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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Commercial crosscountry PIREP (way too long)
I wrote most of this just after getting back from a solo cross-country
towards my Commercial certificate. I'd never flown so far solo before. I realize for some of you old hands this isn't exceptional, but I'm still kicking off what seems like a whole series of training wheels. I thought I'd write these impressions while they are fresh, before I drop into bed under the influence of two large glasses of wine. I'd spent some hours during the week working out the various options. All of them involved going from Paine Field with different routings to either North Bend or Roseburg, both in Oregon. Not being sure of the fuel consumption of our elderly 172's, I had a conversation with our chief instructor yesterday and decided to assume 9gph, and make two fuel stops. North Bend turned out to have a forecast of strong gusting crosswinds (outside the envelope of both me and the plane) and - I just checked - the forecast was accurate. Roseburg was also forecast to be gusty - and it wasn't. I hadn't slept well the night before, partly because of the anticipation, and I came close to canceling. Still, I inventoried my state of alertness and decided I was OK (feel free to flame me here). The only plane available for the full day was 6132G, a nice craft to fly but with basic radios with no flip-flop. That was actually no problem; the radio changes were not challenging. I arrived at Regal Air around 10:15, talked to briefers, and even filed IFR plans for the first and last legs, although I don't really know why - there is very little advantage around here in IFR over flight following on a CAVU day, and as it happened today the IFR altitudes had a strong headwind for the first leg, which I was able to duck. Also, the plane's VOR receivers hadn't been calibrated since May, and since the Paine VOR is out of service it'd have been hard to verify them before launching anyway. But I used flight following on every leg. Weather for the entire route was unlimited and clear. I packed two water bottles, granola bars, fruit and a sandwich, fired up my old Airmap 300 with the 1999 database and was off at 11:28. OK, I'll be honest. After all the planning, the four segments themselves were pretty routine. PAE to HIO just required that I avoid the perma-TFRs and the Blue Angels TFR. I gave the Angels a wide berth and couldn't actually see any of their performance. Charged down to Hillsboro, had the same problem as once before with making out the airport, landed bouncily on the cross-runway 02 (the main runway 12-30 was closed for cleaning) and went to find my son and grandson who live nearby and had come to meet me. Hung out with them and paid for the tank top-up. Talked to a briefer and mentioned that the ride down was smooth but light turbulence during the descent. Later I saw that he had recorded that as a PIREP. The family waved me off and I went south, UBG direct Eugene and on to Roseburg. On the way down, near Salem, I had used the GPS to calculate the winds. At 6500 feet, my result was the same as the 6000 winds aloft forecast, except one knot different, so there was another PIREP. Although it seems like a dream now, the view over the Willamette valley is gorgeous. The valley itself is well tended, the Pacific was shimmering beyond the coastal range, and Mount Jefferson and the Three Sisters marked the Cascades. Not once did I get a traffic call in all of Oregon. RBG is hidden in a notch as the valley gives way to some hills, finally revealing itself, with the 34 pattern rather too close for comfort to a ridgeline to the west. Landed reasonably, and took some pictures just to prove the point, and refilled the water bottles. I got a youngster to sign the logbook, because I thought at least someone should. Roseburg was 99 degrees (yes, I had estimated the density altitude), and the nice dry breeze meant some of the oil intended for the sump went onto my shirt. So I was in Roseburg longer than intended, and left half an hour late on my schedule for the day. I flew airways most of the way to McMinnville, ignoring the GPS this time. By now there was a sameness to the flying, but I found a liberal talk radio show on the ADF, which resulted in my missing a couple of calls from Center... At MMV there was a 6-knot crosswind, and taking extra care in the landing (and despite an updraft on short final) I was very pleased with a smooth straight touchdown. I had called the FBO on Unicom, so they came out to meet me and refill the tanks again. I got a quick turnaround to get me back on schedule. And so back to Everett, via direct Olympia, direct. This was another leg for sightseeing and checking off the landmarks. Here, my broken sleep had some affect on my alertness. Although my flying was fine, and I didn't miss anything on the radio, I found myself fixating on one instrument or another and had to jolt myself back to a normal state. This was also the longest of the four legs. After Olympia I had a series of negotiations with the controller, which brought me back to the desired alertness. He didn't want me within 10 miles of the