IFR in the Eastern Mountains

"skym" wrote in message
oups.com...
Looks like a couple of places in Western Montana...Paradise Valley or
Bozeman??
Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
Ron Lee wrote:
Look at this Kobra:

http://tinyurl.com/y78c8s

Note that it is clear and visibility is 50+ miles.


Where is it?

Leadville, CO

IFR with mountains obscured and MEA above 6000 feet makes
single-engine and light multiengine a difficult trip since
loss of an engine will put you in the strato or
cumulogranite clouds. You can fly the light twin at cruise
several thousand feet above the MEA and drift down while
proceeding to a landing. But a plan is required.



wrote in message
...
|: I disagree. Flying IFR in IMC in the mountains in the
east is serious
| : business and shouldn't be sugar coated. As they say, if
you can't take
| : the heat...
|
| Absolutely. With MEAs over WV around 6000', that pretty
much rules out all
| but thin stratus into VFR-on-top IFR days from October
through April.
|
| The mountain wave and turbulence should also not be
underestimated. I've been
| in VFR over BKW (Beckly, WV... only about 50 miles from my
home base). I hit a layer
| of IMC at about 6000', but there was plenty of VMC below.
I got a clearance for
| "practice." Within 10 minutes, my groundspeed went from
about 100 kts to 55 kts, and
| I was getting +-500fpm no matter what power settings I
tried to use. At one point I
| was in clear VMC and plenty of room below so I cancelled
and flew the last 20 miles
| VFR in 2500' ceilings.
|
| VFR in only more dangerous in the "average" sense that a
lot of the clear
| weather might be associated with highs and gusty winds.
IMC can also have ugly winds,
| and the sink associated with the ridges can make a mess of
you too.
|
| -Cory
|
| --
|
|
************************************************** ***********************
| * Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA
*
| * Electrical Engineering
*
| * Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
*
|
************************************************** ***********************
|

Jim Macklin wrote:
: IFR with mountains obscured and MEA above 6000 feet makes
: single-engine and light multiengine a difficult trip since
: loss of an engine will put you in the strato or
: cumulogranite clouds. You can fly the light twin at cruise
: several thousand feet above the MEA and drift down while
: proceeding to a landing. But a plan is required.

I wouldn't say that particularly makes the trip "difficult." It does change
the risk management equation somewhat but that's not necessarily a "go/no-go"
dealbreaker for many people. Many folks will argue that single-engine IMC or
single-engine night is suicide, but thousands do it daily.

Flying in IMC with the freezing level lower than the ceilings and MEAs is a
significantly higher weighted risk than single-engine failure over the mountains.
That's why for me I feel the latter is an acceptable risk, but the former is not in my
light single.

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA *
* Electrical Engineering *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

I flew a lot of 135, we had to be able to maintain the MEA
on one engine.

What I was pointing out was that two engines don't alter the
safety factor unless you can maintain the MEA and that is an
ice free altitude [thanks for adding that]. Over Kansas, at
night, the forced landing has a 99% chance of coming down on
fairly level ground. Over mountains you may just hit a
vertical wall.


wrote in message
...
| Jim Macklin wrote:
| : IFR with mountains obscured and MEA above 6000 feet
makes
| : single-engine and light multiengine a difficult trip
since
| : loss of an engine will put you in the strato or
| : cumulogranite clouds. You can fly the light twin at
cruise
| : several thousand feet above the MEA and drift down while
| : proceeding to a landing. But a plan is required.
|
| I wouldn't say that particularly makes the trip
"difficult." It does change
| the risk management equation somewhat but that's not
necessarily a "go/no-go"
| dealbreaker for many people. Many folks will argue that
single-engine IMC or
| single-engine night is suicide, but thousands do it daily.
|
| Flying in IMC with the freezing level lower than the
ceilings and MEAs is a
| significantly higher weighted risk than single-engine
failure over the mountains.
| That's why for me I feel the latter is an acceptable risk,
but the former is not in my
| light single.
|
| -Cory
|
| --
|
|
************************************************** ***********************
| * Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA
*
| * Electrical Engineering
*
| * Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
*
|
************************************************** ***********************
|

"Matt Barrow" wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/y78c8s

Note that it is clear and visibility is 50+ miles.

Where is it?

Leadville, CO


Matt is correct. This pic is about 10 miles south of Leadville heading
north.

Ron Lee

Sam Spade writes:
Everett M. Greene wrote:

While you're at it, tell her that Collins exaggerates
greatly in that those overgrown hills back east aren't
mountains.

Hmmmm...I wonder why they're within the FAA's Eastern Designated
*Mountainous* Area then?

People in D.C. don't know what a mountain is?

: What I was pointing out was that two engines don't alter the
: safety factor unless you can maintain the MEA and that is an
: ice free altitude [thanks for adding that]. Over Kansas, at
: night, the forced landing has a 99% chance of coming down on
: fairly level ground. Over mountains you may just hit a
: vertical wall.

True enough. All I was saying is that the chances of getting in trouble by
ignoring something like the MEA's vs. icing is a lot more likely than a single-engine
failure in a single... whether in low IMC over the mountains or not. Just flying over
mountains in IMC doesn't increase the chances of having an engine failure (it just
make you THINK about it more...

-Cory


--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA *
* Electrical Engineering *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

Ron Lee wrote:

I prefer "This is where a serious mistake can get you killed....so
treat it with the respect it deserves."

I realize that, but in watching RM and JK lead the numerous lessons on
those private and instrument CD-ROM based ground school programs, it was
apparent that they were purposely avoiding the use of stronger, direct
words.


--
Peter

Peter R. wrote:

I realize that, but in watching RM and JK lead the numerous lessons on
those private and instrument CD-ROM based ground school programs, it was
apparent that they were purposely avoiding the use of stronger, direct
words.


I personally think JK tends to soften some risks, leaning towards an
"anyone can do this" attitude.

I like the K courses, and have learned lots from them, but...

Everett M. Greene wrote:
Sam Spade writes:

Everett M. Greene wrote:

While you're at it, tell her that Collins exaggerates
greatly in that those overgrown hills back east aren't
mountains.

Hmmmm...I wonder why they're within the FAA's Eastern Designated
*Mountainous* Area then?


People in D.C. don't know what a mountain is?

I presume you're speaking of the FAA. Most of the technical stuff is
headquartered in OKC. And, yes, those folks know a whole lot about
mountains, terrain effect, altimeter errors, and so forth.

I suspect it is you who don't have a firm grasp on what constitutes
mountainous terrain.