Haze and maintaining VFR

[Rob Schaffer]

So, yesterday I had a really important lesson while flying with my wife on our first breakfast run to Lancaster PA. (read about it here -> http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showthread.php?p=330940#post330940 ) We cancelled this trip before due to the haze and bad weather / fog, and the conditions this time seemed much better. The flight out was good, with the haze being 6miles Vis but the sun at our back, with periods of bright sun illuminating the way infront of us for a good 10 miles occasionally.

When flying back, the situation was entirely different. Of course, the weather was changing every second as well yesterday in PA, but the haze was still there, vis reported at 4 miles, and while the sun was near mid-day height, it would be off to our south impeding our vision in that direction.

IF, there were no clouds forming nearby and it was just a hazy day, what are my options as a VFR private pilot?

While as a student, all flying must be maintained with reference to the ground, but as a private pilot, that isn't listed in the FAR's anymore, and I think it is 91.3 or something that states it is the pilots responsiblity for the safetly of the flight and all, etc,...

We were VFR within the legal terms of the FAR's, but practically speaking, this haze really limited the definition of "Visibilty" to the point where MVFR and IMC were divided by such a grey line.

Would I be able to climb to see if the haze reduced, almost to an "on top" condition, while having the vertical visibilty to still reference the ground? Coming back through the haze layer after being above it would be just like flying through it... so I guess this would be ok, as long as the haze layer didn't obstruct my vertical visibilty of the ground, causing a suito IMC condition?...

Yesterday I chose to stay low,.. mostly at 2100 feet MSL for the first 20-25 miles after departing LNS. I'd rather be higher if I had the opportunity.

Anyone ever climb above a haze layer and can provide some insight to this? (thanks to those on LiveChat that did breifly last night, but I wanted further discussion here to get some more insight)

 

[jesse]

I've climbed above haze layers before to get better visibility. The important thing is that you *do not* put yourself in a situation where you have no way back down.

If I had reason to believe that the haze would be less if I climbed and I also knew that I had a VFR route back down for the entire length of the flight (not just the destination) I would climb. If anything, to reduce the risk of a mid-air.

Some VFR pilots are willing to climb above weather with no way to get back down until they reach their clear destination. I'm not one of them though--if I can't land VFR at a field underneath at all times I'll call it quits. I don't want to get stuck on top.

Remember that if you can get above the haze you'll have a safer VFR flight. Just don't put yourself above haze that is below VFR conditions or you won't have any great way to land.

 

[CJones]

Jesse pretty much hit the nail on the head.

Most of the time, you can climb above the haze layer for better vis, cooler temps, and sometimes smoother ride. The trick it to not get confused and end up on top of a solid cloud layer.

IIRC, it seems that any 'build-up' type of clouds usually form right along the haze/clear layer and above, but the annoying scud/undercast type stuff can form under you if you're not careful.

Try it out some time when you're just out punching holes in the sky to get a feel for how things look from above, then go back down to see what they're like below. That'll give you a better feel for things when you want to use the 'climb to clear above' on a XC trip.

 

[Skip Miller]

Sounds like you learned a lot.

Another lesson you learned: viz with haze and the sun at your back is much better than viz with haze and the sun in front. Remember this for future flight planning.

-Skip

 

[dmccormack]

So, yesterday I had a really important lesson while flying with my wife on our first breakfast run to Lancaster PA. (read about it here -> http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showthread.php?p=330940#post330940 ) We cancelled this trip before due to the haze and bad weather / fog, and the conditions this time seemed much better. The flight out was good, with the haze being 6miles Vis but the sun at our back, with periods of bright sun illuminating the way infront of us for a good 10 miles occasionally.

When flying back, the situation was entirely different. Of course, the weather was changing every second as well yesterday in PA, but the haze was still there, vis reported at 4 miles, and while the sun was near mid-day height, it would be off to our south impeding our vision in that direction.

IF, there were no clouds forming nearby and it was just a hazy day, what are my options as a VFR private pilot?

