Flight over Lake Michigan?

[gismo]

I'm torn. If I go over, the plane probably won't die and I'll be just fine. I'll save $150 and about an hour and a half round-trip. But it's kind-of a battle between my logic which says go for it, and my gut instinct that says go around. I'm pretty sure I'll be making this flight a lot, but for now I think I'm going to play it safe. I've got less than 45 hours of flight time, and at the moment only 1.5 in a Cherokee - I scream inexperience, and while I think I could fly a strait line IFR across the lake just fine, it'll be challenge enough for this to be my first flight longer than 3 hours.

So I think in the future I will fly over the lake, but this time I think the odds are stacked up against me a little too much for my comfort.

Trust me on this, you will be far more comfortable avoiding the overwater route. Flying is supposed to be fun and I'd be willing to bet you'd become anxious about halfway across the lake the first time. And if the sky was hazy you could end up near to panic if you lost the horizon part way across. It's hard to describe the way the sky melts into the water under the right conditions but that's claimed many a pilot.

 

[dmccormack]

Trust me on this, you will be far more comfortable avoiding the overwater route. Flying is supposed to be fun and I'd be willing to bet you'd become anxious about halfway across the lake the first time. And if the sky was hazy you could end up near to panic if you lost the horizon part way across. It's hard to describe the way the sky melts into the water under the right conditions but that's claimed many a pilot.

On a flight training trip to NC, I took my student for some night flight training. Had him close his eyes as I pointed us due east, about 3 miles from shore.

It was a moonless, hazy night. There were no boats, no lights, no whitecaps -- nothing on the ocean.

It was a good experience for him and once I gave him the heading to return to shore he said, "That was downright scary -- I couldn't tell which way was up!"

 

[gismo]

On a flight training trip to NC, I took my student for some night flight training. Had him close his eyes as I pointed us due east, about 3 miles from shore.

It was a moonless, hazy night. There were no boats, no lights, no whitecaps -- nothing on the ocean.

It was a good experience for him and once I gave him the heading to return to shore he said, "That was downright scary -- I couldn't tell which way was up!"

And there are times when you can be convinced a sparse collection of lights on the ground are stars and vice versa with stars over dark ground/water even when the visibility is good.

 

[dmccormack]

And there are times when you can be convinced a sparse collection of lights on the ground are stars and vice versa with stars over dark ground/water even when the visibility is good.

Night Flying is Instrument Flying.

Treat it that way and you'll live a long and happy life.

 

[EdFred]

Night Flying is Instrument Flying.

Treat it that way and you'll live a long and happy life.

I think that depends on where you live. Here in Michigan the stars dont form long straight lines that stretch in the 4 cardinal directions.

 

[gismo]

Night Flying is Instrument Flying.

Treat it that way and you'll live a long and happy life.

While that approach is indeed the safest, the truth is that night flying can become instrument flying with little advanced notice under the right (wrong?) conditions. I had plenty of night flight experience before becoming instrument rated and most of those flights could easily have been made without any instruments in the airplane. The toughest part is knowing when this will be true with enough certainty that the risk is minimal.

 

[el con]

I'm a new pilot and have made the trip from Ludington to Manitowoc (42nm) which is I believe about the shortest route ,at 10500. I will admit that you hear things with the engine that you don't normally hear. I went over Beaver on the return trip.
I wore an inflatible vest so my wife could find my wallet
I'm old enough to not worry about death,it's going to get us all anyway at sometime. I don't have a death wish,you could die in the water of hypothermia ,crash into some tall or short concrete structure,a ball of flame,or falling from a 60 ft. pine tree landing. I'm going to really live till I die.A friend of mine knows two people in a twin that is still sitting on the bottom out there. With that said brush up on survival skills,go over the plane a few extra times,use common sense and when you get to the shoreline remember, If it doesn't feel right you can always turn North or South and watch your fuel as you divert. There are people killed on the highways going around Lake Michigan every weekend in cars,they don't have as many options as you do.
When some of these guys on the board tell you not to do it,know this:
Some of these same pilot's are camping at 6Y9 in the U.P in tents where we have Cougars and Wolves and Bears,OH MY!!!
1 Only fly over the Lake if it's clear enough to see the other side and the horizon.
2. Make sure you plane is thoroughly checked out and you have extra fuel.
3. If you don't feel good about it don't cross,go around.
4. Remember all the valid points the other pilots brought up and I have only been flying 105 hrs.
By the way it was nice to fly both ways,and I will be going down under Chicago airspace along the lakeshore too in the future
Have fun and a safe flight,just wing it (responsibly).

