How Quickly Things Can Turn!

Y'All,
A friend of mine wanted to get his plane from Concord CA to Auburn CA a bit
early for his annual to avoid a series of storms shortly to arrive in
Northern CA. He called me at 9 A. M and we were ready to depart at 11AM.
We planned to make separate departures using ATC radar advisories while
monitoring 122.85 if something came up.

I got started out first and waited in the runup areas until my friend
appeared to make my
departure. We had agreed to fly below 3000' AGL. He flew at 2700 and I
flew at 2900 AGL We did not tell ATC that we were together.

At one point I was quired by ATC as to why I chose to fly at 2900. My
response was that not very many pilots make a practice of flying such an
altitude. and it becamse apparent as we encountered any number of other
aircraft flying at 2000;.500 and 3000. It soon became apparent that our
altlitude selection was a good idea.

Between Sacramento and Auburn there was a bank of cumulus what got in the
way. Since I was in front I made the choice of flying over insead of below
the clouds even though the one-minute-weather out of Auburn gave bases of
1500. My choice was based upon the
probability of greater turbulence below the clouds while flying into rising
terrain. My friend, a few miles behind made the same choice. He had GPS
while I was strickly pilotage. Things did not get much better so I advised
ATC that I would descend in VFR and my
friend behind did likewise. The GPS made it possible for him to do so right
over Auburn
but I was about three miles away to the North.

Now we come to the point of my contribution. In my descent I became totally
disoriented
as to where to find Auburn. I immediately advised ATC that I would require
vectors on descent below the clouds. I was giving a heading of 264-degrees.
Usually a vector is not so precise so I quired for a repeat. He was right
on. With excellent visibility 10-15 miles too low to see the airport runway
but I did see the buildings, I continued on that heading. Almost
immediately ATC gave me a terrain alert and a collision alert. I was at
about 500'AGL and in conflict with my friend who was on downwind. I did not
see him until I came out of the ATC recommended left climbing turn for
avoidance. When I came out of my turn I was on left base for 25 and my
friend was on final. We both proceeded to land with no problem

What I am getting at is that a major block facing most pilots who get into
problem situation is not knowing how or when to ask for and get help. My
friend with his GPS had no problem. Pilotage alone was not going to work
for me under the low ceilings so I used
ATC as my 'GPS' and had no problem either.

We met at the restaurant, had lunch and did the planning for the annual soon
to depart back to Concord in my plane. I let him fly right seat for the
experience. We probably saved him a week's delay in getting his annual.

Moral: You don't need to know everything or to solve all flying problems on
your own. The more you know the more willing you will be to ask for help.

Gene Whitt

Wow! Certainly goes to show that weather is something that should be
respected!

I have a copy of the movie, "The Perfect Storm". I've watched it
several times and am fascinated at how insignificant we can be when
weather and/or the sea, in this case, decides to open up a can of
whoop-@$$ on us!

No matter how indestructable we think we are at times, we don't stand a
chance against some of the blows mother-nature can deal.

Best Regards,
Todd

Moral: You don't need to know everything or to solve all flying problems on
your own. The more you know the more willing you will be to ask for help.

Absolutely! I'm also coming to the realization that the more I learn,
the more I know that I don't know anything!!! ;-)

Thanks for sharing your experience!

Best Regards,
Todd

"three-eight-hotel" wrote in message
oups.com...
I popped up to 3,000 ft and was amazed
at how hazey it was towards the west. I stayed at 3,000, and always
had visual reference to the ground, although it was very hazey and I
really couldn't see much at a slant-distance. Having flown this dozens
of times, I knew right where I was going [...]
I continued on, always making sure I could see
down, and having the out to turn around as I mentioned before.

It sounds like you're describing a VFR flight in IMC. Or have I
misunderstood you?

--Gary

I don't think it would have been considered VFR in IMC... There were
absolutely no clouds (although clouds aren't what constitute IMC), and
at 3,000 feet I had constant visual reference with the ground and never
had to depend on my instruments for navigation or situational
awareness. I probably had visibility of 2-3 miles through the haze,
but definitely couldn't see major landmarks like Pilot Hill or Folsom
lake at a distance of greater than 4 or 5 miles.

To be honest, the main reason for posting was because I had finally had
my first chance to fly, in several weeks, and I was stoked about
getting up again, if only for a 10 minute jaunt down the street! ;-)

What struck me though and gave me a more meaningful reason to post was
walking outside after dinner and seeing an entirely different weather
picture than I had seen only an hour ago, when I landed. There was
some pretty ugly, and low clouds hiding behind that haze, meaning in a
worst case scenario, It could have been 4 to 5 miles away from where I
was, and I wouldn't have seen it.