While as a student, all flying must be maintained with reference to the ground, but as a private pilot, that isn't listed in the FAR's anymore, and I think it is 91.3 or something that states it is the pilots responsiblity for the safetly of the flight and all, etc,...

We were VFR within the legal terms of the FAR's, but practically speaking, this haze really limited the definition of "Visibilty" to the point where MVFR and IMC were divided by such a grey line.

Would I be able to climb to see if the haze reduced, almost to an "on top" condition, while having the vertical visibilty to still reference the ground? Coming back through the haze layer after being above it would be just like flying through it... so I guess this would be ok, as long as the haze layer didn't obstruct my vertical visibilty of the ground, causing a suito IMC condition?...

Yesterday I chose to stay low,.. mostly at 2100 feet MSL for the first 20-25 miles after departing LNS. I'd rather be higher if I had the opportunity.

Anyone ever climb above a haze layer and can provide some insight to this? (thanks to those on LiveChat that did breifly last night, but I wanted further discussion here to get some more insight)

Rob,

Haze is a fact of VFR summer flying. I've filed IFR more often to fly through haze than precip and clouds.

Reported visibility is ground vis, which may or may not be the same as in-flight visibility (in haze it always seems less).

I've been at 10,000 and still in haze (usually east of the Alleghenies, over DC, MD, Eastern PA), so climbing of top is not always an option.

Use Flight Following/Traffic Advisories if at all possible, stay at least over minimum obstacle clearance altitude, and then, 100' off the +500' altitude.

After too many flights being delayed or canceled due to haze in summer, I took the plunge and completed the IR.

No other rating/cert will provide as much overall utility as the IR and a well equipped airplane.

 

[Dean]

So, yesterday I had a really important lesson while flying with my wife on our first breakfast run to Lancaster PA. (read about it here -> http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showthread.php?p=330940#post330940 ) We cancelled this trip before due to the haze and bad weather / fog, and the conditions this time seemed much better. The flight out was good, with the haze being 6miles Vis but the sun at our back, with periods of bright sun illuminating the way infront of us for a good 10 miles occasionally.

When flying back, the situation was entirely different. Of course, the weather was changing every second as well yesterday in PA, but the haze was still there, vis reported at 4 miles, and while the sun was near mid-day height, it would be off to our south impeding our vision in that direction.

IF, there were no clouds forming nearby and it was just a hazy day, what are my options as a VFR private pilot?

While as a student, all flying must be maintained with reference to the ground, but as a private pilot, that isn't listed in the FAR's anymore, and I think it is 91.3 or something that states it is the pilots responsiblity for the safetly of the flight and all, etc,...

We were VFR within the legal terms of the FAR's, but practically speaking, this haze really limited the definition of "Visibilty" to the point where MVFR and IMC were divided by such a grey line.

Would I be able to climb to see if the haze reduced, almost to an "on top" condition, while having the vertical visibilty to still reference the ground? Coming back through the haze layer after being above it would be just like flying through it... so I guess this would be ok, as long as the haze layer didn't obstruct my vertical visibilty of the ground, causing a suito IMC condition?...

Yesterday I chose to stay low,.. mostly at 2100 feet MSL for the first 20-25 miles after departing LNS. I'd rather be higher if I had the opportunity.

Anyone ever climb above a haze layer and can provide some insight to this? (thanks to those on LiveChat that did breifly last night, but I wanted further discussion here to get some more insight)

Sounds like every trip I have taken to and from Gaston's.

 

[AdamZ]

Rob, Some good advice given here. As I stated in your other thread haze can be as bad as IMC at times. I'd tell you to ask JFK Jr. But you can't. I have had experiences in Haze flying out of wings where I climbed up through it and could not maintain constant visual contact with the ground. I was on an IFR flight plan anyway and was going a bit of a distance but if I had a problem I am convinced I would have needed to fly an approach to assure myself of getting back to the field. Just two weeks ago when I flew to 26N and came back the Haze over PA was so bad that It would have been all to easy to end up VFR into IMC at higher altitudes. The boarders between severe haze and clouds is often difficult or impossible to define.