 

[jesse]

I'm a new pilot and have made the trip from Ludington to Manitowoc (42nm) which is I believe about the shortest route ,at 10500. I will admit that you hear things with the engine that you don't normally hear. I went over Beaver on the return trip.
I wore an inflatible vest so my wife could find my wallet
I'm old enough to not worry about death,it's going to get us all anyway at sometime. I don't have a death wish,you could die in the water of hypothermia ,crash into some tall or short concrete structure,a ball of flame,or falling from a 60 ft. pine tree landing. I'm going to really live till I die.A friend of mine knows two people in a twin that is still sitting on the bottom out there. With that said brush up on survival skills,go over the plane a few extra times,use common sense and when you get to the shoreline remember, If it doesn't feel right you can always turn North or South and watch your fuel as you divert. There are people killed on the highways going around Lake Michigan every weekend in cars,they don't have as many options as you do.
When some of these guys on the board tell you not to do it,know this:
Some of these same pilot's are camping at 6Y9 in the U.P in tents where we have Cougars and Wolves and Bears,OH MY!!!
1 Only fly over the Lake if it's clear enough to see the other side and the horizon.
2. Make sure you plane is thoroughly checked out and you have extra fuel.
3. If you don't feel good about it don't cross,go around.
4. Remember all the valid points the other pilots brought up and I have only been flying 105 hrs.
By the way it was nice to fly both ways,and I will be going down under Chicago airspace along the lakeshore too in the future
Have fun and a safe flight,just wing it (responsibly).

Nice post Brad.

Cougars and Wolves and Bears,OH MY!!!

So maybe when Tristan jumped awake at 3am saying something grabbed her foot..she wasn't lieing

 

[AdamZ]

I'm a new pilot and have made the trip from Ludington to Manitowoc (42nm) which is I believe about the shortest route ,at 10500. I will admit that you hear things with the engine that you don't normally hear. I went over Beaver on the return trip.
I wore an inflatible vest so my wife could find my wallet
I'm old enough to not worry about death,it's going to get us all anyway at sometime. I don't have a death wish,you could die in the water of hypothermia ,crash into some tall or short concrete structure,a ball of flame,or falling from a 60 ft. pine tree landing. I'm going to really live till I die.A friend of mine knows two people in a twin that is still sitting on the bottom out there. With that said brush up on survival skills,go over the plane a few extra times,use common sense and when you get to the shoreline remember, If it doesn't feel right you can always turn North or South and watch your fuel as you divert. There are people killed on the highways going around Lake Michigan every weekend in cars,they don't have as many options as you do.
When some of these guys on the board tell you not to do it,know this:
Some of these same pilot's are camping at 6Y9 in the U.P in tents where we have Cougars and Wolves and Bears,OH MY!!!
1 Only fly over the Lake if it's clear enough to see the other side and the horizon.
2. Make sure you plane is thoroughly checked out and you have extra fuel.
3. If you don't feel good about it don't cross,go around.
4. Remember all the valid points the other pilots brought up and I have only been flying 105 hrs.
By the way it was nice to fly both ways,and I will be going down under Chicago airspace along the lakeshore too in the future
Have fun and a safe flight,just wing it (responsibly).

Man with comments like that you must have had a real nut job for your CFI

 

[gprellwitz]

Man with comments like that you must have had a real nut job for your CFI

Ain't that the truth!

And he told us not to worry about the bears!

 

[RMCN172RG]

Ain't that the truth!

And he told us not to worry about the bears!

You don't have to worry about them. If they want something they will take care of it all by themselves.

Umh, send more tourists.

