Near miss from space junk.

In article ,
says...
"chris" wrote in
ups.com:

On Apr 3, 2:53 pm, Jose wrote:
Really?? But you gotta be clear of cloud, surely!!!

Yes, you must be clear of cloud. Depending on the airspace, you must be
certain distances away. However, in the US you do not need ground
contact. You can fly VFR above a solid overcast.

It may not be too bright to do so, depending on circumstances. However,
it is legal, and often not a dumb thing to do.

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Makes me laugh, just a little.. People here have been telling me how
dangerous it is to fly without accurate fuel gauges coz you might have
a fuel leak or something like that and here you guys are now telling
me you can fly above a solid overcast.. What happens if you have an
engine failure?? Or get to your destination and you can't get down??
I also wouldn't think you could navigate by using your map if you
can't see the surface, so that means using VOR or GPS or something,
which I was under the impression are supposed to be secondary to your
map reading! But what do I know... :-)


In clear VFR, would you fly over water, say between the North and
South Island or, in the US, between Ventura and Catalina? If so, you have
no option on where to land should you get an engine failure. If you would
not such a flight in clear VFR, then you shouldn't fly over a solid
overcast. But if you would, what is the difference, especially if you have
CAVU and can see your destination?

The difference is you pack a liferaft.

--
Duncan

On Apr 3, 5:01 pm, "Maxwell" wrote:
"chris" wrote in message

oups.com...



Hey guys.. I have noticed a bit of a theme with these posts.. It
seems people here are saying it's nice to have a stick to dip your
tanks. That makes it sound like it's not standard to have one??? In
whatever country you are from, that is. Here you'd be hard pressed
to find an aircraft that doesn't have a stick in it, except for things
like Robins that have one tank inside the fuselage and a funny fuel
filler in the side window..

If this is true, doesn't it follow that if sticks are not standard
then people will be inclined to not use them, and then they presumably
will begin to rely on gauges which seem to be prone to going tits up,
whereas a stick has no moving parts to break down :-)

So, I am thinking it is more sensible to always dip your tanks and
then ignore the gauges than it is to not have a stick and have to rely
on gauges or eyeballing the tank???

I think the reason most of the people including me seldom use them, is we
usually top off before each take off. I fly rental aircraft and usually find
the aircraft topped off or just an hour or so down. Unless you are pushing
the minimums it's either full enough it's obviouse to the eyeball, or you
top off to be on the safe side.


I rent, and have often found not much gas in the tanks.. Without
dipping the tanks I can't tell if there's enough.. I am not likely to
go wait in line to fill up if I am not going far, but we aren't going
anywhere if we don't know how much is in there..

On Apr 3, 7:13 pm, Marty Shapiro
wrote:
"chris" wrote roups.com:



On Apr 3, 2:53 pm, Jose wrote:
Really?? But you gotta be clear of cloud, surely!!!

Yes, you must be clear of cloud. Depending on the airspace, you must be
certain distances away. However, in the US you do not need ground
contact. You can fly VFR above a solid overcast.

It may not be too bright to do so, depending on circumstances. However,
it is legal, and often not a dumb thing to do.

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Makes me laugh, just a little.. People here have been telling me how
dangerous it is to fly without accurate fuel gauges coz you might have
a fuel leak or something like that and here you guys are now telling
me you can fly above a solid overcast.. What happens if you have an
engine failure?? Or get to your destination and you can't get down??
I also wouldn't think you could navigate by using your map if you
can't see the surface, so that means using VOR or GPS or something,
which I was under the impression are supposed to be secondary to your
map reading! But what do I know... :-)

In clear VFR, would you fly over water, say between the North and
South Island or, in the US, between Ventura and Catalina? If so, you have
no option on where to land should you get an engine failure. If you would
not such a flight in clear VFR, then you shouldn't fly over a solid
overcast. But if you would, what is the difference, especially if you have
CAVU and can see your destination?

I've done the trip from San Jose to South Lake Tahoe and there have
been several times the central valley is fogged in but the fog only came up
to 1,000' AGL. The weather in the Santa Clara Valley (San Jose), the
mountains west of Sacramento, South Lake Tahoe, and at my cruise altitude,
9,500 MSL, it was CAVU all the way. If I have an engine failure over the
central valley, I'm in big trouble as it is often W0X0F on the ground, but
I'm in just as much trouble over the mountains or water where I have CAVU.
If it's W0X0F, unless I'm CAT IIIc capable, even an instrument rating isn't
going to be of much help.

