Holding question

[genna]

Hi all,

I was thinking about this holding scenario today:

I'm flying on my IFR plan in IMC to primary with an alternate airport and the ATC is giving me a hold prior to the approach with EFC 10 min due to a line of thunderstorms at the airport.

5 min in my radio goes dead.

Theoretically, as i understand the rules, i'm supposed to squack 7600 and depart hold at my EFC and fly any approach to the primary. However, there is a pretty good chance that thunderstorms have not cleared my path and this seems like a not-so-prudent course of action.

What is the best course of action here?

 

[midlifeflyer]

Depends on where you are and what else is happening. I would be exercising my emergency authority, not fly into the storm no matter what the rules stay and if my make a (hopefully good) decision based on the information I have, remembering that ATC knows we are lost comm even without the 7600 squawk.

On board weather information to get relatively current information?
Those thunderstorms heading your way? Or away from the airport?
VFR conditions aside from the storms?
VFR or at least not stormy conditions nearby (you did at least get some idea of that preflight and maybe even en route, right)?

 

[genna]

Ok, little more details:

No onboard weather. IMC is all around me. My weather info is from 3 hours earlier(pre-flight) with no reliable VMC info around any longer. What I knew 3 hours ago is outside my range now.

Is this an emergency cituation? I guess it is and then still what is the best course of action? Alternate with 7700?

 

[Checkout_my_Six]

yer screwed.....

 

[Subsea]

Would a handheld radio help in this scenario? Cellphone to center?

 

[frfly172]

If you have no weather ,portable or fixed ,your between a rock and a hard place.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Of course it's an emergency situation. Assuming I did not keep track of the weather around me while en route, I would use the forecasts as a guideline.

I don't understand what "What I knew 3 hours ago is outside my range now" means. Even if the pilot in the hypothetical didn't update weather information en route (generally a good SOP when flying in instrument weather conditions), do you mean the pilot only looked at departure weather and not any forecasts for en route or destination conditions?

Why the alternate? Since you are positing that the pilot doesn't know anything about the weather around him, what makes you think the "flight planning alternate" is any safer than hanging out until he thinks the storms cleared at the original destination.

Offhand it sounds like the basic bad scenario a small airplane issue (bad radio) compounded by a series of pilot decisions during the more than 2 hours and 55 minutes before the radio crapped out.

 

[AustinPilot]

Would a handheld radio help in this scenario? Cellphone to center?

Yeah, first things to try right here.

 

[genna]

This is just a hypothetical. Clearly, a pilot should have made better observations and decisions prior to getting to that point. Personally, i have a handheld for that reason and I would not be flying low IMC in a C172 without knowing where VMC is.

The issue is not whether the pilot is an idiot or not, but rather that how to apply a normal comm-loss procedure in this situation and should it even be applied?

It seems that the consensus is that it is no longer a 7600 comm-loss situation, but a full blown emergency. Alright. Makes sense

 

[genna]

....I don't understand what "What I knew 3 hours ago is outside my range now" means. Even if the pilot in the hypothetical didn't update weather information en route (generally a good SOP when flying in instrument weather conditions), do you mean the pilot only looked at departure weather and not any forecasts for en route or destination conditions?

It just means that the forcasted VMC(from preflight) is now outside off the range for the plane.

Clearly, planning needed more work.

....
Why the alternate? Since you are positing that the pilot doesn't know anything about the weather around him, what makes you think the "flight planning alternate" is any safer than hanging out until he thinks the storms cleared at the original destination.

No particular reason other than hopefully a good alternate was chosen and ATC knows about it. Otherwise, sure it's also a roll of the dice

....

Offhand it sounds like the basic bad scenario a small airplane issue (bad radio) compounded by a series of pilot decisions during the more than 2 hours and 55 minutes before the radio crapped out.

agreed

 

[azure]

INo particular reason other than hopefully a good alternate was chosen and ATC knows about it. Otherwise, sure it's also a roll of the dice

ATC may well know of a good alternate nearby where there is good VMC, but I don't think they know anything about your filed alternate. And without knowing whether YOU know of the alternate they are aware of, I don't think they have any reason to assume you'll go there. All they can do is watch what you do, and clear the airspace around you and around the airport you appear to be heading toward.