 

[ScottM]

Man with comments like that you must have had a real nut job for your CFI

I heard he is more like a real gambler

 

[tabrina]

We went out and bought a GPS - a Garmin nuvi 200, which is a car GPS, but it was on sale for about $100 off. We took it up in the Cherokee yesterday for a flight around Cedar Rapids and it seemed to do quite well. It has an offroad mode so it doesn't do too bad at putting you on nearby streets, and it has most airports built-in. It even had Green Castle, so it must be good. I figure it's just an added bonus to the navigating that I'll be doing on my own. It even did pretty good on my ground speed - 146mph during cruise with a tail wind.

 

[tabrina]

The flight's over! I went around the lake to the south, being careful to stay south of the Chicago Bravo. I got flight following both ways, but I noticed one very annoying thing about them - sometimes they didn't pass me off to the next station. On the flight back I had to ask the next frequency and when I could call them several times.

All in all, it was a pretty uneventful trip (wich is what I was hoping for On the way there I ran into some weather, though. That was pretty nerve-racking for me (at that point I didn't even have 45 hours total). There was a TFR to the north of my route, a pretty large rain shower to the south, and right in front of me a very big, black, ominous looking cloud which I didn't really want to fly under! I compromised and flew between the rain and the scary cloud. It wasn't too bad - it just rained pretty hard for a couple of minutes then I poked through and the weather from then on was just fine. It even got pretty sunny once I got into Michigan. In retrospect, I should have just done a 180 when I found out stuff was going to get ugly and diverted to the far south around the south edge of the rain. Poor decision-making on my part, I think, but when I first decided to go between the two there was a sizeable gap. By the time I got to that gap, though, it was gone - and then there was really no turning around - I was afraid that I would start getting turbulence which would make turning at that point worse for me than just going on through. Especially since I could see the edge of the rain. I'm curious - what would everyone else do in such a situation?

The ride back was great - it was windy the whole time, but once we got out of northern Michigan it was sunny and not as turbulent.

Oh, and the GPS worked well. We mostly used it to look at our ground speed and to check against the charts. It wasn't ever wrong, but I'd hate to have to rely on that thing. I tought my boyfriend how to navigate and find the frequencies I needed with the sectionals, and that was much better than the cheap GPS. I felt like that lady in the car GPS commercials - "Jake Jake, where am I?" "Jake Jake, how far to the closest airport?" "Jake Jake, what heading should I fly to get to get around that airspace?" Ha Ha, it was great.

 

[Steve]

If the cloud base is high enough I'll go VFR through the rain as long as I have a definite horizon or can maintain good visual contact with the ground ahead (> 1mile). If it looks like the bases are lowering or the rain intensity is increasing I'll try to go around the shafts. Last choice would be to set down and wait it out, but sometimes that's the best choice.


Btw, congrats on the flight. Looks like you did just fine.

The flight's over!

I'm curious - what would everyone else do in such a situation?

 

[gprellwitz]

Sounds like a great flight, Tabrina! As far as being handed off when on VFR advisories, some approaches will not accept handoffs (Chicago comes to mind), so you have to call them up after the previous people drop you. That's negotiated between the various facilities in a letter of understanding that we mere pilots aren't privy to.

As far as flying between the nasty black cloud and the rain, sounds like a sucker hole. If it made you uncomfortable then remember that feeling and go around next time. If you felt the rain was no big deal, then remember that too. Keep in mind, though, that weather can change quickly, and what is easily flyable one time might not be so benign the next. Err on the side of caution! Sounds like you did good, though!

 

[stingray]

I will fly through rain if there are no bumps nice calm stuff. I do not mess with storms, you may get through once or twice but it's that 3rd time that bites you. I will fly over the lake before I fly through a storm and be safer to boot.

Dan

 

[gismo]

If the cloud base is high enough I'll go VFR through the rain as long as I have a definite horizon or can maintain good visual contact with the ground ahead (> 1mile). If it looks like the bases are lowering or the rain intensity is increasing I'll try to go around the shafts. Last choice would be to set down and wait it out, but sometimes that's the best choice.


Btw, congrats on the flight. Looks like you did just fine.

