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 |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Blanche wrote:
And what happens if the engine conks out? Where do you land? How do you land? Maybe he should also take glider lessons, mountain survival, parachuting, and aerobatics prior to the flight. I mean, those disciplines have just as much relevance if not more should a forced landing be immanent. 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? About the only thing I could think of would be to try to estimate winds and direction based on terrain features. Read Sparky's book and you have some theory to work off of but, really....do you think that this would sufficiently arm you for an encounter with the winds in the mountains? If you do then you have never flown *in* the mountains! As far as *where* you land...you land wherever you can; as in non-mountainous terrain. And when that happens, all of a sudden you need to worry about mountain waves, density altitude, valley winds, etc. Calculate glide distance from 16K and tell me where & how you're going to land. Well...if you know how far you can glide at 1000 ft you can multiply by sixteen. But that calculation would only give you the no-wind theoretical distance. It also something every pilot should know regardless of whether they are in the mountains or not. And, come on! Are you really going to pull out the ole' whiz wheel and think about "...density altitude, valley winds, etc." when you are dead-sticking it to a suitable landing site? Generally, you *might* have one place to land that is suitable and you can bet your gold-plated E6B you'll take it regardless of the "density altitude". I have always considered mountain flying to be flying *in* the mountains and the things that concern a mountain pilot to be at or below the peaks. Is this incorrect? yes. Really? And minus the engine out scenario, you think the guy cruising over the peaks at 16-19,000 ft is in need of *mountain flying* skills? That ain't *mountain flying* in my book...neither is it in Sparkũ's.(Which, I agree, is a great book!) Sorry, but I respectfully disagree. Antonio |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Morgans wrote:
"Toņo" wrote I have always considered mountain flying to be flying *in* the mountains and the things that concern a mountain pilot to be at or below the peaks. Is this incorrect? Yes. The waves extend way up past the peaks, and so do rotors. Not according to Sparky Imeson.... "...the rotor cloud will be downwind from the mountain range and extend anywhere from the earth's surface to up to mountain-top level". --p.63 of "Mountain Flying" by Sparky Imeson In 15 years of mountain flying I have never encountered a rotor above a mountain peak. Turbulence, yes...but *rotors*, no. I have encountered waves and even flown in them. Sometimes the waves extend hundreds of miles downwind of a range! Waves are not at all dangerous to fly in! In fact, gliders often take advantage of their superior lift and laminar air. I have often paralleled a mountain range to take advantage of them. Antonio |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
mindenpilot wrote:
You can expect LARGE updrafts and downdrafts. It is important to know where they may occur in relation to the mountain ridge. Like I said, if you actually fly in it a couple times, it becomes a little more obvious. Is there an altitude above the ridge line at which the "mountain wave" effect isn't significant? -- Chris W Gift Giving Made Easy Get the gifts you want & give the gifts they want http://thewishzone.com |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
"Toņo" wrote Not according to Sparky Imeson.... "...the rotor cloud will be downwind from the mountain range and extend anywhere from the earth's surface to up to mountain-top level". --p.63 of "Mountain Flying" by Sparky Imeson Antonio 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 |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
"Chris W" wrote in message
news:gj%ae.640$zv1.481@lakeread07... Is there an altitude above the ridge line at which the "mountain wave" effect isn't significant? Probably would be pretty negligible at 23,000 miles. For example. Seriously though, yes...you can sometimes fly high enough to avoid the wave. But that depends on the height of the terrain, the strength of the wind, and of course the type of aircraft. There is no reliable way to know ahead of time how high you need to fly to avoid it. That said, there's being high enough to get all the way out of any noticeable effects of the wave, and then there's being high enough to avoid the wave forcing you too close to the terrain. The former may be impossible, depending on the situation. The latter is usually possible. I have rarely experienced altitude excursions of greater than 2000-3000 feet as a result of mountain wave, so that's a pretty reliable margin for crossing ridges. Of course, there is the question of whether mountain wave can actually push you into the ground. I've never actually heard of that happening, and for it to do so, the part of the air mass you're flying in would have to hit the ground as well. That happens in microbursts, or under virga, for example, but you'd have to be pretty darn close to the ground in the first place for a mountain wave to push you into it. From a practical perspective, a couple of things to consider: higher up may provide less turbulence (though, don't try to fly through a rotor cloud). Also, if you want to most efficiently use the mountain wave to your advantage, pitch up and slow down while it's making you go up, and pitch down and speed up while it's making you go down. This will increase the magnitude of your altitude changes, but you'll be spending less time during the "bad" down areas and more time during the "good" up areas. Fighting the mountain wave is just that: fighting. And no one wins a fight with Mother Nature. Of course, in practice you may have upper and lower limits to acceptable altitudes, and those need to be taken into account. But inasmuch as you can allow your altitude to vary with the wave, let it. Pete |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
tony roberts wrote:
So you fly in the downdraft side. If you can handle that you will get through. Depending on the wind situation, you can expect downdrafts of 10 fpm or even more. No light single will outclimb this, even less at altitude. It's a key point to fly on the updraft side. If things get worse, at least your 180 will be into a nice safe updraft. There's nothing wrong with turning into a downdraft. Just keep your speed up and make sure you have always enough air below you. And before you ask: I've been flying mostly in mountains, too. Mostly in gliders, the rest in vastly underpowered planes (80 to 100 hp). Learn to use the weather instead of fighting it. Stefan |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Peter Duniho wrote:
Is there an altitude above the ridge line at which the "mountain wave" effect isn't significant? There's no reason to be afraid of wave. Wave isn't turbulent at all, just think of it as a region with strong up or down draft. Stron means just that: strong. You'll see 20 fpm and more. No way to fight a downdraft of 20 fpm. So don't fight it, rather fly perpendicularly to the ridge until you leave that region. Chances are, you'll find a region with the same amount of updraft there. Throttle back and enjoy. Rotors are a completely different story, but you won't encounter them above the peaks. Of course you may hit some other turbulence, so stay below the yellow arc. Stefan |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Chris W wrote: mindenpilot wrote: You can expect LARGE updrafts and downdrafts. It is important to know where they may occur in relation to the mountain ridge. Like I said, if you actually fly in it a couple times, it becomes a little more obvious. Is there an altitude above the ridge line at which the "mountain wave" effect isn't significant? Not for your plane. Airlines will reroute around these areas to avoid mountain wave. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
"Peter R." wrote in message ... Tango Whiskey wrote: Somebody here posted recently what I think is great advice. Night, Mountains, Single Engine: pick any two. Well, I picked only one: Single Engine. I flight planned away from the mountains (where possible) and we are going to leave early AM. -- Peter You don't need specific instruction and will have a great time on your trip. If you have an interest in mountains and mountain flying read Exploring the Monster which is availible at any glider FBO. Mike MU-2 |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Rotors do not extend much above the ridgetops. The waves themselves are
smooth until reaching the tropopause except the extreme case of breaking waves. Mike MU-2 "Morgans" wrote in message ... "Toņo" wrote I have always considered mountain flying to be flying *in* the mountains and the things that concern a mountain pilot to be at or below the peaks. Is this incorrect? Yes. The waves extend way up past the peaks, and so do rotors. -- Jim in NC |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
NTSB: USAF included? | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 10 | September 11th 05 10:33 AM |
TSA rule 49 CFR Part 1552 (or its misinterpretation) is already preventing people from flying (even renters) (long) | Bay Aviator | Piloting | 15 | October 21st 04 10:29 PM |
the thrill of flying interview is here! | Dudley Henriques | Piloting | 0 | October 21st 03 07:41 PM |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Piloting | 25 | September 11th 03 01:27 PM |