 

[poadeleted20]

ATC doesn't know your filed alternate, and it's not an issue, anyway. If after losing comm you miss at your destination, or before reaching your destination the situation requires diversion, the only applicable regulation is 14 CFR 91.3(b). At that point, you do whatever you think will result in the safest outcome without regard for other traffic, which ATC will clear from your path based in what they see you do on their scope.

 

[sgenie]

Cap'n Ron is right. May I also add that it helps greatly if ATC sees you as a predictable fella - then they can work around any of your decisions. Basically, if you had your alternate filed - fly there. If not, divert to any airport where you can land judging by your wx information.

 

[taters]

I would be exercising my emergency authority

all there is too it..and maybe an ASAP or NASA/ASRS report before I cracked a beer.

 

[DeckardTrinity]

An instrument pilot who plods on for 3 hours without checking any weather (on-board, awos/asos/atis, hiwas, flight watch, heck, even center), then gets put into a hold, then loses comms... is going to make the right call now about whether it's 7600 or 7700?

I think not.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Cap'n Ron is right. May I also add that it helps greatly if ATC sees you as a predictable fella - then they can work around any of your decisions. Basically, if you had your alternate filed - fly there. If not, divert to any airport where you can land judging by your wx information.

Why fly to the preflight planing alternate? As Ron also said, ATC doesn't know what it is, so ATC expectations aren't an issue.

I'm going to, as you said, "divert to any airport where you can land judging by your wx information" regardless of whether I put it in my flight plan to satisfy regulatory requirements to plan an alternate.

Are you making the common error of thinking the filed alternate is anything other than a preflight fuel planning requirement and may be completely disregarded once the flight begins?

 

[Gucci Pilot]

Reading your post, I'm gonna leave the fix at the EFC, but I'm going the opposite direction to an airport away from the thunderstorms.

 

[Kritchlow]

No kidding? ATC can't find your alternate? I knew it wasn't on your strip, but I thought they could retrieve it for a situation exactly like this so they knew where you were going. Obviously if you don't lose radios you can ask where the weather is good. I thought the whole point of actually "filing" an alternate, vs just knowing where the wx is good, was to alert ATC where you would go should you have a radio failure. Again, I knew it wasn't on your strip.
Live and learn. Curious what the point of putting on the flight plan is?

 

[azure]

No kidding? ATC can't find your alternate? I knew it wasn't on your strip, but I thought they could retrieve it for a situation exactly like this so they knew where you were going. Obviously if you don't lose radios you can ask where the weather is good. I thought the whole point of actually "filing" an alternate, vs just knowing where the wx is good, was to alert ATC where you would go should you have a radio failure. Again, I knew it wasn't on your strip.
Live and learn. Curious what the point of putting on the flight plan is?

The point is, to force you to carry enough fuel to get you somewhere there is reasonable confidence of getting in. Your filed alternate is in no way binding on you, you can go pretty much anywhere, as long as you get down safely as expeditiously as possible.

Look at it this way: ATC knows there might well be better choices now than your filed alternate, so why should they go through the trouble of retrieving it? They know that you're under no obligation to go there as opposed to somewhere else, so it would pretty much be useless information to them. Better to just watch what you do, and clear airspace around you accordingly.

 

[Kritchlow]

The point is, to force you to carry enough fuel to get you somewhere there is reasonable confidence of getting in. Your filed alternate is in no way binding on you, you can go pretty much anywhere, as long as you get down safely as expeditiously as possible.

Look at it this way: ATC knows there might well be better choices now than your filed alternate, so why should they go through the trouble of retrieving it? They know that you're under no obligation to go there as opposed to somewhere else, so it would pretty much be useless information to them. Better to just watch what you do, and clear airspace around you accordingly.

But you can put any old number in the fuel on board column, so I don't see where that forces you to carry more fuel.

Your second paragraph is my main point. The only time it would come into play is when you can't communicate your intentions to ATC, and likely can't get current weather at other places. It's a way to keep both pilot and ATC on the same page.

Not doubting anyone here, I'm just trying to understand the logic.

