IFR release quandary - uncontrolled field
- Thread starter RussR
- Start date
poadeleted20
Deleted
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
- Messages
- 31,250
What's legal ain't always smart/safe, and making a habit of running around under 900-foot ceilings has a way of turning folks into statistics. I know Ed believes he's incredibly skilled and probably bulletproof, too, so I know he's going to keep doing things like this, but I'm hoping the rest of you out there are smart enough not to try it unless the Hovitos Indians are closing in with spears and poison dart blowguns.
EdFred
Taxi to Parking
poadeleted20
Deleted
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
- Messages
- 31,250
No, not all of us. Just the ones who do dumb things.
ChrisK
En-Route
EdFred
Taxi to Parking
Who are you to judge what is or isn't dumb? When were you appointed as judge and jury? Anyone who does something you wouldn't is dumb? I'm pretty sure I could find people that would say the same things about things you do. Where is the line drawn?
Eventually you back that line up far enough and no one can do anything outside of a little protective bubble. Is that what we want? Protective little bubbles?
Eventually you back that line up far enough and no one can do anything outside of a little protective bubble. Is that what we want? Protective little bubbles?
EdFred
Taxi to Parking
But vegetarians are 12% less likely to die according to articles Steingar posts.
azure
Final Approach
Well yeah, I wouldn't doubt it. If you know the route and/or are confident you can avoid any and all obstacles, you're golden. Big sky theory works well up there. Not so much around Dayton.
dukeblue219
Line Up and Wait
Everyone has a line somewhere that separates "well, it's worth the risk" from "are ya kidding?" It's called risk management.
I think for the vast majority of us, flying VFR under a 900' overcast, especially with no plan other than "fly around until ATC has time and separation to give me clearance" is well beyond our levels of acceptable risk. You want to risk that, fine, but you have to recognize that what you say on a public forum can be misconstrued by less experienced pilots as advice. When someone asks me for advice I'm going to be as conservative as I possibly can because I sure as hell don't want the liability or the regret if that person goes out and does something stupid.
For all I know, Ron goes out and secretely flies VFR over the Chesapeake with 900' ceilings all night long, but he's sure as hell never going to encourage others to do it. Sorry, but you suggesting that another pilot launch VFR into a 900' overcast is simply reckless.
denverpilot
Tied Down
Easy fix. Tell every fifth one to launch into thunderstorms and ram fuel trucks, because its fun.
Then no liability suit since you're obviously a loon and it'll reinforce with the jury that it's the farging Internet.
JoeSelch
Pattern Altitude
EdFred
Taxi to Parking
Easy fix. Tell every fifth one to launch into thunderstorms and ram fuel trucks, because its fun.
Then no liability suit since you're obviously a loon and it'll reinforce with the jury that it's the farging Internet.
What about launching into a T-storm with a Ram truck?
tmyers
En-Route
I launch into thunderstorms with my Ram truck all the time.
That was great. The only possible thing you can say after that is:
You don't pull the mask off the old Lone Ranger
And you don't mess around with Slim
poadeleted20
Deleted
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2005
- Messages
- 31,250
What I want is to not have to go any more funerals for pilots I know who got killed because they did something dumb. Done that too many times in my 44 years of flying, and it really [drags on you] after the first dozen or so. Makes it worse when the widow says, "I knew he'd get killed in an airplane, but I didn't think it would happen this soon."
gismo
Touchdown! Greaser!
Prolly because they are much less likely to choke on a chunk of steak.
Very sad for the survivor. But can be even worse when his flying friends say, "well, it was bound to happen sometime."
Banjo33
Line Up and Wait
Forgive me for bringing this up....I'm not trying to be "that guy", but in the military it's not uncommon for us to fly 200'/540 kts (9 miles per minute). Granted, we require a minimum 5 miles vis and conduct very thorough flight planning. However, there's no getting around that there are frequently towers and terrain that reach well above us, uncontrolled airfields below us, power lines for us to climb over, birds to avoid, GA aircraft to dodge, etc. and we have to go heads down frequently to brief the next leg of our route (hdg, time on top, time enroute, current fuel, minimum fuel to complete the route and make it home, and describe the point we'll be flying over as well as any significant points/obstructions off our sectional). We know we've ALWAYS got an out (up) and the energy to get there QUICKLY, but I don't see how flying at 600' AGL at 80 kts (1.3 miles per minute) is any more dangerous as long as you know your area, maintain control of your aircraft and have decent vis (3+ miles)? I know this behavior isn't for everyone, but if you're instrument rated, comfortable/current in your aircraft and in your normal area of operations, what's the big deal? Truly....what am I missing?
dtuuri
Final Approach
Banjo33
Line Up and Wait
The fact that you're expendable?
dtuuri
Lol, said safely from behind a computer screen!