I would not go over an extended overcast unless I knew the weather
patterns at both my origin and destination and planned alternates. In the
mountains, the higher elevation airports often are CAVU when the valley
airports are effectively closed due to Tule fog.

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

The difference between flying over water and flying over cloud is if
you have an engine failure over water there is not going to be any
buildings, trees, fences, cows or cars below you. I would really hate
to try and do a forced landing if I don't know what is waiting for me
under the cloud...

On Apr 3, 9:05 pm, Dave Doe wrote:
In article ,
says...





"chris" wrote in message
roups.com...

Hey guys.. I have noticed a bit of a theme with these posts.. It
seems people here are saying it's nice to have a stick to dip your
tanks. That makes it sound like it's not standard to have one??? In
whatever country you are from, that is. Here you'd be hard pressed
to find an aircraft that doesn't have a stick in it, except for things
like Robins that have one tank inside the fuselage and a funny fuel
filler in the side window..

If this is true, doesn't it follow that if sticks are not standard
then people will be inclined to not use them, and then they presumably
will begin to rely on gauges which seem to be prone to going tits up,
whereas a stick has no moving parts to break down :-)

So, I am thinking it is more sensible to always dip your tanks and
then ignore the gauges than it is to not have a stick and have to rely
on gauges or eyeballing the tank???

I think the reason most of the people including me seldom use them, is we
usually top off before each take off. I fly rental aircraft and usually find
the aircraft topped off or just an hour or so down. Unless you are pushing
the minimums it's either full enough it's obviouse to the eyeball, or you
top off to be on the safe side.

Most of the Cessnas and Pipers I've flown can not be topped off, with
passengers, and not be above MAUW.

--
Duncan

That's right...

Something us fat *******s have worse then the rest of you :-)

Sylvain writes:

if you are entering IMC while VFR, knowing where you are will be
the least of your problem: you'll be dead before it matters one
way or the other.

Not if you know how to fly with instruments.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

chris writes:

And as far as I am concerned, if you are a VFR pilot, if you enter
IMC, it isn't suddenly IFR flying if you ain't got your IFR rating!

You don't need a rating to know how to fly by instruments. The rating just
makes it legal. But if you are stuck in IMC and you know instrument flight
but don't have the rating, I don't think it would be a good idea to throw up
your hands and give up because you cannot legally use the instruments.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

chris writes:

The amount of instrument training a PPL student receives is sufficient
in theory to allow him/her to get the hell out of the weather. Its not
intended to allow you to press on in IMC. You need a lot more IF
training to be proficient enough to not kill yourself..

I agree, based on what I've seen of instrument knowledge among alleged pilots
here. But nothing prevents you from learning about instrument flight if you
want to. Personally, I think instrument flight is highly interesting and it
surprises me that so many VFR pilots do not seem to look into it. In fact, I
learned how to fly on instruments before learning how to fly by hand, since
early simulators were much better at simulating instrument flight than they
were at simulating real flight (they still are, but now visual flight is much
more realistic and good enough to be worth practicing).

The last thing I'd be doing is diverting my attention from my scan to
read a chart when I would almost certainly be struggling keeping it
upright.

The aircraft is no more difficult to maintain upright in zero visibility than
it is in perfectly clear weather. There are no evil demons trying to turn it
over just because you are in IMC. Set it straight and level and trim for it
and then you can look at your chart.

If there is someone in the right-hand seat, he or she can help a lot as well,
although that's not an absolute requirement.

No, you get the hell out of the IMC

If you don't know where you are, which way do you go to get out?

If you've just plunged into IMC, you can make a U-turn and probably get back
out. But if that doesn't work, you'll need a plan B.

Two things we are trained to do in the event of imminent IMC. 1)
Always make sure you have an escape route
2) We practise precautionary landings. Stick the damn thing down in a
paddock rather than pressing on and killing yourself.

The first makes sense. But how do you land in IMC?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Dave Doe wrote in
. nz:

In article ,
says...
"chris" wrote in
ups.com:

On Apr 3, 2:53 pm, Jose wrote:
Really?? But you gotta be clear of cloud, surely!!!

Yes, you must be clear of cloud. Depending on the airspace, you
must be certain distances away. However, in the US you do not
need ground contact. You can fly VFR above a solid overcast.

It may not be too bright to do so, depending on circumstances.
However, it is legal, and often not a dumb thing to do.

