Descending through a thin icing layer

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote:
To me, getting low on fuel in deteriorating weather is preventable
and doesn't thus constitute a bona fide emergency. It constitutes
stupidity.

Of course it's an emergency. I agree with you that it's most probably
stupidity and preventable, but that doesn't make it not an emergency.
It's just an emergency of your own making.

The feds may still bust your butt for careless and reckless, but in the
the here and now, it's an emergency.

Roy Smith wrote:
I'm sure some people will poo-poo the idea of declaring an emergency.
Well, there's two reasons for doing so. One is that it gets you the
legal authority to violate the POH.

I think declaring an emergency may make good sense in this situation,
but I don't see that you need to do so legally. If as PIC you have
determined there *is* an emergency, then you have emergency authority
to deal with the situaation. If you are planning to deviate from an
ATC instruction, you need to tell them about the emergency, but
is there anything in the FARs to require you to declare an emergency
just because you are, in fact, acting outside the usual FARs to deal
with the emergency? (By "declare an emergency", I'm assuming you
mean calling up ATC and saying "Cessna 123 is declaring an emergency",
as opposed to turning to the person flying in the right seat and
saying "Hey, this is an emergency".)

--
David Rind

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...

I'm sure some people will poo-poo the idea of declaring an emergency.
Well, there's two reasons for doing so. One is that it gets you the
legal authority to violate the POH.


You have that authority by HAVING an in-flight emergency requiring immediate
action, it does not have to be declared.

You have that authority by HAVING an in-flight emergency requiring immediate
action, it does not have to be declared.


Yes, but having it on tape may be beneficial should you not make it.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

David Rind wrote
I think declaring an emergency may make good sense in this situation,
but I don't see that you need to do so legally. If as PIC you have
determined there *is* an emergency, then you have emergency authority
to deal with the situaation.

Exactly. Just because you don't declare an emergency does not mean
one doesn't exist, and just because you do declare an emergency does
not mean one exists.

If you are planning to deviate from an
ATC instruction, you need to tell them about the emergency, but
is there anything in the FARs to require you to declare an emergency
just because you are, in fact, acting outside the usual FARs to deal
with the emergency?

There is not, for Part 91 operations.

Further, in this situation I would think twice about declaring. Odds
are that even if you got into the mess through no fault of your own
(and you probably didn't), you will not be able to prove this to the
satisfaction of an FAA inspector. And if you declare an emergency,
there will be paperwork. You won't necessarily need to do any, but a
flight assist report will go to someone in your FSDO. Months later,
after all the weather records and ATC tapes are gone, and you have no
hope of proving that you did not wind up in your situation through
sheer stupidity, you may be getting a certified letter from the FAA.
Don't tell me it can't happen, because I know for a fact it has.

There is also the possibility that the fed who looks at the flight
assist report will consider any IFR flight in a non-deiced light
airplane in weather with the potential for icing conditions to be
stupid, and will thus consider your situation to be your own fault.
He will then consider the violation (descent through the icing layer)
intentional, and not even a NASA form will protect you.

Michael

Roy Smith wrote:
"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote:

To me, getting low on fuel in deteriorating weather is preventable
and doesn't thus constitute a bona fide emergency. It constitutes
stupidity.


Of course it's an emergency. I agree with you that it's most probably
stupidity and preventable, but that doesn't make it not an emergency.
It's just an emergency of your own making.

The feds may still bust your butt for careless and reckless, but in the
the here and now, it's an emergency.

I agree it is an emergency and should be dealt with as such, but I
wouldn't be surprised if the Feds didn't accept it as a reason to fly
into known icing conditios.


Matt

"Teacherjh" wrote in message
...

Yes, but having it on tape may be beneficial should you not make it.


How can anything be beneficial to you if you don't make it?

How can anything be beneficial to you if you don't make it?

I didn't say beneficial to you. I said beneficial. To (for example) your
heirs.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

"Teacherjh" wrote in message
...

I didn't say beneficial to you. I said beneficial. To (for example) your
heirs.


How so?

In article ,
"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote:

Roy Smith wrote:
"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote:

To me, getting low on fuel in deteriorating weather is preventable
and doesn't thus constitute a bona fide emergency. It constitutes
stupidity.


Of course it's an emergency. I agree with you that it's most probably
stupidity and preventable, but that doesn't make it not an emergency.
It's just an emergency of your own making.

The feds may still bust your butt for careless and reckless, but in the
the here and now, it's an emergency.

I agree it is an emergency and should be dealt with as such, but I
wouldn't be surprised if the Feds didn't accept it as a reason to fly
into known icing conditios.

Well, if I'm running out of fuel, I don't give a rats ass what the feds
are going to do to me once I get my sorry butt safely on the ground.