Mountain flying knowledge required?

"Casey Wilson" N2310D @ gmail.com wrote in message
news:iqbbe.6406$Nc.4745@trnddc08...

"Morgans" wrote in message
news


There is some disagreement with this, and here is a clip:
Normally the rotor clouds is centered beneath the lenticular cloud. Most
often it extends anywhere from ground level to mountaintop level, but is
frequently observed up to 35,000 feet. Destructive turbulence from the
rotor
rarely exists more than 2,000-3,000 feet above mountaintop level.

http://www.mountainflying.com/mountain_wave2.htm

My point is, just because you clear the ridge, there are still dangers
that
can ruin your day, if the winds are right. Further down in the article,
this author talks about rotors that do not have a visible cloud.

If the wind is blowing strong, close to perpendicular to the ridge, best
wait until early the next day, and see if the winds are calmed down.

Hey, I just read, and remember. I have no idea if what everyone says is
true. I would rather be safe, than sorry. YMMV
--
Jim in NC

Hmmmm, I've been through the rotor a few times -- while yanking and
banking on the end of a 200' length of towrope behind a tow-plane. The
first time is the worst. After that you remember to breathe and you don't
suck quite as hard on the seat cushion.
When you're headed for the primary wave developed on the east slope of
the Sierra, the rotor is unavoidable. Some folks, with more skill than I
possess, ride thermals up into the secondary wave and, when high enough
slide over to the primary.
I guess I never thought of the rotor as destructive. Maybe I shouldn't
do that again.

It can be fatal but that is an extreme case with winds at ridgetop level
over 100kts. There is a chapter in Exploring the Monster describing a
flight into a rotor by Mt. Tom which is slightly north of Bishop where the
glider broke up and the pilots were subject to +16G and -20G. I have
actually "heard" rotors hissing and roaring near Genoa, NV with winds over
100kts at ridge level but calm in the valley because of a strong inversion
so it happens but only in extreme weather. It was a textbook day for a
record attempt but nobody flew out of Minden that day. In any case, gliders
are much better suited to thiese conditions than GA airplanes.

Mike
MU-2

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
.net...
Rotors do not extend much above the ridgetops. The waves themselves are
smooth until reaching the tropopause except the extreme case of breaking
waves.

Before Mike, Jim in NC wrote:

The waves extend way up past the peaks, and so do rotors.

I guess it depends on your definition of "way past". As per my other
quoted
post, about destructive part of the rotor going to 2 thousand over the
ridge, I think that is way over. Plus, I want to be well above where the
rotor is still destructive, like another couple thousand. That is really
way past to me. YMMV

I just want people to know that if they are thinking of going over a pass
with only a couple thousand to spare, if the wind is blowing just right,
they could be in big trouble, whether they see it or not. Right?
--
Jim in NC


Rotors can't extend much past ridgetop level because they are formed from
the low pressure produced on the downwind side of the ridge. My
observations from living and flying in one of the best places to see and
observe mountain wave systems is that the rotor seldom extends above the
ridge more than a few hundred feet. There are a lot of pilots who attribute
any turbulence in the mountains to "rotors" but a rotor is a specific
condition where there is closed circulation, looking very much like the
Bonzai Pipeline in Hawaii rolling over but not moving forward. At Minden,
virtually nobody flys when there is enough wind to produce a wave system
with a rotor. Only the bravest towplane and glider pilots walk the tarmac
on those days....

When there is a *real* rotor, the towplane and the glider sometimes find
themselves facing each other head on!

Mike
MU-2

"Casey Wilson" N2310D @ gmail.com wrote in message
news:iqbbe.6406$Nc.4745@trnddc08...

"Morgans" wrote in message
news


There is some disagreement with this, and here is a clip:
Normally the rotor clouds is centered beneath the lenticular cloud. Most
often it extends anywhere from ground level to mountaintop level, but is
frequently observed up to 35,000 feet. Destructive turbulence from the
rotor
rarely exists more than 2,000-3,000 feet above mountaintop level.

http://www.mountainflying.com/mountain_wave2.htm

My point is, just because you clear the ridge, there are still dangers
that
can ruin your day, if the winds are right. Further down in the article,
this author talks about rotors that do not have a visible cloud.