Steve, I know you're OK with this but I strongly recommend that any relatively low time pilot forget about proceeding through rain with a little over 1 mile of visibility. For one thing you won't be able to see how bad the rain/vis is further ahead and are therefore taking a big risk WRT running into some actual IMC. You also cannot see another airplane further than about 1/2 to 1/4th the visibility distant under most conditions. Even if you're only making 100 Kt TAS, the time from detection to collision in 1 nm vis could be as little as five seconds (200 nm closure with detection at .25 nm)

 

[Steve]

I think the risk is higher driving down the highway under similar conditions, but we tend to ignore that aspect it seems.

 

[gismo]

I think the risk is higher driving down the highway under similar conditions, but we tend to ignore that aspect it seems.

You might be right, at least in the sky the chances for a "close encounter" are fairly small. OTOH, on the ground you can stop in 150-200 ft at high cruising speeds and they have these neat painted yellow lines on the ground to help maintain separation from opposing traffic that I've never seen in the air.

 

[tonycondon]

sounds like you had a good flight Tabrina, congrats! I wanna know how the rides went and what the airport ended up being like?

 

[alaskaflyer]

I read this thread in light of the upcoming possibility of moving to SE Alaska. There, landing in 40 degree water IS often your safest possibility for an emergency landing.

You are a poor pilot if you don't endeavor to manage risk on each flight. BUT, there is only so much risk you can manage before you find yourself selling the plane to stay shivering in your easy chair. It would suck to cross Lake Michigan, have an engine failure and stall it into the trees in the widespread forest on the other side and die

 

[Ted]

Sounds like a great and successful flight, Tabrina! Good use of crew management by making your boyfriend do work. It's good to utilize all the resources you have, especially when you're at low hours. A few comments (since I was where you are a few months ago, and have learned a few things now that I wish I knew then):

The flight's over! I went around the lake to the south, being careful to stay south of the Chicago Bravo. I got flight following both ways, but I noticed one very annoying thing about them - sometimes they didn't pass me off to the next station. On the flight back I had to ask the next frequency and when I could call them several times.

You have a few options with Bravos. You can attempt to go through them if approach will allow it. This varies depending on who you talk to, the amount of traffic they're dealing with, etc. You can avoid them entirely (which it sounds like you did). You can also be careful to locate yourself in a particular place and skirt around the edges of them (this is what I normally do when flying to New York). The last thing is you can go over them, assuming the clouds permit it. Personally, I'll advocate going high when the weather permits. It allows you to go more direct, plus it gives you more options in case of an engine failure. If I can do it, I'll try to. The reason I don't when going to New York is that the airports I'll land at are just within the outer ring, so it makes sense for me to just go low if they won't give me clearance through the Bravo.

All in all, it was a pretty uneventful trip (wich is what I was hoping for On the way there I ran into some weather, though. That was pretty nerve-racking for me (at that point I didn't even have 45 hours total). There was a TFR to the north of my route, a pretty large rain shower to the south, and right in front of me a very big, black, ominous looking cloud which I didn't really want to fly under! I compromised and flew between the rain and the scary cloud. It wasn't too bad - it just rained pretty hard for a couple of minutes then I poked through and the weather from then on was just fine. It even got pretty sunny once I got into Michigan. In retrospect, I should have just done a 180 when I found out stuff was going to get ugly and diverted to the far south around the south edge of the rain. Poor decision-making on my part, I think, but when I first decided to go between the two there was a sizeable gap. By the time I got to that gap, though, it was gone - and then there was really no turning around - I was afraid that I would start getting turbulence which would make turning at that point worse for me than just going on through. Especially since I could see the edge of the rain. I'm curious - what would everyone else do in such a situation?