17 years in the Marine Corps from Infantry to Aviation as Enlisted and as an Officer and I can't recall a single instance of someone being considered or treated as "expendable." Care to continue to express your ignorance or ready to offer an intelligent response to my question?
Didn't think it necessary to clarify, but we don't lose many aircraft in training operating at these altitudes and airspeeds. At 20+ million dollars per aircraft (plus aircrew), if we started crashing regularly, we would certainly stop doing it.
dtuuri
Final Approach
Well, as a Vietnam vet myself, I'm sorry if you were offended. Back in the day, we used the expression self-deprecatingly. I assumed you guys still do.
dtuuri
Banjo33
Line Up and Wait
I guess after having lost enough friends and acquaintances over the years, I missed the "tongue-in-cheek" and take it a bit personal.....especially knowing to what great lengths we go to try and minimize casualties. But you're certainly right, different time and place, but really maybe only the names have changed.
dukeblue219
Line Up and Wait
How often did you fly that way without being in radio contact with a controlling facility of some kind and with an overcast 200' above? Kind of takes away that "up" option as your "out," at least from a legal standpoint. I'm sure you're also better trained than the average spam can driver.
It's not that you're going to die from doing it... Just that it may not be prudent or necessary for most pilots given the risk. On the other hand, if you're training to go to war, such activity is undoubtedly beneficial and necessary for your future survival.
Banjo33
Line Up and Wait
We're not talking to anyone when we do it. Sometimes we'll have come onto a VR route off of an IFR clearance, but we'll have cancelled (in VMC) it before joining the route. Our weather minimums while operating on the route are 3000'/5 SM, but that wasn't the point. IME, operating at 200' at 9 miles per minute or 600' at 1 mile per minute, can be done safely if you're comfortable with the area, have planned carefully, are proficient in your aircraft, and you have decent visibility regardless of where the ceiling is. I just don't buy that it's this HUGE risk and warrants insults being thrown around over it. I do welcome further discussion on this though, because I'm certainly not infallible and may be missing the forest.
The effectiveness of it as a legitimate tactic is a WHOLE different topic! Lol
Oh, and "UP" is always an out (assuming you have the energy [potential and/or kinetic], have attempted to clear your vector, and aren't under a bridge) if failing to do it will kill you!
I agree with you, Banjo, that it doesn't warrant insults being thrown around. All of us have differing risk tolerance, and there is no need to throw insults at someone whose tolerance is different from yours. Let's all try to get along. We all, ultimately, want the same thing
.
wsuffa
Touchdown! Greaser!
And that's the crux of the problem in the specific case mentioned by the OP (and similarly is a potential issue in scud running). Assuming the ceilings are 800', and you're at 600' there's not any margin to go UP without ending up in the clouds.
Once you get in the clouds, you're putting yourself at risk as well as other planes that are flying legitimatly under IFR. In the OP case, one would be scud running to get around clearance restrictions, so going up into the cloud has a higher liklihood of busting the protected area around an IFR flight.
If it's VFR weather, then going up may very well be an option.
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2012
- Messages
- 15,762
- Display Name
Display name:
Velocity173
Banjo, low level flying does have an increased level of risk involved. In the last decade in my neck of the woods (northern GA) we've had 2 T-39s plow into the mountains while on the VR routes. The military accepts this higher level of risk because it's necessary training for national defense. Im sure flying onto an aircraft carrier at night isnt the safest mode of flying either but definitely essential.
"Scud running" in combat happens and I've lost friends that have tried and failed. It's combat and there's some urgency to get the mission done. That's an acceptable level of risk because of who we are and where we are. As a civilian GA pilot I have no urgency to push marginal weather. There isn't anything I do as a civilian worth pushing weather. As Ron said, what is legal isn't necessarily safe.