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Makes me laugh, just a little.. People here have been telling me
how dangerous it is to fly without accurate fuel gauges coz you
might have a fuel leak or something like that and here you guys are
now telling me you can fly above a solid overcast.. What happens
if you have an engine failure?? Or get to your destination and you
can't get down?? I also wouldn't think you could navigate by using
your map if you can't see the surface, so that means using VOR or
GPS or something, which I was under the impression are supposed to
be secondary to your map reading! But what do I know... :-)


In clear VFR, would you fly over water, say between the
North and
South Island or, in the US, between Ventura and Catalina? If so, you
have no option on where to land should you get an engine failure. If
you would not such a flight in clear VFR, then you shouldn't fly over
a solid overcast. But if you would, what is the difference,
especially if you have CAVU and can see your destination?

The difference is you pack a liferaft.


Well, yeah, if you don't flip over on landing a fixed gear aircraft on
water and can get out before the aircraft sinks. Of course, this doesn't
address flying over the Sierra-Nevada's where there is no place but tree
tops to land, nor does it address the issue of an instrument rated and
current pilot overflying the California central valley with all airports
below you W0X0F when there is Tule fog. Are these all "No Go"? If the
prospect of an engine failure while overflying Tule fog in the central
valley is a "No Go" for VFR, then is it also a "No Go" for IFR if neither
you, your aircraft, nor the underlying airports are not all CAT IIIc rated?

There is always some risk. You need to decide what level of risk you
will accept. To me, overflying the central valley Tule fog isn't any more
of a risk than overflying the Sierra-Nevada in areas where I've only got
tree tops for landing and not that much altitude AGL.

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

"Mxsmanic" wrote

You don't need a rating to know how to fly by instruments. The rating
just
makes it legal. But if you are stuck in IMC and you know instrument
flight
but don't have the rating, I don't think it would be a good idea to throw
up
your hands and give up because you cannot legally use the instruments.

Every year there are instrument rated pilots who get killed in "continued
VFR" accidents. "Knowing how" to fly on instruments is not the same thing
as having experience and maintaining proficiency. There is also a stress
factor involved when confronted with weather that is degrading to IMC, and
stress leads to singular focus or the inability to multi-task, which is a
very bad thing when you're flying, especially if you're on instruments.

BDS

"chris" wrote in
ps.com:

On Apr 3, 7:13 pm, Marty Shapiro
wrote:
"chris" wrote
roups.com:



On Apr 3, 2:53 pm, Jose wrote:
Really?? But you gotta be clear of cloud, surely!!!

Yes, you must be clear of cloud. Depending on the airspace, you
must be certain distances away. However, in the US you do not
need ground contact. You can fly VFR above a solid overcast.

It may not be too bright to do so, depending on circumstances.
However, it is legal, and often not a dumb thing to do.

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Makes me laugh, just a little.. People here have been telling me
how dangerous it is to fly without accurate fuel gauges coz you
might have a fuel leak or something like that and here you guys are
now telling me you can fly above a solid overcast.. What happens
if you have an engine failure?? Or get to your destination and you
can't get down?? I also wouldn't think you could navigate by using
your map if you can't see the surface, so that means using VOR or
GPS or something, which I was under the impression are supposed to
be secondary to your map reading! But what do I know... :-)

In clear VFR, would you fly over water, say between the North
and
South Island or, in the US, between Ventura and Catalina? If so, you
have no option on where to land should you get an engine failure. If
you would not such a flight in clear VFR, then you shouldn't fly over
a solid overcast. But if you would, what is the difference,
especially if you have CAVU and can see your destination?

I've done the trip from San Jose to South Lake Tahoe and
there have
been several times the central valley is fogged in but the fog only
came up to 1,000' AGL. The weather in the Santa Clara Valley (San
Jose), the mountains west of Sacramento, South Lake Tahoe, and at my
cruise altitude, 9,500 MSL, it was CAVU all the way. If I have an
engine failure over the central valley, I'm in big trouble as it is
often W0X0F on the ground, but I'm in just as much trouble over the
mountains or water where I have CAVU. If it's W0X0F, unless I'm CAT
IIIc capable, even an instrument rating isn't going to be of much
help.

I would not go over an extended overcast unless I knew the
weather
patterns at both my origin and destination and planned alternates.
In the mountains, the higher elevation airports often are CAVU when
the valley airports are effectively closed due to Tule fog.

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

The difference between flying over water and flying over cloud is if
you have an engine failure over water there is not going to be any
buildings, trees, fences, cows or cars below you. I would really hate
to try and do a forced landing if I don't know what is waiting for me
under the cloud...



Will you fly with a new moon and CAVU weather, especially over open
country? You've got the same problem. Does NZ permit night flight without
an instrument rating and/or being on an instrument flight plan?

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)