I mentioned JFK Jr. in all seriousness where you live you have the potential to do flying over water. Flying in severe haze over featureless terrain can really be a big problem

So heed Jesses words well. Just know what your doing and getting into if you decide to climb. Dan is also right there is nothing like climbing above the haze layer for a beautiful VFR flight I did that once on my way to KUNV flight over the mountains were beautiful and clear but just a little bit lower it was bad scuzz everywhere. Thankfully once again we were on an IFR plan and did the Approach into KUNV. I would not have wanted to decend into Happy Valley in that junk VFR.

 

[2256Q]

IMHO, Dan has offered what is the best solution to the haze problem. Get that instrument rating! Adam mentioned JFK, Jr. and that is a perfect example of what not to do. My first experience with haze was coming out of the Los Angeles basin in the mid-60s. I finally broke out at 13,000 and it was just like breaking out of a cloud layer with mountain tops protruding through the haze. The only visibility was straight down while I was in it. Same thing happens in this cruddy Houston too often these days. Don't bother looking ahead, the only vis is straight down. Much easier to get on the gauges and stay there until you break out.

 

[dmccormack]

IAdam mentioned JFK, Jr. and that is a perfect example of what not to do.

I was instrument rated and current, and the first time I did some night VFR over water during the summer (Hazy) -- the pucker factor was high.

At least in the clouds you know you're above the ground. Over water at night in haze you have no idea other than what the gauges tell you, and -- don't take this wrong -- but the 3 or so hours spent under the hood for the PP does not prepare a pilot for flying instruments.

I've said this in other threads and I'll repeat here -- Night (and sometimes even day) VFR overwater in haze is instrument flying, period.

 

[AdamZ]

I've said this in other threads and I'll repeat here -- Night (and sometimes even day) VFR overwater in haze is instrument flying, period.

A Hearty AMEN to that statement.

 

[2256Q]

but the 3 or so hours spent under the hood for the PP does not prepare a pilot for flying instruments.

I've said this in other threads and I'll repeat here -- Night (and sometimes even day) VFR overwater in haze is instrument flying, period.

Agree. The PP hood time is not even really relevant to the real thing. Also agree about the night VFR overwater statement. Be on the gauges or be somewhere that has a horizon.

 

[dmccormack]

Agree. The PP hood time is not even really relevant to the real thing. Also agree about the night VFR overwater statement. Be on the gauges or be somewhere that has a horizon.

One of my Student Pilots owns a nice airplane. I won't let him use the autopilot yet, but as he gets closer to the practical and we start focusing on real world flying, we'll head into some clouds and I'll have him release the yoke and turn on the autopilot and use it to make a 180 out of the clouds.

 

[AdamZ]

One of my Student Pilots owns a nice airplane. I won't let him use the autopilot yet, but as he gets closer to the practical and we start focusing on real world flying, we'll head into some clouds and I'll have him release the yoke and turn on the autopilot and use it to make a 180 out of the clouds.

Will ATC let you do an IFR flight plan and do things like that or were you just talking figurativly and were gonna throw on a pair of foggles?

Also do you think it would be safer for a pp who flies VFR into IMC to immedialty do a 180 hand flying it or put on the AP to do it. Depending upon the AP that adds a few extra steps and movements. Heck it may be worth the extra time to engage the AP I really don't know just asking.

 

[2256Q]

One of my Student Pilots owns a nice airplane. I won't let him use the autopilot yet, but as he gets closer to the practical and we start focusing on real world flying, we'll head into some clouds and I'll have him release the yoke and turn on the autopilot and use it to make a 180 out of the clouds.

Autopilot is like the glass cockpit to me. I never really trust the things. Probably a function of having grown up (aviation-wise) when the things were not very reliable. Crazy things won't couple, or the alt. hold turns the plane into a porpoise, or it won't engage, or it wants to give you a 90-degree bank when it intercepts the next VOR...oh, well. I like hand flying, anyway.