 

[sgenie]

The reasons to have an alternate is to be prepared to the certain flow of events, rather than playing by the ear. If you nominate your alternate, you prepare yourself fuel wise, you prepare documentation and flight planning and, not the least, you let ATC know in advance what you are going to do if you cannot land and the comms line is broken. Therefore, since you already said "I am going to divert to X in case s***t hits the fan" ATC knows that you are going to bail in this direction and would work their traffic around your projected flight path.

 

[Kritchlow]

The reasons to have an alternate is to be prepared to the certain flow of events, rather than playing by the ear. If you nominate your alternate, you prepare yourself fuel wise, you prepare documentation and flight planning and, not the least, you let ATC know in advance what you are going to do if you cannot land and the comms line is broken. Therefore, since you already said "I am going to divert to X in case s***t hits the fan" ATC knows that you are going to bail in this direction and would work their traffic around your projected flight path.

Well... That's close to exactly what I'm saying. I mean, why put it on the flight plan if it's not to communicate your plan?

 

[midlifeflyer]

Well... That's close to exactly what I'm saying. I mean, why put it on the flight plan if it's not to communicate your plan?

Want a WAG? There were enough incidents and accidents in the earlier days of IFR flight where pilots simply ran out of fuel due to weather at the destination that they (1) made the planning of an alternate required and (2) also required to put evidence you did it in the flight plan.

But you can put any old number in the fuel on board column, so I don't see where that forces you to carry more fuel.

You can say that about any number of things including your pilot logbook and your tax returns and say you don't see where it forces you to do the right thing (unless, of course, you are caught).

 

[midlifeflyer]

But you can put any old number in the fuel on board column, so I don't see where that forces you to carry more fuel.

Your second paragraph is my main point. The only time it would come into play is when you can't communicate your intentions to ATC, and likely can't get current weather at other places. It's a way to keep both pilot and ATC on the same page.

Not doubting anyone here, I'm just trying to understand the logic.

We are talking about have a Plan B in case things unexpectedly go south. Most of that Plan B is simply about having enough fuel to go somewhere and make an instrument approach and still have fuel to try something else.

The problem that the exact same same "going south" that makes your destination unusable can apply just as easily to the planned alternate.

Imagine this scenario. Don't think abstractly; grab a chart and put in real places. You are planning a flight to your nontowered home base, which is 30 NM south of a relatively busy Class D, C or B airport (call it KDCB ) with lots of services and access to hotels. You list the DC/B airport as your alternate based on the weather conditions at the time of planning and the fact that it is both close and accessible.

That convective, nasty thunderstorm? It's your typical southwest-to-northeast front and even without having updated weather, you know that the chances are better than 80% that if it's affecting your destination, it is affecting KDCB.

At the same time, even though you haven't been following the weather, you aren't blind enough to know that the area you passed a half hour ago was non-convective and may even had had areas of broken-to-scattered clouds.

So, you're thinking it's a better idea to be on a "same page" with ATC that makes you feel like you need to head to KDCB instead of making a 180 and getting away from the convection? No thanks. I'm happier with the rule as it is.

 

[Kritchlow]

Want a WAG? There were enough incidents and accidents in the earlier days of IFR flight where pilots simply ran out of fuel due to weather at the destination that they (1) made the planning of an alternate required and (2) also required to put evidence you did it in the flight plan.


You can say that about any number of things including your pilot logbook and your tax returns and say you don't see where it forces you to do the right thing (unless, of course, you are caught).

Your WAG may have merit... I guess it holds the pilot somewhat accountable.

Your second point, although you could use the same logic as the first, is less likely IMO. At my old company sometimes we would file our own flight plans. I would use fltplan.com, and to be honest I made sure I had enough fuel for my legal alternate, but I never figured my exact hours and minutes of fob. I just made sure I was covered legally, but then always rounded to a pretty number.
Don't get me wrong, while airborn we managed fuel carefully to ensure safety. It's just sometime flight planning was done well ahead of time, before company gave us the fuel scores (where to tanker, where to go lean). Because of this we often didn't have an exact fuel load ahead of time.

That said, I still can't imagine that ATC couldn't get your alternate from your original filing if it was needed.
Regardless, it really makes no practical difference to me. Just curiosity.