If the wind is blowing strong, close to perpendicular to the ridge, best
wait until early the next day, and see if the winds are calmed down.

Hey, I just read, and remember. I have no idea if what everyone says is
true. I would rather be safe, than sorry. YMMV
--
Jim in NC

Hmmmm, I've been through the rotor a few times -- while yanking and
banking on the end of a 200' length of towrope behind a tow-plane. The
first time is the worst. After that you remember to breathe and you don't
suck quite as hard on the seat cushion.
When you're headed for the primary wave developed on the east slope of
the Sierra, the rotor is unavoidable. Some folks, with more skill than I
possess, ride thermals up into the secondary wave and, when high enough
slide over to the primary.
I guess I never thought of the rotor as destructive. Maybe I shouldn't
do that again.


If you are talking about flying at Minden, you can often get into the
primary wave without going throught the rotor by flying west. You will be
in low level turbulence but it won't be too bad. When you are so close to
the mountains that you say: "no way I'm going any closer" and start to turn
away (about a mile) you will often start to pick up lift at 5500-6000' stay
close to the mountains and you can get over the rotor by keeping west of it.
This only works when the wind is really screaming, (80kts+ at the ridges)
and the rotor cloud is almost over the airport. I once climbed to FL290 in
the MU-2 in perhaps four minutes. The IVSI goes to 6000fpm and it was
pegged the whole time. It is also worth knowing that both instrument
approaches and the instrument departure proceedure go through the rotor when
wave conditions are strong.

Mike
MU-2

Blanche wrote:
Toño wrote:

Blanche wrote:


My response addressed your comment about "flying in the mountains".
And yes, if you're going to fly "in the mountains" in a single (unless,
of course, that single engine is attached to an F16) you really should
have some knowledge of mountain survival.

And here we are in agreement that *if* you are indeed *in* the
mountains, then some training would be well advised. However, if you are
10,000ft above the nearest peak with a good engine (or in a glider..;-)
) then of what possible use could mountain flying knowledge be?


How does a knowledge of mountain flying help you to land with and engine
out? And how would that differ from any other no-engine landing?


OK, you're at 16K over the I-70 in Colorado west of Denver. Let's
say somewhere between Georgetown and Silverton. What are you going
to do? (And following I-70 between Denver and Glenwood Springs is
the absolute worst action you can take). If you've only read Sparky's
book it's not going to help much.

The question of the OP had to do with being over the mountains, not in
them. He specifically stated a "turbo-normalized Bonanza with on-board
O2" ...."at altitudes in the mid-to-upper teens". He wondered if
*mountain flying training* would be of assistance to him.

However, I wondered: Where is the mountain flying? My contention was
that he did not need training specific to mountain flying because he was
not going to be in the mountains.

Admitedly, in a "what-if" scenario, he might possibly end up in a glide
toward some valley in the mountains. He might possibly be able to pick a
better landing site ( if indeed he has an option ) if had been "mountain
flying trained". But this was such a strecth and departure from all
that I know of genuine bush-pilot, down in the peaks mountain flying
necessities that I felt he might be wasting his time (on this particular
flight) in seeking that *specific* type of education.


Please remember, I'm the one who said reading Sparky's book and
nothing else is not a good idea. Flying in the mountains...hm...
Half the time I'm in the air, I'm very close to mountains. Personally,
I prefer NOT to be "in the mountains". Above, between, sure.


Noted. I overlooked that. But I lean toward loving being in the
mountains. Sure there are risks but, ahhhhh, the rewards are great!!

As far as *where* you land...you land wherever you can; as in
non-mountainous terrain.


Again I respond -- if all you've ever done is read the book you're
not prepared.

However off the OP's topic it is, I would enjoy hearing responses on:
How do you prepare to land Bonanza in the mountains? ( I ask that
sincerely wishing to know and not just to be rhetorical.)


I don't own a "whiz wheel". Well, I do. I just don't know where it
is these days.

Ha! (That made me laugh!)

I love these type discussions--the one's where people are actually civil
to each other and seek sincerely to understand more. It really makes
the experience here so very valuable.