SeaTac evening push, and I didn't want to be too low ... I could have canceled FF, but that would have been rude, somehow. We worked it out and finally, after a long straight-in, with all my wits about me, I did a smooth, soft landing that bisected the centerline. Lessons learned. Get sleep. Just conducting the airplane on a series of 90 minute legs can be draining, and the need to keep having something to do. What I had almost forgotten - a good plan, with latest wind forecasts, can be carried out almost to the minute. And, I suppose the best lesson, how easy I found the whole thing. And the scenery isn't bad, either. I know one purpose of the commercial XC is to help you deal with changing weather. Oh well. It did get hotter in the Deep South, and there was an impressive pressure gradient that was probably responsible for the surface breezes. Even my calls to Fligh****ch tended to get a "still CAVU, why are you asking, thanks for the PIREP". About that fuel consumption. I had planned for 65% cruise, using the book values for RPM under the altitude/temperature conditions, and the numbers worked out at around 7.5gph, which is pretty good. That assumes the same burn rate for descent as for cruise, so it's probably an underestimate, but in any case I seem to have easily matched the book consumption. Not bad for a 1979 Skyhawk. Hobbs 6.8 Straight line PAE to RBG 284 Distance flown 585 -- David Brooks |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
You get traffic reports with VFR flight following, too, AJW. That's what it is for. The real name of FF is "Radar Traffic Information Service" (4-1-14 AIM). Not the best reason for choosing IFR over VFR. Unless there's a compelling reason not to, I almost always file IFR. It makes (in my view, at least) flying much easier. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Ben Jackson" wrote in message
news:xE_Rc.101784$8_6.36019@attbi_s04... [...] I realized how scary it would be to land there at night. That realization sort of put me off going to new airports at night VFR. For some airports, it should. For others, it's not such a big deal. It depends a lot on the airport itself and the terrain around it. I'm also more comfortable flying into an unfamiliar airport at night if it's got an instrument approach I can use, especially if I'm actually flying on an IFR flight plan and am under radar control. Other airports, even if I'm familiar with them, I would be VERY wary about landing or departing at night. Of course, there's "night" and then there's "NIGHT". With clear skies and a full moon, night operations are a lot easier. Overcast or new moon conditions are basically IFR, at least in the rural areas, even if you're legally flying VFR. As usual, it comes down an "it depends". You're wise to avoid night operations at *certain* airports that you're unfamiliar with, but don't limit yourself unnecessarily. Pete |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
AJW wrote:
You get traffic reports with VFR flight following, too, AJW. That's what it is for. The real name of FF is "Radar Traffic Information Service" (4-1-14 AIM). Not the best reason for choosing IFR over VFR. Unless there's a compelling reason not to, I almost always file IFR. It makes (in my view, at least) flying much easier. I'm still wavering on this issue, but when flying eastbound, I usually file IFR so that I can get above the clouds and pick up the strong tailwinds. Sometimes IFR doesn't make sense westbound because the MEAs are too high (navaid reception, not terrain) and would put me into the strong headwinds. North and south are tossups, of course, since you can have a headwind or tailwind either way. When you're flying a slow, 126-knot plane like a Warrior, a 30-50 kt headwind or tailwind makes an enormous difference in your ETE. When in doubt, I file -- if I get a clearance I don't like and I'm in good VMC, I can always cancel IFR. If I'm in IMC or MVFR conditions, well, I need to be IFR anyway. All the best, David |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"I can appreciate your not flying IFR. but in general it's so much easier to
plan and fly under those rules than VFR, and the traffic reports are nice to have. too." Agreed...but I interpreted your comment about traffic reports (above) to mean that they were not available when VFR. Bob "AJW" wrote in message ... You get traffic reports with VFR flight following, too, AJW. That's what it is for. The real name of FF is "Radar Traffic Information Service" (4-1-14 AIM). Not the best reason for choosing IFR over VFR. Unless there's a compelling reason not to, I almost always file IFR. It makes (in my view, at least) flying much easier. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
SWRFI Pirep.. (long) | Dave S | Home Built | 20 | May 21st 04 03:02 PM |
Commercial dual crosscountry definition | David Brooks | Piloting | 20 | February 6th 04 06:23 PM |
Another Addition to the Rec.Aviation Rogue's Gallery! | Jay Honeck | Home Built | 125 | February 1st 04 05:57 AM |
Another Addition to the Rec.Aviation Rogue's Gallery! | Jay Honeck | Owning | 116 | February 1st 04 05:57 AM |
Trafficscope PIREP - long | SeeAndAvoid | Owning | 6 | November 24th 03 08:24 PM |