Best Regards,
Todd

"three-eight-hotel" wrote in message
ups.com...
I don't think it would have been considered VFR in IMC... There were
absolutely no clouds (although clouds aren't what constitute IMC), and
at 3,000 feet I had constant visual reference with the ground and never
had to depend on my instruments for navigation or situational
awareness. I probably had visibility of 2-3 miles through the haze,

But as you know, less than 3 sm visibility is IMC (except in Class G during
the day at 1200' AGL or less), so VFR flight in those conditions is unsafe
and illegal.

You described being able to see things "down" but not "at a slant" in haze
at 3000'. At that altitude, if you can't see prominent objects 11 degrees
below horizontal, you have less than 3 sm visibility (and if you can't see
prominent objects 35 degrees below horizontal--still nowhere near
"down"--you have less than 1sm visibility).

Even if you can manage to aviate and navigate without instruments while
flying VFR in IMC, you don't have adequate means to see and avoid anyone
who's legally flying IFR near you. So you're betting their lives that you
won't happen to collide with them.

reason to post was
walking outside after dinner and seeing an entirely different weather
picture than I had seen only an hour ago, when I landed.

I appreciate your motivation for posting, but I think you've overlooked a
far more important lesson than the one you had in mind.

Regards,
Gary

Gary Drescher wrote:
: oups.com...
: I popped up to 3,000 ft and was amazed
: at how hazey it was towards the west. I stayed at 3,000, and always
: had visual reference to the ground, although it was very hazey and I
: really couldn't see much at a slant-distance. Having flown this dozens
: of times, I knew right where I was going [...]
: I continued on, always making sure I could see
: down, and having the out to turn around as I mentioned before.

: It sounds like you're describing a VFR flight in IMC. Or have I
: misunderstood you?

Might be, might not be. Playing the legal card here isn't helpful. As anyone
who's flown in the haze can attest, the visibility of 2.9 miles vs. 3.1 miles is not
something that is easily determined in flight. One is illegal, one is legal, and they
are both indeterminable in flight.

Was it MVFR? Sure. Was it IMC? Possibly. Remember that it's also very
possibly to legally fly under VFR in legal VMC and still require instruments to
control the aircraft (night, OTT with strange clouds below, etc). Unlike ceilings,
visibilities are not as clear-cut in determining when the conditions are IMC vs. VMC.

Chill.
-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

But as you know, less than 3 sm visibility is IMC (except in Class G during
the day at 1200' AGL or less), so VFR flight in those conditions is unsafe
and illegal.

Agreed.

You described being able to see things "down" but not "at a slant" in haze
at 3000'. At that altitude, if you can't see prominent objects 11 degrees
below horizontal, you have less than 3 sm visibility (and if you can't see
prominent objects 35 degrees below horizontal--still nowhere near
"down"--you have less than 1sm visibility).

Any typical day in the Sacramento Valley is going to involve haze,
except for those perfect days. I am certain that I have flown in
conditions of 10, 20+, to almost unlimited visibility, where I couldn't
see Mt. Diable, 90ish miles away, at an altitude that probably put it
at 11 degrees below horizontal.

Standing on the ground at the departure and destination airports, I can
comfortably say that there was 5 sm visibility, as I was amazed at how
different things could look from the ground and in the air. An
un-intentionally omitted fact was that the flight occured around 4:30
p.m., which added another parameter, being the setting sun. The
setting sun and haze could have likely made for poorer visibility, as
I was flying East to West???

Another fact that I will humbly admit to, is that my gauge of distance
probably leaves a lot to be desired. I welcome any and all comments to
how people best gauge distance. I would like to know that when I
report a 5 mile final, it isn't actually a 7 mile final, which I
suspect I might be guilty of.

I'm certainly not trying to be argumentative and appreciate your post,
nor am I looking to get flamed for flying VFR into IMC, which I assure
you, I would not be comfortable doing or be happy about, if I had let
it occur.

Even if you can manage to aviate and navigate without instruments while
flying VFR in IMC, you don't have adequate means to see and avoid anyone
who's legally flying IFR near you. So you're betting their lives that you
won't happen to collide with them.

As I said above, the visibilty on the ground, after arrival, I would
comfortably call 5 miles. Although I'd feel better about stating that,
if I could see a copy of the METAR for that time. Is there any way of
finding METAR information for a previous day??? It would be nice to
see a copy for peace of mind...