It's hard for any of us to give a good answer since we weren't there. Rain and turbulence aren't necessarily problems. However, low visibility is, and if you get excessive turbulence, that is a problem, too. It all depends on your comfort level. Remember that you can always go back or just land and wait it out for a bit. Obviously you survived, and you will get better at learning how to read weather and what you're comfortable with. You'll figure out what you don't want to handle. One thing you've learned is that holes in weather can close up. One suggestion I can give here is to spend some time flying in less than ideal conditions with a CFI (or another pilot) who has more experience. This past weekend my instructor and I flew through a squall line area, and so he taught me about reading the storms and finding holes. In bad weather flying high is better, too. It allows you to be above the benign stuff and get a better view of the things that will really cause problems. For my flight home last weekend, I was at 11,500 ft. We were at the tops of the benign clouds, and got to see all the massive vertical developments that we didn't want to go to.

Oh, and the GPS worked well. We mostly used it to look at our ground speed and to check against the charts. It wasn't ever wrong, but I'd hate to have to rely on that thing. I tought my boyfriend how to navigate and find the frequencies I needed with the sectionals, and that was much better than the cheap GPS. I felt like that lady in the car GPS commercials - "Jake Jake, where am I?" "Jake Jake, how far to the closest airport?" "Jake Jake, what heading should I fly to get to get around that airspace?" Ha Ha, it was great.

GPS is a tool, just like anything else. Relying on any single tool is a recipe for problems. The best thing is to know how to use all the tools available to you (for navigation, that would probably end up being GPS, VORs, and looking out the window), and use them all together. They should place you in roughly the same location. Then, you can use any one and then have backups in case one fails.

Kudos on a great flight! Time to go fly some more!

 

[n20junkie]

I have and will continue to cross the lake, with life jackets. You can go high, and talk to people on the way down. from 10,000 feet, you have the ability to get rescue assets moving if need be. And we fly many times close to death, its just not known usually. Chances are you will lose power, but a total engine failure are somewhat rare in a cruise profile, assuming the aircraft has gas.

 

[Steve]

If I can't maintain a mile visibility VFR I'm turning around. Any legal pilot would do the same.

The OP asked what I would do, not for a recommendation. That's all I was responding to.

btw, you don't have to meet opposing traffic to get run over on a highway with limited visibility, I-10 near Mobile and N. O. has demonstrated that on numerous occasions when the fog persists during the daily commute.

Steve, I know you're OK with this but I strongly recommend that any relatively low time pilot forget about proceeding through rain with a little over 1 mile of visibility. For one thing you won't be able to see how bad the rain/vis is further ahead and are therefore taking a big risk WRT running into some actual IMC. You also cannot see another airplane further than about 1/2 to 1/4th the visibility distant under most conditions. Even if you're only making 100 Kt TAS, the time from detection to collision in 1 nm vis could be as little as five seconds (200 nm closure with detection at .25 nm)

 

[flyingcheesehead]

You have a few options with Bravos. You can attempt to go through them if approach will allow it.

Ted, this was Chicago... And this is what the Chicago TAC would look like if Chicago Approach had their way:

The last thing is you can go over them, assuming the clouds permit it. Personally, I'll advocate going high when the weather permits. It allows you to go more direct, plus it gives you more options in case of an engine failure. If I can do it, I'll try to.

The problem with going over: That's where the big airplanes enter and exit the Bravo, and they're going very fast with insane climb rates. Keep your eyes open!

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I have and will continue to cross the lake, with life jackets. You can go high, and talk to people on the way down. from 10,000 feet, you have the ability to get rescue assets moving if need be.

An airplane that's in my logbook ended up at the bottom of the lake. The pilot did exactly as you describe. I think you're overestimating the speed of the rescue assets. The plane sank long before they got there, and the pilot was never found despite being within five miles of shore and a very strong swimmer (as in, competitive). Lake Michigan is some coooooold water, all the life jacket means is that they'll find your body.

That's why I limit my lake crossings in singles to the times of year when boats are everywhere and don't go below 12,000 feet... And that's not even enough to make shore.

 

[ScottM]

An airplane that's in my logbook ended up at the bottom of the lake. The pilot did exactly as you describe. I think you're overestimating the speed of the rescue assets.

I think I can talk about the rescue asset around Lake Michigan with some authority.

In the summer time the USCG has helicopters at Traverse City and Waukegan, IL (north of Chicago). From Labor Day until Memorial Day they only have them at Traverse City, MI.