 

[dmccormack]

Autopilot is like the glass cockpit to me. I never really trust the things. Probably a function of having grown up (aviation-wise) when the things were not very reliable. Crazy things won't couple, or the alt. hold turns the plane into a porpoise, or it won't engage, or it wants to give you a 90-degree bank when it intercepts the next VOR...oh, well. I like hand flying, anyway.

I trust an AP over a student/low time PP inadvertently in the clouds any day.

I've found the AP really helps reduce the overall workload when SPIFR, as well, though one hand is always nearby, guarding the yoke near the AP disconnect.

Of course it depends on the airplane and the AP.

 

[2256Q]

I trust an AP over a student/low time PP inadvertently in the clouds any day.

I've found the AP really helps reduce the overall workload when SPIFR, as well, though one hand is always nearby, guarding the yoke near the AP disconnect.

Of course it depends on the airplane and the AP.

The things have improved since my perception formed, as well. Other than an altitude hold problem a couple of years ago, mine has worked pretty well. If your student can set up the a/p correctly it could save his bacon if he inadvertently gets into IFR, there's no question. I just like to fuss.

 

[dmccormack]

The things have improved since my perception formed, as well. Other than an altitude hold problem a couple of years ago, mine has worked pretty well. If your student can set up the a/p correctly it could save his bacon if he inadvertently gets into IFR, there's no question. I just like to fuss.

He bought the airplane with an installed S-TEC AP (I forget the model -- it's in the Turn coordinator). It took some practice in severe VFR, but I actually like it -- it has a wing leveler, a turn right/left (no more than standard rate), a HDG function (flies to the Heading bug) and LO and HI Nav tracking.

It has altitude hold, but you need to get trimmed up and then set it. It shrieks if it gets out of trim.

The Bonanza A36 has a Century 21 -- pretty nice system as well, but vacuum driven.

 

[2256Q]

He bought the airplane with an installed S-TEC AP (I forget the model -- it's in the Turn coordinator). It took some practice in severe VFR, but I actually like it -- it has a wing leveler, a turn right/left (no more than standard rate), a HDG function (flies to the Heading bug) and LO and HI Nav tracking.

It has altitude hold, but you need to get trimmed up and then set it. It shrieks if it gets out of trim.

The Bonanza A36 has a Century 21 -- pretty nice system as well, but vacuum driven.

Mine's just an old Cessna 800 coupled to the HSI. I call it my Veg-o-matic.

 

[Rob Schaffer]

The C172SP has an autopilot, and during my checkout ride at LOM they introduced me to it. I've downloaded the manual to get the basics, as it is a 2-axis setup with the Heading hold and link to the heading bug. A nice setup, and seems easy to engage. KP140 is the model I think,.. don't have my notes in front of me now.

 

[dmccormack]

The C172SP has an autopilot, and during my checkout ride at LOM they introduced me to it. I've downloaded the manual to get the basics, as it is a 2-axis setup with the Heading hold and link to the heading bug. A nice setup, and seems easy to engage. KP140 is the model I think,.. don't have my notes in front of me now.

Great! It would be worth the hour CFI time to get some instruction on the ground and in the air and then practice using it in severe VFR after clearing turns -- the works -- as if you were doing maneuvers.

Then put it through its paces, including learning all the different ways to turn it off.

Some are tuned for standard rate turns, since AP is usually used flying IFR.

Some are set to 30 degrees, which can be quite a shock when you switch on the AP to HDG mode and the HDG bug is 90 left of your current heading!

 

[Rob Schaffer]

He showed me how to use it on my checkout ride, but there was so much information that I couldn't retain it all at once. I have the manual, and next time I'm up I'll engage it on a good VFR day. It has Altitude hold and heading hold, and you can even climb and decend at fixed rates just by pressing a few buttons and setting the rate. Additionally, you set the Heading mode on once you have the plane trimmed and the heading bug on current course. Once engaged in this mode, you can take your hands completely off the yoke and fly just by turning the little orange heading bug. Want a 180* turn, just turn the bug right or left (plane follows the direction you turn it) and it will stay at standard rate. It was cool,... then I was busing setting up radios for Reading. Read about it breifly on my blog.

