:04 pm, Matt Whiting wrote:
Neil Gould wrote:
Recently, Andrew Sarangan posted:

On Mar 3, 7:28 am, "Neil Gould" wrote:

Recently, Andrew Sarangan posted:

Terrain avoidance at night becomes a problem only in unpopulated
areas under an overcast moonless sky. It has happened, so it is a
real issue, but most pilots fly in areas where there are at least
some ground lights, moon or stars, and it is really not that hard
to tell if you are heading towards a mountain. On the other hand,
unlit towers are a real concern, regardless of whether it is day or
night, and this is why they get NOTAM'd.

The above is an excellent example of bad pre-flight planning. All
one has to do to avoid terrain, day, night, IMC, etc. is stay above
the altitude of any obstructions in the sector. As this is plainly
listed on every sectional, it is not a difficult task.

Neil

If you insist on flying above the MEF for each quadrant, you will not
be able to do any GA flying in the mountain states. This is the very
definition of mountain flying - ie flying below the peaks. Please
don't flame my responses as "examples of bad preflight planning" when
it is your reponse that is not adequately thought out.

I would consider a "go" decision to fly in the mountains at night to be
*exceptionally* bad pre-flight planning. Exceptions do not invalidate a
rule.

Why? I've flown on full-moon nights where it was very easy to see the
terrain. A new moon night is an entirely different animal, however. I
don't think your blanket statement above is true.



Full moon is nice to have, but you don't necessary need a full moon to
see the terrain. Pilots fly every day in the vast mountain areas of
this country at night under VFR without any problems. There are of
course hazards that come with any flying activity, but if you insist
on only flying the MEF altitude, you will have to avoid flying night
VFR in nearly a third of this country.

I have flown in the remote areas of the southwestern desert mountains
with no moon at all, and you can see the terrain just fine. You just
needs to be more pro-active when looking outside (dim cockpit lights,
proper dark adaptation) and exercise the usual mountain area
precautions.

Not flying the MEF is not bad preflight planning. In fact I would
claim that insisting on flying the MEF is poor planning because you
are wasting too much time and fuel to do something that could be done
far simpler by flying a lower altitude.

Consider a routine night VFR flight from Albuquerque to Santa Fe,
which is only 40 miles. MEF is 11,000 ft. Are you really going to
climb to 11000 ft (about 6000' AGL) to go 40 miles? If you do that, I
can assure you that you will get funny looks from pilots who live in
that area.

It's a neat point you raise -- there is special VFR. That does not
deny that vis 3 miles is a criteria for not VMC, ergo actual IMC, in
many parts of the country.

He's twisting, twisting, slowly in the wind.

On Mar 3, 9:49 am, TxSrv wrote:
Tony wrote:
Are you in VMC flying in haze with vis 2 miles in most domestic
airspace? Do you have outside reference?

Perhaps you meant one mile? 91.157? No, wait, research by
one poster here might turn up the fact that most pilots
requesting a special have crashed. 91.157(d) does, however,
require that nonpilot simmers set crash off when viz is set
to one in MSFS. Wise of FAA; oh, the simulated humanity.

F--

Andrew Sarangan writes:

It is done all the time, unless you think pilots who live in Colorado,
Arizona etc.. should not be flying VFR at night at all.

As long as I'm not aboard, I don't care what they do.

There are lots of places in Colorado and Arizona without mountains.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Andrew Sarangan writes:

I can see the sprit of the 'rule' that was taught to you, but that is
by no means a rule. It is easy to follow that rule in the eastern and
midwestern states, but it is impossible in the west.

You can fly above the mountain peaks just about anywhere. If you can't, then
it might be a good idea to stay out of areas where you can't at night.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

However, I no long harbor the notion that an IR is going to help us
fly more, or longer, or more regularly -- at least not until we can
afford something like a Pilatus.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

You know, my instrument rating doesn't currently help me that much
with my Pilatus being VFR only...

Its great being constantly confused with PC-12s by ATC though. I think
my Vne is actually higher than their's, but the only way I'd ever
outrun a PC-12 is if we were both aimed straight at the ground...

Jay, I will give you an alternate piece of data on IFR flight: Out of
my long XC flights (400nm+) prior to buying the Pilatus (VFR only) I
have had to fly in IMC at some point on more than 75% of them. After
purchasing a VFR only aircraft, I have had to land and wait out
weather on 2 out of 5 long XC flights, where I could have easily
continued non-stop if the plane was equipped for IFR.

The issue I see with the way you calculated the % of time that the
weather is IMC, is that on a cross country flight you need a constant
path of VMC weather from departure to destination in order to make the
flight. I would be really interested to find out what the results
would change to, if your friend did a search on the number of days
that every ASOS station from IOW to Cincinnati or Detroit was showing
VFR. That would give a much better read on the percent of days that it
is possible to do a cross country under VFR.

Thanks,
Eric Bartsch
1959 Pilatus P-3 A-848
http://www.hometown.aol.com/bartscher/P3A848.html

The issue I see with the way you calculated the % of time that the
weather is IMC, is that on a cross country flight you need a constant
path of VMC weather from departure to destination in order to make the
flight. I would be really interested to find out what the results
would change to, if your friend did a search on the number of days
that every ASOS station from IOW to Cincinnati or Detroit was showing
VFR. That would give a much better read on the percent of days that it
is possible to do a cross country under VFR.

True enough, Eric -- although it wouldn't take into account the
ability to fly around pockets of IFR conditions.

This happens on almost every long (and I mean trans-continental) cross
country flight I've done -- sooner or later, you're going to run into
cruddy weather over *there*, which means that I fly over *here*.

While this may be seen as inconvenient by some, we have built it into
our expectations of a "flying vacation" -- and relish it. And on
those rare occasions when the weather goes REALLY bad, you park the
plane and make the best of it.

We saw Nashville that way for three days, because of freezing rain --
and had one of our most memorable vacations, ever. It turned out to
be a fantastic time.

The key is to always be flexible. When it comes to flying VFR cross-
country, we have to be more flexible than our IFR-capable brethren --
but not by too much.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"