"Scud running" in combat happens and I've lost friends that have tried and failed. It's combat and there's some urgency to get the mission done. That's an acceptable level of risk because of who we are and where we are. As a civilian GA pilot I have no urgency to push marginal weather. There isn't anything I do as a civilian worth pushing weather. As Ron said, what is legal isn't necessarily safe.
RussR
En-Route
But that's the issue the OP (me) faced - there was no careful planning. On a VR route, you've got a surveyed route, right? I bet you spend hours planning the flight and briefing it too. For a pilot departing VFR because he can't get an IFR release, there is, almost by definition no planning for a low-level visual flight, since that wasn't the goal. Instead, it would be a matter of "I'll just take off and fart around a little until ATC can clear me."
Even in the situation if it was carefully planned, we're now in a matter of legalities. Can I safely fly at 200 feet at 100 knots if I plan it out? Yeah, probably. Of course, 200 foot-tall antennas aren't charted, but I should still be able to see them in time, I hope. But how can you reasonably expect to comply with 91.119 at 200 feet? I assume the military does not have to comply with the FAA's minimum altitude rules.
And "up" is not a legal or safe option in this scenario, with a cloud deck right above you. Though it might be safer than weaving around a tower or something, now we're into a scenario of "which risk is least" - worse of two evils decision. You've already said that your weather limits are 3000' ceiling - that gives you many more options, even at 500 knots, than a 700-900 foot ceiling.
Also, let's keep in mind that we're not talking about training for or conducting a military mission here. Nothing much is going to change if a GA pilot waits a few minutes to work out the clearance issue.
Last edited:
Banjo33
Line Up and Wait
Notice I said it's not a "huge" risk....of course there's increased risk involved, I just take issue with the mentality that you must have some kind of death wish for doing it.
I also know that we lose aircraft occasionally doing it...as we do in ALL flight regimes. We've lost 2 T-39's, a couple T-34s, and an EA-6B in 10 years (probably a couple others)...how many flight hours you reckon that encompasses? As a DSS/ASO I'll have to pull that data, but I would hazard a guess that we lose more aircraft to much less dynamic regimes. Not to mention the methods in which we do it is MUCH more dynamic (lower, faster, higher task loading, etc) than merely climbing to 600' at 80 kts and picking up an IFR clearance. I'm not trying to start a ****ing contest, but it's not rocket surgery if you've met the conditions I previously alluded to. If someone isn't comfortable with it and decide it's not for them, then great that's ORM in action and perfectly acceptable. But to bad mouth someone else for it?
And please quit bringing up combat. ENTIRELY different scenario and circumstances.
Banjo33
Line Up and Wait
Optimally, we would take several hours to plan and conduct a route study. But, we're talking about a flight that may cover a hundred and fifty miles or more. It's not likely we're going to commit much to memorization.
Honestly, I don't know how a VR route is created or what requirements must be met, but we contend with every size tower, airfields, cities, all airspace classifications, terrain, etc for it to be no different than someone taking off from just about any non-towered airfield in the US to pick up an airborne clearance.
You mention taking off and "farting around" awaiting a clearance...must you fly 20 miles away from the airport to do this? Could you not remain within 2 miles or overhead the field while awaiting that clearance? Would that not allow you to land if the ceilings were lower than expected, radio reception was not good enough to contact ATC? Would that really require THAT much extra planning or terrain/obstacle study?
Go back and read my comment regarding UP always being an option..."if not doing it is going to kill you", then up is the better option...do you disagree with that? Why do you feel the need to climb? Obstacles? Terrain? Knowing the MEF for your sector would solve that. Knowing the height of the towers in your immediate area would be a better option. Granted, IMC without being on a clearance is not a good idea, but it beats flying into a tower trying to avoid the clouds above you...they're not made of concrete after all. Maybe in planning you see that there's lower towers in a different direction that would allow you to maintain VMC and you elect to use good judgement and head in that direction instead...you're merely climbing higher looking for better radio reception to get your clearance, right? I NEVER recommended doing this at 200'! I believe my examples referred to 600'....you are free to set your own minimums, mine will change based on the knowledge I have of the area and my current level of proficiency. Ymmv.
azure
Final Approach
It all depends on where you are though. Around and above my home base there's likely a lot of embedded aluminum in them.
Banjo33
Line Up and Wait
I think the thread is starting a bit of divergence and my example has caused it. The dilemma was in regards to a poster's recommendation to launch below a 900' ceiling in order to pick up an IFR clearance (that the OP had already filed). My example could be construed as a much more extreme version of scud running (had a low ceiling been involved), but it's used to show that the other poster's recommendation to pick up his clearance airborne wasn't that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things.