That means USCG air assets are limited to fixed wing USCG Aux flights and fire department assets on the west and south parts of the lake. It would take 2 hours for the helo to get from Traverse to say Gary, IN. The USCG boats on Lake Michigan are mostly small patrol boats that will take a long time to get out into the middle of the lake.

I also have the unique perspective of actually being on the receiving end of a rescue.

I was three miles off of the coast of Evanston. when we sank one October Saturday. When we started having trouble we alerted the Coast Guard and advised them of what was happening and gave a position report. 15 minutes later we were barely able to get a MAYDAY out before we were all in the 50F water. It was 1.5 hours before we were rescued.

I had a 7mm wet suit on and no gloves. When I was being pulled form the water my hands did not work. The captain who was in street clothes was a mess and was near unconciousnes.

I have a healthy respect for cold water and I KNOW how long it will be until a rescue. If you do not rescue you yourself you may not survive. The rescue assets are mostly there doing recovery.

 

[Ted]

Ted, this was Chicago... And this is what the Chicago TAC would look like if Chicago Approach had their way:

Not all Bravos are that way, Kent! I was giving more general advice. NY and Philly, for example, are both very friendly and I have had no issues. Talking to Detroit Approach on Saturday, they seemed friendly as well (but I have heard otherwise). Same for Cleveland. I didn't actually go in Detroit or Cleveland Bravo (I was above them... literally, and outside the wedding cake).

The problem with going over: That's where the big airplanes enter and exit the Bravo, and they're going very fast with insane climb rates. Keep your eyes open!

Correct, this is why it's important to be on flight following if you can get it. Center/Approach/Whoever will tell you where to fly to make sure you stay out of the bad stuff. On Saturday, we got to see a 757 flying by off the left side of the plane. Too bad the camera wasn't ready, that would've been a good shot.

Thing is, when you're going low (especially on a nice day) you have all the VFR traffic and people like a certain friend and coworker of mine on this forum who shall remain nameless () who likes to be antisocial while flying and not talk to ATC. They're flying around with without any advisories of who's around, other than (hopefully) looking out the window. At least the big planes have TCAS and are presumably paying more attention to it. So, no matter what, you've got something to be concerned with. Personally, I like going high, but I like talking to ATC.

Of course, what your plane's performance is is another factor. By the time you get up to 11,500 in the Archer, it's pretty anemic. I can only suspect a 150/152 to be even worse.

 

[tabrina]

I can attest to the class bravo around Chicago being less than welcoming. On the way back I flew into the mode C ring, but was explicitly told not to enter the bravo. I hadn't planned to anyway, so I didn't really care.

Flying through the rain wasn't really very nerve-racking in the sense that I was actively afraid of losing my visibility or losing control of the airplane - I never felt like I wasn't in control. I've just heard so many horror stories of pilots who thought that they could handle rain or a storm and something happened and they ended up a pile of burnt aluminum. It was more that aspect that I was worried about. I'd rather not play the odds

I have mixed feelings about the Mancelona airport. On the one hand its 18-36 runway is nice and long and very wide wich made it very easy to land and take off when I was full of passengers. But on the other hand it wasn't in the greatest condition. It was mowed, but pretty rough. There was another (grass) runway, but I wouldn't have felt comfortable taking off or landing on it while full of passengers. It was 2400 feet with an 800 ft displaced threshold. I know that's plenty, but it sure looked tiny. I was glad the winds were from the south the whole time.

The rides all went quite well. I took 5 people up in two flights and three of the five had never been in an airplane before. I admire them all, because it was quite choppy once we got up. I was perfectly comfortable with it, but for someone who has never flown before I could see it being very scary. The first flight right after takeoff we got up over the tree line and started getting tossed around quite a bit. I saw the worried look on the passengers' faces and assured them that we wouldn't fall out of the sky. I think that made them feel a little better, but not as much as it did when we got the ground and trees a little farther beneath us. The landings were a bit more interesting than I would have liked, but coming in over those Michigan forests made for some weird winds. For my final to 18 I was correcting for a crosswind from the left, but as soon as I got beneath the tree line the crosswind changed to the right and I would have to make a quick correction back the other way before touching down. I think everyone had a good time - they all had smiles on their faces getting out of the plane and nobody puked from the turbulence, so I say it was a success.