I appreciate your motivation for posting, but I think you've overlooked a
far more important lesson than the one you had in mind.

Thanks Gary! Your point is taken! I "did" take a 10 minute flight for
granted, and will no longer depend on a forecast and a pop-up and see
how it feels report for current weather. I will "always" get a
breifing at least one hour prior to departure. The other point in
that, is that there could have been a situation where a temporary TFR
was introduced since the original briefing...

Best Regards,
Todd

"three-eight-hotel" wrote in message ups.com...

if I could see a copy of the METAR for that time. Is there any way of
finding METAR information for a previous day??? It would be nice to
see a copy for peace of mind...

Todd


http://adds.aviationweather.gov/metars/
Enter the aerodrome identifier, and select the time period, up to 36 hours,
from the drop-down box.

"three-eight-hotel" wrote in message
ups.com...
You described being able to see things "down" but not "at a slant" in
haze
at 3000'. At that altitude, if you can't see prominent objects 11
degrees
below horizontal, you have less than 3 sm visibility (and if you can't
see
prominent objects 35 degrees below horizontal--still nowhere near
"down"--you have less than 1sm visibility).

Any typical day in the Sacramento Valley is going to involve haze,
except for those perfect days. I am certain that I have flown in
conditions of 10, 20+, to almost unlimited visibility, where I couldn't
see Mt. Diable, 90ish miles away, at an altitude that probably put it
at 11 degrees below horizontal.

Of course--it varies with altitude. At 3000', 11 degrees below horizontal
gives you just under 3 sm slant distance. At a much higher altitude, 11
degrees below horizontal gives a much greater slant distance.

Standing on the ground at the departure and destination airports, I can
comfortably say that there was 5 sm visibility, as I was amazed at how
different things could look from the ground and in the air. An
un-intentionally omitted fact was that the flight occured around 4:30
p.m., which added another parameter, being the setting sun. The
setting sun and haze could have likely made for poorer visibility, as
I was flying East to West???

Quite likely. But flight visibility is defined by how far you can see,
regardless of the factors that contribute to limiting that distance. And the
VMC/IMC visibility distinction is defined with regard to *flight*
visibility, not ground visibility.

Another fact that I will humbly admit to, is that my gauge of distance
probably leaves a lot to be desired. I welcome any and all comments to
how people best gauge distance.

Yup, it's hard to judge distance, especially when the air is very hazy.
Calculating the slant distances that correspond to various altitudes and
viewing angles can be helpful. An obvious easy one to remember is that at 30
degrees below horizontal, the slant distance is twice your altitude
(neglecting earth curvature).

I'm certainly not trying to be argumentative and appreciate your post,
nor am I looking to get flamed for flying VFR into IMC, which I assure
you, I would not be comfortable doing or be happy about, if I had let
it occur.

I believe you. But with no flame intended, and with all due respect, your
description (seeing things in the down direction, but not at much of a
slant, from 3000') makes it seem likely that your flight visibility was
*nowhere near* VMC. In fact, if you couldn't see prominent objects from your
altitude 35 degrees below horizontal, the conditions were not only IFR but
LIFR! (Of course, all this applies when you are *in* the haze rather than
*above* the haze.)

Even if you can manage to aviate and navigate without instruments while
flying VFR in IMC, you don't have adequate means to see and avoid anyone
who's legally flying IFR near you. So you're betting their lives that
you
won't happen to collide with them.

As I said above, the visibilty on the ground, after arrival, I would
comfortably call 5 miles.

But that's what not defines the difference between VMC and IMC. What matters
is *flight* visibility, which (as your story vividly illustrates) can be
much less than ground visibility. And it makes sense that the rules refer to
flight visibility, because a primary reason not to be VFR in IMC is the need
to see and avoid other aircraft--and that ability depends on your flight
visibility. (Again, my intent here is not to criticize, but to
constructively point out a vital distinction that you and perhaps other
pilots here may have forgotten.)

Thanks Gary! Your point is taken! I "did" take a 10 minute flight for
granted, and will no longer depend on a forecast and a pop-up and see
how it feels report for current weather. I will "always" get a
breifing at least one hour prior to departure.

That's a good idea too, but the same situation could well have arisen even
with a more up-to-date briefing. Once you take off and discover sub-VMC
flight visibility, the briefing becomes moot.

You might want to file an ASRS report on this flight--not only for your
legal protection (most likely no one noticed anyway), but also because this
is exactly the sort of event that NASA hopes to learn from in order to
improve aviation safety. As do the readers of this newsgroup, so thanks for
your post!

Regards,
Gary