I'll take AdamZ, Lee, or one of the other guys from the POA Wings group up with me next time so I can play

This time I was happy to have the GPS up and running as a secondary id of location. I still linked the CDI's to the NAV, but could have setup the top CDI to the GPS just by pressing the GPS/NAV button.

 

[dmccormack]

I'll take AdamZ, Lee, or one of the other guys from the POA Wings group up with me next time so I can play .

Good! Excellent idea -- doesn't have to be a CFI -- just someone who is knowledgeable and can run you through all the emergency situations.

(Autopilots do malfunction. In a recent Bonanza Society magazine an A36 owner from the Philly area described a malfunction that caused a 300' loss of altitude when the nose headed earthward before he could identify and disconnect the AP. He was fortunate to have been VFR when it occurred, but in IMC or on a fully coupled approach, the malfunction could have been deadly)

 

[TMetzinger]

The KAP140 in a 172SP will probably have altitude preselect and a bunch of other features, so you will want to spend some time with the manuals and then go up with another pilot who's familiar with the airplane (and ideally with the autopilot too).

You'll need to learn to think like an autopilot a little bit to get the most out of it. Most CFI's don't really know autopilots (no insult intended to those that DO) unless they've gone through a structured course on them (i.e. a manufacturer course), as they've been shunned in the training regime until recently.

But an autopilot is a terrific tool, and the more recent ones are much more reliable and powerful. I require one for single-pilot IFR with passengers, and use it whenever I have passengers in VFR as well.

 

[dmccormack]

You'll need to learn to think like an autopilot a little bit to get the most out of it.

Good point!

Most pilots who eschew the AP could actually learn from it -- you will fly more smoothly, with more precise inputs after observing the "mentor" for a while....

Just don't keep ALT hold on in bumpy air -- you'll get a rougher ride than deserved.

 

[Clark1961]

All this talk about AP's makes me wonder if folks have experience with the Century III as installed by Piper in the PA28? I believe they called it the Altimatic IIIc.

I've read the manual a couple times and things appear to be fairly straightforward until it gets into flying approaches. Does it really perform as advertised? I'm really looking forward to actually using it someday when the Dakota gets out of the hospital...

 

[2256Q]

All this talk about AP's makes me wonder if folks have experience with the Century III as installed by Piper in the PA28? I believe they called it the Altimatic IIIc.

I've read the manual a couple times and things appear to be fairly straightforward until it gets into flying approaches. Does it really perform as advertised? I'm really looking forward to actually using it someday when the Dakota gets out of the hospital...

That's not the one with the manual engage lever, is it? If it is, throw that thing in the trash. Friend of mine almost bought the farm one day when the a/p went belly-up, the nose went down, and he couldn't get the crazy thing disengaged. Lost about 8,000 feet before he managed to kick it out of gear.

 

[Clark1961]

That's not the one with the manual engage lever, is it? If it is, throw that thing in the trash. Friend of mine almost bought the farm one day when the a/p went belly-up, the nose went down, and he couldn't get the crazy thing disengaged. Lost about 8,000 feet before he managed to kick it out of gear.

According to the manual, AP engagement is controlled by the Roll switch which also acts as master. Heading and Altitude or Pitch control engagement follow activating the Roll. Using the lateral guidance system is where things start to get complicated...

Lost 8,000 feet ya say? Hell, I've never been 8,000 AGL. Of course that's sorta tough to do around here in a beat-up rental N model Skyhawk...

 

[dmccormack]

According to the manual, AP engagement is controlled by the Roll switch which also acts as master. Heading and Altitude or Pitch control engagement follow activating the Roll. Using the lateral guidance system is where things start to get complicated...

Lost 8,000 feet ya say? Hell, I've never been 8,000 AGL. Of course that's sorta tough to do around here in a beat-up rental N model Skyhawk...

I clawed a C152 to 10,000 over PA once during a student solo XC.

Was about 100 FPM towards the end, but still climbing!