 

[petrolero]

I have a handheld radio but I hold out little hope of it working in flight at any distance more than a couple miles.

To better my chances I have an antenna with a suction cup that I can stick on the windshield or on the outside just under the window (Cessna). But I have never practiced with it in flight. Maybe I'll give it a shot. I actually think a cell phone has a better chance of working than a handheld but where is the ATC phone book? I'd call them but I don't think I could tell you where to find the numbers.

Has anyone practiced with a handheld or handheld + remote antenna? How bad was your range? Try getting a relay from other a/c on freq perhaps. Someone will probably hear you if you're high enough and near a city. Try multiple freqs.

Anyway absent the handheld/cell phone approach, in the OP scenario squawk 7600 or even 7700 and wait a few minutes for them to clear traffic and proceed to your alternate or make the approach to the original destination if it looks safe. As others said 91.3.

 

[RotorDude]

I have a handheld radio but I hold out little hope of it working in flight at any distance more than a couple miles.

To better my chances I have an antenna with a suction cup that I can stick on the windshield or on the outside just under the window (Cessna). But I have never practiced with it. Maybe I'll give it a shot.

Has anyone practiced with a handheld or handheld + remote antenna? How bad was your range?

I just tried my ICOM A6 (with external belly antenna) handheld the other day. Was about 45 nm from Approach, at 8,500', over relatively flat terrain. I heard ATC normally, while they heard me initially "loud and clear", then added, "well a bit scratchy but still loud and clear." Didn't try to find the range limit, but based on that I think it won't be much less than the built-in radios.

 

[midlifeflyer]

That said, I still can't imagine that ATC couldn't get your alternate from your original filing if it was needed.
Regardless, it really makes no practical difference to me. Just curiosity.

They "could." The same way anyone else "could", by calling Flight Service and having them pull up the filing. But these are busy guys and gals with a lot to do when the weather comes down, especially with a NORDO airplane out there in a busy approach environment, and they know the pilot is not expected to fly to the alternate.

Almost listed it in my signature block:

IFR...it's not about YOU.​

 

[Kritchlow]

They "could." The same way anyone else "could", by calling Flight Service and having them pull up the filing. But these are busy guys and gals with a lot to do when the weather comes down, especially with a NORDO airplane out there in a busy approach environment, and they know the pilot is not expected to fly to the alternate.

Almost listed it in my signature block:

IFR...it's not about YOU.​

Why is the pilot not expected to fly to alternate if nordo with below mins wx at destination?

 

[poadeleted20]

But you can put any old number in the fuel on board column, so I don't see where that forces you to carry more fuel.

If you're going to lie about that, then it really doesn't matter what you put down for the alternate, either. The point is that if you comply with the regulations, you are forced to carry enough fuel to have a reasonable array of options.

 

[poadeleted20]

The reasons to have an alternate is to be prepared to the certain flow of events, rather than playing by the ear. If you nominate your alternate, you prepare yourself fuel wise, you prepare documentation and flight planning and, not the least, you let ATC know in advance what you are going to do if you cannot land and the comms line is broken. Therefore, since you already said "I am going to divert to X in case s***t hits the fan" ATC knows that you are going to bail in this direction and would work their traffic around your projected flight path.

Except that isn't how it works, and for the reasons stated (mostly that your alternate is based on weather data which, by the time you reach your destination, could be 18 hours old for what most of us here do, or even 36 hours old if you're in long-range international ops) it isn't how you'd want it to work, either.

 

[poadeleted20]

That said, I still can't imagine that ATC couldn't get your alternate from your original filing if it was needed.

I suppose they could get that data from Flight Service, but since there is no regulatory reason to either limit someone to their filed alternate or even think that's where they'd be going if they lost comm and then missed at their destination, it really doesn't matter, so it's not part of ATC's playbook.

 

[Kritchlow]

If you're going to lie about that, then it really doesn't matter what you put down for the alternate, either. The point is that if you comply with the regulations, you are forced to carry enough fuel to have a reasonable array of options.

What is the purpose to file an alternate?? I understand the purpose to have an alternate, but why file it unless it's to communicate where you will go? It just doesn't make any logical sense.