Antonio

Tango Whiskey wrote:
would it still be advisable for me to
seek out some mountain flying instruction?

To answer your question directly, I think based on what you have
described
that if you take time to flight plan rigorously, try to stay day VFR,
and
read a good mountain flying book like Sparky Imerson's you'll be good
to go
without specific mountain flying instruction. That said, getting
some extra
instructional time in new conditions is always a good thing, but I
think in
your case not strictly required if you study up.

Hi Peter,
You can save some money by going to my web site for information on
mountain flying instead of buying the book. By the way, there is a new
Mountain Flying Bible Revised (with 16 pages of color photos operating
at backcountry strips) coming out in 3 days. Try
http://www.mountainflying.com
Blue skies and tail winds,
Sparky

Newps wrote:
tony roberts wrote:



You don't fly down the middle, because that may not leave you
enough
space to do a 180 either way

Right.


You don't fly on the updraft side - even though that initially
seems the
safest - because if things change and you need to do a 180, you now
have
to turn into the downdraft - which you may not be able to recover
from.

Wrong. You fly on the downwind side, also known as the updraft side.

If you lose your engine and you are in a downdraft just how smart is
that? You don't knowingly fly in downdrafts, unless of course you
want
to go down.



So you fly in the downdraft side. If you can handle that you will
get
through. If things get worse, at least your 180 will be into a nice
safe
updraft.

If things get worse you may be plastered on the mountain before you
can
turn around.

I guess I would prefer to fly the updraft side of a canyon, unless it
is a narrow canyon (a narrow canyon is one where the radius of turn
exceeds half the canyon width). Take advantage of the lift.

The radius of turn varies as the square of the true airspeed. Even at
80 knots TAS and limiting yourself to a 35-degree bank, you only
require 811.7 feet for the radius of turn.

Toño wrote:
[snip]
I love these type discussions--the one's where people are actually civil
to each other and seek sincerely to understand more. It really makes
the experience here so very valuable.

Antonio

Personally, I consider anyone who cannot discuss another's parentage,
heritage and destination without resorting to invectives and/or
4-letters words to have a very poor command of the english language
and not worth the effort to bring out the flame-thrower...

(*chortle*)

Blanche wrote:

Personally, I consider anyone who cannot discuss another's parentage,
heritage and destination without resorting to invectives and/or
4-letters words to have a very poor command of the english language
and not worth the effort to bring out the flame-thrower...

(*chortle*)


Ha! In that case....Thank for honoring me with your earlier flame! ;-)

Antonio

Toño wrote:
Blanche wrote:

Personally, I consider anyone who cannot discuss another's parentage,
heritage and destination without resorting to invectives and/or
4-letters words to have a very poor command of the english language
and not worth the effort to bring out the flame-thrower...

(*chortle*)


Ha! In that case....Thank for honoring me with your earlier flame! ;-)

Antonio

But Antonio -- you never got any more hostile than a "bah humbug".

Peter R. wrote:
wrote:

Hello! I've returned from Sun-N-Fun... I'm tanned, rested and ready to fly!
Mountain flying and FUN available... 50 miles north of Denver at 3V5...
then you can save time/money by flying in the mountains instead
of around! Give me a call/email!

How long is your mountain flying class? I expect to only be in the area
for a few days.

I can do a one-day one-on-one, with 7 hours of mountain flying, ridge
crossing, mountain wave surfing, lift and sink identification and
FUN... in one day. :-) It does not make one a "mountain pilot", but
will give you a good feel about how to navigate, routes to take, which
side of the canyon to fly on and how to select altitudes and emergency
landing sites.


Best regards,

Jer/ "Flight instruction and mountain flying are my vocation!" Eberhard

--
Jer/ (Slash) Eberhard, Mountain Flying Aviation, LTD, Ft Collins, CO
CELL 970 231-6325 EMAIL jer'at'frii.com WEB http://users.frii.com/jer/
C-206 N9513G, CFII Airplane&Glider, FAA-DEN Aviation Safety Counselor
CAP-CO Mission&Aircraft CheckPilot, BM218 HAM N0FZD, 227 Young Eagles!