 

[CJones]

I can attest to the class bravo around Chicago being less than welcoming. On the way back I flew into the mode C ring, but was explicitly told not to enter the bravo. I hadn't planned to anyway, so I didn't really care.

Flying through the rain wasn't really very nerve-racking in the sense that I was actively afraid of losing my visibility or losing control of the airplane - I never felt like I wasn't in control. I've just heard so many horror stories of pilots who thought that they could handle rain or a storm and something happened and they ended up a pile of burnt aluminum. It was more that aspect that I was worried about. I'd rather not play the odds

I have mixed feelings about the Mancelona airport. On the one hand its 18-36 runway is nice and long and very wide wich made it very easy to land and take off when I was full of passengers. But on the other hand it wasn't in the greatest condition. It was mowed, but pretty rough. There was another (grass) runway, but I wouldn't have felt comfortable taking off or landing on it while full of passengers. It was 2400 feet with an 800 ft displaced threshold. I know that's plenty, but it sure looked tiny. I was glad the winds were from the south the whole time.

The rides all went quite well. I took 5 people up in two flights and three of the five had never been in an airplane before. I admire them all, because it was quite choppy once we got up. I was perfectly comfortable with it, but for someone who has never flown before I could see it being very scary. The first flight right after takeoff we got up over the tree line and started getting tossed around quite a bit. I saw the worried look on the passengers' faces and assured them that we wouldn't fall out of the sky. I think that made them feel a little better, but not as much as it did when we got the ground and trees a little farther beneath us. The landings were a bit more interesting than I would have liked, but coming in over those Michigan forests made for some weird winds. For my final to 18 I was correcting for a crosswind from the left, but as soon as I got beneath the tree line the crosswind changed to the right and I would have to make a quick correction back the other way before touching down. I think everyone had a good time - they all had smiles on their faces getting out of the plane and nobody puked from the turbulence, so I say it was a success.

Sounds like fun! Now you're ready for 6Y9 for Labor Day!

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I think I can talk about the rescue asset around Lake Michigan with some authority.

In the summer time the USCG has helicopters at Traverse City and Waukegan, IL (north of Chicago). From Labor Day until Memorial Day they only have them at Traverse City, MI.

That means USCG air assets are limited to fixed wing USCG Aux flights and fire department assets on the west and south parts of the lake. It would take 2 hours for the helo to get from Traverse to say Gary, IN. The USCG boats on Lake Michigan are mostly small patrol boats that will take a long time to get out into the middle of the lake.

I also have the unique perspective of actually being on the receiving end of a rescue.

I was three miles off of the coast of Evanston. when we sank one October Saturday. When we started having trouble we alerted the Coast Guard and advised them of what was happening and gave a position report. 15 minutes later we were barely able to get a MAYDAY out before we were all in the 50F water. It was 1.5 hours before we were rescued.

I had a 7mm wet suit on and no gloves. When I was being pulled form the water my hands did not work. The captain who was in street clothes was a mess and was near unconciousnes.

I have a healthy respect for cold water and I KNOW how long it will be until a rescue. If you do not rescue you yourself you may not survive. The rescue assets are mostly there doing recovery.

Thanks for the perspective, Scott. That's about what I figured. The plane went in the drink only about 5 miles off shore, due east of KMKE, in April. (Aren't water temps the coldest around then?) The boats were launched before he hit the water, but still couldn't get there in time.

"The airplane had experienced a loss of engine power while in cruise flight over Lake Michigan."
"The pilot survived the ditching and is presumed drowned."
"the pilot used his mobile phone to call 911 after ditching in Lake Michigan."

 

[tonycondon]

Sounds like fun! Now you're ready for 6Y9 for Labor Day!

thanks for the report Tabrina. You are coming to Sidnaw right?

 

[ScottM]

FYi this is what VFR with more than 10 miles vis looks like when you are over the lake on a moderate hazy day. These were shot looking towards Manitowac from 10500'MSL at a distance of about 45NM.