Some people explore the boundaries of flight (and some of them die because of it), others have no idea where those boundaries begin and are afraid to leave their comfort bubble for fear of death not knowing how small their bubble is and how much more their envelope can be expanded without incurring much additional risk and how much of that risk can be mitigated by just applying some common sense and by thinking it through. I'll be the first to admit that I don't have it all figured out and that I'm also a VERY conservative GA flier because I can't keep my proficiency where I like it.
Some people explore the boundaries of flight (and some of them die because of it), others have no idea where those boundaries begin and are afraid to leave their comfort bubble for fear of death not knowing how small their bubble is and how much more their envelope can be expanded without incurring much additional risk and how much of that risk can be mitigated by just applying some common sense and by thinking it through. I'll be the first to admit that I don't have it all figured out and that I'm also a VERY conservative GA flier because I can't keep my proficiency where I like it.
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2012
- Messages
- 15,762
- Display Name
Display name:
Velocity173
As an ASO then you should know about risk management. To say low level is on the same level as an IFR cross country is ludicrous. It has a higher level of risk. You can look at the low level training accidents leading up to Desert Storm and see the proof. After several accidents, many squadrons were forced to train at higher altitudes. Once again, the risk involved in military is a necessary risk and isn't compatible to the OP.
My comparison with combat is valid. I'm trying to show that in theater there are allowances to be made to fly in weather that you wouldn't normally do in peacetime. These exceptions are necessary for mission accomplishment. Pushing marginal VFR sometimes is necessary when lives are at stake. What sort of mission would a private GA pilot have that would necessitate pushing marginal VFR when they could easily pick the clearance up on the ground?
I'm not bad mouthing anyone because of a weather decision. Most of us are simply saying scud running in marginal VFR while trying to pick up an IFR clearance isn't something we'd do. To each his own.
Banjo33
Line Up and Wait
Absolutely, and by you knowing that about your area may discourage this altogether.
Banjo33
Line Up and Wait
Are you reading what's being posted? Low level for combat ops is MUCH lower than 600' and MUCH faster than the OP in a light civil. There's AAA, manpads, SMARMS, trees, multi-level structures, formation integrity, unfamiliar terrain, hell...kids with rocks! not to mention sensor management that must be factored in. Hello task saturation! How is that even slightly comparable to launching below a 900' ceiling to pick up an IFR clearance??? Lol!
bbchien
Touchdown! Greaser!
Ah. another superior pilot. 9 posts in the last 15.
I am a not so superior pilot.
I was also once expendable and it was made clear to me that I was. But I did survive.
Keep preaching. Gettin' strident. The louder and louder you screech the harder to hear, it'll get. Dude, we are working in a civil system, in shared space with civil pilots. What part of that don't you get?
Yeah, I was only O-2. That's how it was.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2012
- Messages
- 15,762
- Display Name
Display name:
Velocity173
??? You're the one who brought up the comparison (200 ft 540 kts), not me. I'm saying you can't compare your type of flying to the OP. My example of accidents wasn't combat. It was during the training (Desert Shield) leading up to Desert Storm. Also unless you flew during the initial stages of OEF / OIF, you haven't done low level ops in combat. I've flown in both places and the coordination altitude is quite high. Unless you're doing a show of force, a tactical jet is well outside of any threat over there.
Banjo33
Line Up and Wait
Um, what? Lol! I get that you didn't contribute much in this post? Are you the guy that stands on the outside of a conversation and attempts to interject randomly out of context? We know you're usually better than that!
Banjo33
Line Up and Wait
I brought it up as an example that what was suggested (launching below a 900' ceiling to merely pick up an IFR clearance) can be done relatively safely. It's a MUCH greater extreme example of how we do a similar mission (low level operations). I also offered some risk mitigation techniques that would allow it to be done in a safer manner (ie some planning and self assessment). Combat, prep for combat....MUCH farther to the extreme than my example.
It was merely an opinion with an example. Ultimately it's up to the PIC to decide if it's safe.
Last edited:
bbchien
Touchdown! Greaser!
No I made the observation that now 11 of the preceeding 18 posts are from you. That says something.
I too am ex mil.
But I sure don't brag on it.