(Possibly quoted the wrong response there, but you get the idea...)

 

[Kritchlow]

I suppose they could get that data from Flight Service, but since there is no regulatory reason to either limit someone to their filed alternate or even think that's where they'd be going if they lost comm and then missed at their destination, it really doesn't matter, so it's not part of ATC's playbook.

Maybe it's just me, but I would like to know where you are going if you lost comm in imc.
Is that unreasonable?

 

[sgenie]

When you plan your flight, you are obliged to check TAF for your departure aerodrome and if the weather is not within the 1000'/+2km limits +/- 1 hour at the time of your estimate arrival, you must file an alternate. There is no 24/36 hours, you have to know exactly what you are doing - otherwise your IFR become a russian roulette - only the latter gives you more chances for survival.

 

[Kritchlow]

When you plan your flight, you are obliged to check TAF for your departure aerodrome and if the weather is not within the 1000'/+2km limits +/- 1 hour at the time of your estimate arrival, you must file an alternate. There is no 24/36 hours, you have to know exactly what you are doing - otherwise your IFR become a russian roulette - only the latter gives you more chances for survival.

Well, my point is you can check wx and plan and fuel all the alternates you want. But why put them in the flight plan?

I'll give it a rest.,, I don't think we will ever know.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Why is the pilot not expected to fly to alternate if nordo with below mins wx at destination?

because it's not required and the weather might not be any better at the filed alternate. Just like the scenario I presented In the other post. You are welcome to head into the thunderstorm cell at your filed alternate or waste more fuel in the attempt if you are so wedded to it. I'll head in the opposite direction where I think I have a better chance of getting on the ground successfully.

Change the scenario slightly. You have in board weather that shows you the conditions. Still feel the need to head to that storm at your filed alternate? Or turn around and head back to better conditions?

The filed alternate is for planning. The real alternate is an in-flight decision. Guess as to why we have to put it in the flight plan is the same as before.

.

 

[sgenie]

Indeed, flight time conditions may vary. However, the alternate is assigned based on the expected conditions in the alternate - again, it is not a guesswork but the analysis of TAF.

 

[Kritchlow]

because it's not required and the weather might not be any better at the filed alternate. Just like the scenario I presented In the other post. You are welcome to head into the thunderstorm cell at your filed alternate or waste more fuel in the attempt if you are so wedded to it. I'll head in the opposite direction where I think I have a better chance of getting on the ground successfully.

Change the scenario slightly. You have in board weather that shows you the conditions. Still feel the need to head to that storm at your filed alternate? Or turn around and head back to better conditions?

The filed alternate is for planning. The real alternate is an in-flight decision. Guess as to why we have to put it in the flight plan is the same as before.

.

Interesting..
In your situation of having on board weather is kind of an exception, seeing as though albeit it minimal, there is still some communication (flow of information).

I know it's not required to go to the filed alternate, but if you have zero communication, due to my preflight planning that would be my best guess. IMO, that's really what planning is for. If the wx at the airport five miles away was forecast to be good weather, I would have picked that as an alternate in the first place. If we are truly nordo/no on board wx, all we really can rely on is what we see with our eyes, and our preflight planning.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Interesting..
In your situation of having on board weather is kind of an exception, seeing as though albeit it minimal, there is still some communication (flow of information).

But your biggest concern seems to be being on the same page as ATC. How does ATC know whether you have on-board weather or not?

And why should it make a difference if the direction of your diversion is on-board weather or the fact that you just went through some benign conditions 30 minutes earlier and are not too sure about what lies ahead in that area of thunderstorms that led to the hold.

Other than my guess, I can't say why the rule requires the flight plan to indicate that you have indeed planned an alternate 3 hours ago when it doesn't get passed onto ATC, but I can see plenty of operational and safety reasons why it doesn't and that it's only one of your choices once you get there - you plan for the weather you have, but fly in the weather you get.

Or are you assuming the preflight planning that told you your alternate had better weather was any better than the preflight planning that led you into the storms. Or did you plan to fly into the stormy area to begin with? If that's the case and you specifically planned your alternate behind you so you could turn around, that's great and, in the absence of better information, I'd head there, but even then, it's still just a choice made at the time you divert.