IFR just 5.4% of the time

Andrew Sarangan wrote:

On Mar 2, 12:03 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:

Andrew Sarangan writes:

Not necessarily. For driving, you only need a clear view of the road
and traffic ahead. Whether you can see the scenery around you is
irrelevant for safe driving. Except for the darkness inside the cabin,
which makes it harder to read maps, the darkness outside is not a big
factor. As long as you can see the horizon, airports, runways and
other airplanes, it does not make a big difference how much of the
scenery you can see.

What about terrain?




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.

If you are flying the minimum IFR altitudes, it still should not be a
problem, unless there is a chart error.

Matt

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.

On Mar 3, 8:24 am, Matt Whiting wrote:
Andrew Sarangan wrote:
On Mar 2, 12:03 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:

Andrew Sarangan writes:

Not necessarily. For driving, you only need a clear view of the road
and traffic ahead. Whether you can see the scenery around you is
irrelevant for safe driving. Except for the darkness inside the cabin,
which makes it harder to read maps, the darkness outside is not a big
factor. As long as you can see the horizon, airports, runways and
other airplanes, it does not make a big difference how much of the
scenery you can see.

What about terrain?

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.

If you are flying the minimum IFR altitudes, it still should not be a
problem, unless there is a chart error.

Matt- Hide quoted text -

True, but we are talking about flying VFR at night and how to avoid
terrain under those circumstances.

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 ...

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

Tony writes:

OK, you have now demonstrated you don't know how to do research --
again.

One of the sentences I used is almost literatim from one of the sources I
consulted. I suspected you wouldn't notice, and you didn't.

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

You breakout at 200 feet and a half mile, and see the runway
enviroment. Are you in IMC? Do you have outside reference?

You are in a thousand feet high gap between stratus layers. Are you in
IMC? Do you have outside reference?

How many specific examples does it take to demonstrate you are wrong
inyour presumption that IMC is defined as having no outside reference?

You make a poor student, but an excellent troll.


assertation On Mar 3, 9:20 am, Mxsmanic wrote:
Tony writes:
OK, you have now demonstrated you don't know how to do research --
again.

One of the sentences I used is almost literatim from one of the sources I
consulted. I suspected you wouldn't notice, and you didn't.

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

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 wrote:

On Mar 3, 8:24 am, Matt Whiting wrote:

Andrew Sarangan wrote:

On Mar 2, 12:03 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:

Andrew Sarangan writes:

Not necessarily. For driving, you only need a clear view of the road
and traffic ahead. Whether you can see the scenery around you is
irrelevant for safe driving. Except for the darkness inside the cabin,
which makes it harder to read maps, the darkness outside is not a big
factor. As long as you can see the horizon, airports, runways and
other airplanes, it does not make a big difference how much of the
scenery you can see.

What about terrain?

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.

If you are flying the minimum IFR altitudes, it still should not be a
problem, unless there is a chart error.

Matt- Hide quoted text -


True, but we are talking about flying VFR at night and how to avoid
terrain under those circumstances.

I didn't see any clear reference to VFR, just to flying at night and
seeing things. And the subject line says IFR... :-)

Matt

Recently, Andrew Sarangan posted:

On Mar 3, 8:24 am, Matt Whiting wrote:
Andrew Sarangan wrote:
On Mar 2, 12:03 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:

Andrew Sarangan writes:

Not necessarily. For driving, you only need a clear view of the
road and traffic ahead. Whether you can see the scenery around
you is irrelevant for safe driving. Except for the darkness
inside the cabin, which makes it harder to read maps, the
darkness outside is not a big factor. As long as you can see the
horizon, airports, runways and other airplanes, it does not make
a big difference how much of the scenery you can see.

What about terrain?

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.

If you are flying the minimum IFR altitudes, it still should not be a
problem, unless there is a chart error.

Matt- Hide quoted text -

True, but we are talking about flying VFR at night and how to avoid
terrain under those circumstances.

That's why sectionals are handy, and pre-flight planning is a good idea.
It's really easy to avoid terrain if you read the chart and stay above the
altitude of the highest obstacle in the sector, which is clearly marked in
large numbers. I don't understand why pilots would fly at night with
insufficient information to be safe.

Neil

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