 

[Clark1961]

I clawed a C152 to 10,000 over PA once during a student solo XC.

Was about 100 FPM towards the end, but still climbing!

Do we all do that? Just how high will this thing go...

I've been above 10,000 but that just isn't particularly far from the ground in these parts...

 

[2256Q]

Do we all do that? Just how high will this thing go...

What better way to test our limits than to test the limits of our aircraft? Yes, I suspect we all do it. I certainly do. Would you believe a C-411 will actually climb to FL 260? It will.

 

[Rob Schaffer]

a C152 at 10,000!! Wow, I hit 5500 on my N10-KUNV long solo XC in a 152, and that took a while to get to.... that's the highest I've been so far.

 

[dmccormack]

a C152 at 10,000!! Wow, I hit 5500 on my N10-KUNV long solo XC in a 152, and that took a while to get to.... that's the highest I've been so far.

MEA over Albuquerque, New Mexico is 13000 --- An A36 will get that high, but it's not super happy.

 

[Clark1961]

What better way to test our limits than to test the limits of our aircraft? Yes, I suspect we all do it. I certainly do. Would you believe a C-411 will actually climb to FL 260? It will.

I was mostly thinking about going for altitude on one of our x-c solos. My excuse was that it was a hot spring day so climb to cooler air...and to get over COS airspace...and for terrain clearance over the Palmer divide...and anything else I could make up......hey it was a sunny Sunday afternoon so life was good

 

[poadeleted20]

All this talk about AP's makes me wonder if folks have experience with the Century III as installed by Piper in the PA28? I believe they called it the Altimatic IIIc.

I've read the manual a couple times and things appear to be fairly straightforward until it gets into flying approaches. Does it really perform as advertised? I'm really looking forward to actually using it someday when the Dakota gets out of the hospital...

The C-III a/p isn't the smartest unit out there, but it does what it does perfectly well. It flies an ILS very nicely, and tracks localizers just fine (including going backwards using the LOC REV setting) -- as long as you remember to put the heading bug on the course. It's not real good on GPS tracking unless you have a GPS roll steering module installed. Also, using it to fly altitudes on nonprecision approaches is kind of workload intensive since at each altitude change, you have to turn off ALT, pitch the plane for the descent using the a/p pitch trim wheel, then level the plane again with that wheel (if you engage ALT with more than 200-300 fpm of climb/descent, it tends to go of in an undamped oscillation around the altitude at which you hit ALT) and finally hit ALT again once the plane is on altitude and less than 200 fpm on the VSI. But it will do a fine job within its inherent limitations.

 

[pgengler]

I've been up to 7500 during one of my lessons, trying to get above some of the turbulent air/haze. It didn't really work but at that point you couldn't see anything except straight down so we just did some simulated instrument stuff. My instructor said was up to 9500 in the Cherokee once and the plane still would have climbed, but he didn't want to get run over by the speed demons above 10k.

 

[dmccormack]

My instructor said was up to 9500 in the Cherokee once and the plane still would have climbed, but he didn't want to get run over by the speed demons above 10k.

Hunh?

 

[TMetzinger]

Ditto on the HUH? I don't think it matters whether the airplane that hits you is doing 249 KIAS or 280 KIAS or 330 KIAS.

 

[pgengler]

It wasn't so much a matter of how fast it was going when it hit you, rather that slower traffic would be easier to spot & avoid. Thinking about it more, though, it probably isn't that much of a big deal and one could always pick up FF to make it easier. *Shrug*

 

[dmccormack]

It wasn't so much a matter of how fast it was going when it hit you, rather that slower traffic would be easier to spot & avoid. Thinking about it more, though, it probably isn't that much of a big deal and one could always pick up FF to make it easier. *Shrug*

FF always at that altitude.

The advantages for see and avoid at altitude is the air is clearer (usually) and there is less traffic.

 

[Danos]

I got a friend's 172 N up to 10k last weekend hot and humid with full tanks and a 600 lb payload. It was slow going past 8k. In fact I was in the same PA. haze Rob was in. Went IFR. It was thick.