Mountain flying knowledge required?

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
Sparký's.(Which, I agree, is a great book!)

Sorry, but I respectfully disagree.

Antonio

Morgans wrote:
"Toño" 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

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

"Toño" 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

"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

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

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

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.

"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

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
...

"Toño" 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