On image 8 you see some interference on the left from my prop. But the black dot at about 1 o'clock is a freighter on the surface of the lake.

 

[azure]

FYi this is what VFR with more than 10 miles vis looks like when you are over the lake on a moderate hazy day. These were shot looking towards Manitowac from 10500'MSL at a distance of about 45NM.

That looks familiar. I've been pax about three times with a friend in a Cardinal RG on that crossing, once at the controls. We were flying PHN to ATW so we made the crossing at the LDM-MTW "narrow" point (about 50 nm). We always went as high as we could. I think we were either 8500 or 10,500 the time I was at the controls, then 9500 coming back. Once you're about halfway across you start to see the opposite shore, but as you're just getting out over the lake you really have no horizon, even with ~10 SM vis which isn't very hazy. Stay on the gauges and watch out for traffic at the same time! (Or better yet, have a pilot friend along as "safety pilot".)

 

[Ted]

Yep... A few weeks ago I flew to Block Island, which involved some time over water, and the rest of the time it was an MVFR flight over land. Lots of haze the whole trip. I was definitely using instruments for that one. I would not have made the trip if I had just gotten my PPL. In fact, the main reason I felt comfortable with making the trip with that visibility was that I'm very close to getting my IR.

 

[AdamZ]

Yep... A few weeks ago I flew to Block Island, which involved some time over water, and the rest of the time it was an MVFR flight over land. Lots of haze the whole trip. I was definitely using instruments for that one. I would not have made the trip if I had just gotten my PPL. In fact, the main reason I felt comfortable with making the trip with that visibility was that I'm very close to getting my IR.

Ted one of the things I think I'm hearing here is that the Water we fly over ie to Block Island, Provincetown, Martha's Vineyard or Nantucket are eh all with in 24 mi or so of land. Plus there are a ton of boats around all these places, working boats, fishing, pleasure etc. flying from Dixie to JFK on V16 over the ocean If I had to put down I'd be luck not to hit a boat.

It seems over the Great lakes there really ain't much out there in the way of boats and you'd sit in an icebath way to long before you were picked up. I canntot help but always think of that kid who almost made it to the WI shore and stood on his wing and made a 911 call never to befound again.

 

[Ted]

It seems over the Great lakes there really ain't much out there in the way of boats and you'd sit in an icebath way to long before you were picked up. I canntot help but always think of that kid who almost made it to the WI shore and stood on his wing and made a 911 call never to befound again.

Correct, and that is part of the decision factor. A few weeks back I made a flight over Lake Erie that had me over it about as long as possible, with land not in sight. Landing would have meant ditching in the water. We brought life vests, but we also were comfortable with the reliability of our engine. Good decision or not? I suppose that depends on your risk tolerance. We were comfortable with it.

 

[Dave2]

I canntot help but always think of that kid who almost made it to the WI shore and stood on his wing and made a 911 call never to be found again.

Well I survived two more crossings of Lake Michigan, and OSH was great but hot, what's new. A little wind would have helped.

As for that kid, well he plain ran out of fuel, and had no form of survival equipment on board. Yes it is a shame no question, but again he was improperly prepaired. You can vastly improve your chances of succesful crossings, by checking you equipment and your aircraft. Personally I'd never do it unless it was in a personally owned aircraft.

 

[dmccormack]

Correct, and that is part of the decision factor. A few weeks back I made a flight over Lake Erie that had me over it about as long as possible, with land not in sight. Landing would have meant ditching in the water. We brought life vests, but we also were comfortable with the reliability of our engine. Good decision or not? I suppose that depends on your risk tolerance. We were comfortable with it.

Were you in a fixed gear?

If so, ditching will be painful -- it's almost impossible to prevent a flip forward once the gear dig in to the surface.

One older Cessna I flew has a note in the POH to "Avoid Water Landings if at all possible."

Code for "You ain't gonna like it..."

The Great Lakes surface water temperatures vary quite a bit -- Lake Erie can be 76 degrees F in July, while Superior barely breaks 50 F.