![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Judah" wrote in message . .. "Ron McKinnon" wrote in news ![]() "Doug" wrote in message oups.com... I was in one once. A towering Cumulus. A big dark one. Weather said just rain, no thunderstorms. It started raining. Then I lost some altitude. Looked up and my airplane was coated with ice! Clear, but ragged ice, about 1/2" thick on all forward facing surfaces. Fortunately I had warm VMC under me, so I descended and shed the ice. I don't fly into dark Cumulus clouds anymore. Only reason I did that time is I was pretty ignorant of weather. How on earth could you be an Instrument rated Pilot, or even a non-instrument rated pilot for that matter, and be 'pretty ignorant of weather' ??? I was just happy to have a clearance and be able to fly in actual. I was in and out of IMC. Here comes a big dark one. In I went. Coulda been worse, coulda been hail.... I suspect that his level of "ignorance of weather" was that he was unable to accurately predict the conditions inside that dark towering Cumulus cloud he flew through. The level of ignorance implied by my post was the level of ignorance stated by the original poster 'Pretty ignorant about weather", and the stated actions of that poster I also suspect that most pilots, VFR or IFR, have been in the same boat at some point after their IFR training, especially since it is not a pre-requisite to receiving the instrument rating. We are mostly taught to depend on forecasts and spend very little time during training on learning to properly identify cloud formations from actual pictures or live representations, and to understand what to expect within each type of cloud. How can you 'depend on forecasts' alone? They are a sketch of what someone thinks is *likely* to happen. They are not cast in concrete statements of what *will* happen everywhere in the given area. And even if they're right-on, for the most part, they can still miss very localized or short-term events. You can't rely on the forecasts alone. And, in any case, you need to know enough about weather to understand the forecasts so that you know how they might impact you. This implies a certain understanding of the characteristics of things like clouds. During VFR training, you learn to just stay away from them. And during IFR training, you get pounded about the extremes (CBs and Stratus clouds) but there is really inadequate training of the stuff in the middle - probably because the stuff in the middle varies so widely. If you know that you should stay the hell away from CBs, you should know to stay away from "big, dark, TCUs" as well. A big, dark, TCU, depending on how big and dark it is, for your intents and purposes, should be considered the same as a CB. A cloud doesn't just turn into a CB and becoume dangerous because now it's a CB; it becomes dangerous the bigger it gets. A big, dark TCU, should probably be considered as dangerous as a new CB. Can you accurately predict conditions inside of a towering CU unless you get inside of it? There are different conditions even within the same cloud that depend on many factors tat include pressure, elapsed time, wind speed, humidity levels, etc. So while one dark TCU may produce hail, rain, and ice, the next dark TCU might be fairly uneventful and produce some turbulence as you enter and exit and that's all. You don't need to know what a grizzly bear had for breakfast to know not to poke him with a stick. Respect him just 'cause he's a grizzly bear. 'Accuracy of predictions' is a red-herring, here. Accurate predictions of conditions inside a TCU are not required. Just know that if they're big and dark, they're probably nasty. If you wouldn't penetrate or fly in the vicinity of a CB, you should probably accord a 'big dark TCU' similar respect. I think most people are fairly ignorant of weather, even if we think we are experts. Otherwise the meteorologists would never be wrong, and the rest of us COULD just depend on the forecasts... I suggest that meteorologists are not absolutely wrong as much as you think. Or as much wrong as you think. But even so, this does not speak to ignorance of weather, nor or weather processes, but more to the difficulty in predicting very far into the future the behaviour of a largely chaotic system such as the atmosphere. Pilots do not need to be degreed meteorologists, but they do need to know enough to understand what meteorologists are telling them, and they do need to know the *basics* well enough to expect that flying into a 'big, dark TCU' is very likely a problem. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Cumulus releases version 1.2.1 | André Somers | Soaring | 0 | March 2nd 05 09:58 PM |
Four States and the Grand Canyon | Mary Daniel or David Grah | Soaring | 6 | December 6th 04 10:36 AM |
[Announcement] Cumulus 1.1 released | André Somers | Soaring | 0 | January 24th 04 11:59 AM |
Blue Clouds | Mark Cherry | Simulators | 0 | September 21st 03 12:57 PM |
Across Nevada and Part Way Back (long) | Marry Daniel or David Grah | Soaring | 18 | July 30th 03 08:52 PM |