Is the experienced scud runner safer than the rare instrument pilot?

Knowledge of weather, knowing my aircraft and my limits, synthetic vision, Foreflight, TruTrac AP and never being afraid to make that 180 has kept me and my family safe VFR and MVFR.

An unknown VFR couple crashed into the Appalachians in October (both thankfully survived), while attempting to fly about 2 hrs directly through the weather that we were flying 4.3 hrs to go around (the DC SFRA of all things). I found out the next day when a friend ask if we were ok. My family understood why I spent the extra time that day studying the weather.
 
I thought scud running was just flying beneath the clouds to avoid weather. if you're 1000 ft below some clouds at 6000 ASL then I've called that 'scud running'.
 
Rare IFR? I am IFR in my job 100% of the time...BUT I have been trained extensively to use the avionics in the aircraft and I have a F/O and two autopilots.
NOW, I am coming back to my roots and flying a 182RG with a 530w and an STEC 30. I fly along with the manual and play with all the features of the 530 so as to make it second nature but still forget and get confused. I just did my first real IFR flight with bases of 1700 and tops about 6000. I will admit tension on getting it set up and hoping it was right. Still working with an instructor but what some of you might consider easy weather I still sit up and take notice.

I talk with my friends and what we did when we were younger would ground us now. Time and confidence will help but depart and fly somewhere with the weather near minimums? No way.

Beware the guy who says "it's got wings, I can fly it"...yes but what about the panel?
 
Based on the Nall Report.....IR pilots get bit more with IMC scud running that not.
 
Seems like the more complete question being asked is , "For pilots willing to push beyond the regs when facing marginal weather, is the experienced scud runner safer than the less than current IFR pilot?"

Having possibly qualified in both categories over the years, I've concluded that the FARs are pretty damn well designed in this area. I'm increasingly under the belief that following them to the letter is a good minimum standard for safer flight.
 
Scud running is where you are low enought to worry about hitting something and flying where you cant climb any higher because of the clouds.
 
I wonder if the 'scud runner' definition should be expanded to include the pilot who purposely arrives over his destination on top of a well forecasted undercast with bottoms at <1500' AGL, and then asks ATC to tell him where it might be thinnest so he can descend to underneath and land?

He was very matter-of-fact on the radio and never asked for an IFR clearance to do what was clearly and IFR operation. He casually mentioned that he would be using his AP for the descent. It occurred to me that by never asking for the clearance, he never faced the question of whether he was "IFR equipped and able".
 
kyleb said:
IMO, you have to look at the charts. There are a couple of smokestacks and towers in the vicinity of my home field which drive the "safe" VFR altitude on the chart. That's the case in a lot of areas. As long as you're aware of and avoid the handful of tall towers, the safe altitudes come down significantly. That's where obstacle databases more than pay for themselves.
Click to expand...

That reminds me - about 20 years ago (yikes! Am I getting that old?) when I first started taking lessons, some bozo departed FTY and made a skid mark down the side of that smokestack by 285. About the only thing around one could hit...

http://ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/brief2.aspx?ev_id=20001207X03216&ntsbno=ATL95FA088&akey=1
 
Stewartb said:
Silly topic. Scud running is an imaginary exercise for most of you. Weather and visibility are relative to the airplane speed. What I can do in a Cub has little to do with what you go-fast guys think you can't do.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I've flown 25 miles to a friend's strip in 600 broken and 800' overcast in an ultralight in perfect safety, knowing I could land anywhere if I had to (also being familiar with the local area and conditions and knowing it was forecast to lift), but it would be stupid in a faster airplane. Being able and willing to put it down is key.
 
For the purposes of discussion, Coloradobluesky's (#46) definition seems to work well IME. If you're flying your ultralight (for example) at 600' agl with an 800' deck, and you know there are 800' towers out there, seems like you'd better know where they are.
 
iflyvfr said:
For the purposes of discussion, Coloradobluesky's (#46) definition seems to work well IME. If you're flying your ultralight (for example) at 600' agl with an 800' deck, and you know there are 800' towers out there, seems like you'd better know where they are.
Click to expand...
Yes, and especially if you fly along in that sct- bkn layer at 600' with ovc at 800'. Likely what happened in Atlanta. Looking down to the sides, he had it under control...until the middle of an 800' stack appeared, then it is too late.
 
RV10flyer said:
Yes, and especially if you fly along in that sct- bkn layer at 600' with ovc at 800'. Likely what happened in Atlanta. Looking down to the sides, he had it under control...until the middle of an 800' stack appeared, then it is too late.
Click to expand...
RV10 - were you by chance doing TNGs Wednesday afternoon on RWY 18 and landed just as 2 Cessnas were taxiing out?
 
iflyvfr said:
RV10 - were you by chance doing TNGs Wednesday afternoon on RWY 18 and landed just as 2 Cessnas were taxiing out?
Click to expand...
Yes...smooth flying wasn't it. Glad to see a few planes out. We really enjoy the family trips, but one a year is all we can afford right now. Just try to get out every 2-3 weeks and knock the rust off.
 
RV10flyer said:
Yes, and especially if you fly along in that sct- bkn layer at 600' with ovc at 800'. Likely what happened in Atlanta. Looking down to the sides, he had it under control...until the middle of an 800' stack appeared, then it is too late.
Click to expand...
Stack wasn't on the sectional?
 
RV10flyer said:
Yes...smooth flying wasn't it. Glad to see a few planes out. We really enjoy the family trips, but one a year is all we can afford right now. Just try to get out every 2-3 weeks and knock the rust off.
Click to expand...
Yep it was a great day for it. Boy did your engine sound sweet as you went by while we were loading up. What a great looking airplane too! With the tailwind I was doing 122 kts GS descending into Bolton - didn't take long at all to get home.
 
Bill Watson said:
I wonder if the 'scud runner' definition should be expanded to include the pilot who purposely arrives over his destination on top of a well forecasted undercast with bottoms at <1500' AGL, and then asks ATC to tell him where it might be thinnest so he can descend to underneath and land?

He was very matter-of-fact on the radio and never asked for an IFR clearance to do what was clearly and IFR operation. He casually mentioned that he would be using his AP for the descent. It occurred to me that by never asking for the clearance, he never faced the question of whether he was "IFR equipped and able".
Click to expand...
We came over the Appalachians one year heading to Triple Tree. The "forecast" was for the 700'-5,000' agl layer to move out by 10 AM. The Sun was coming up nicely and what a beautiful snow white undercast for as far as you could see in front of us. Flat on top and bottom and did not budge a bit until 3 PM. I already had plan B and C in mind. Re-checked wx at KAND, 3.5 hrs of fuel on board, told ATC what we were doing. I hope I never have to ask for help, but would if necessary.
 
MD11Pilot said:
Rare IFR? I am IFR in my job 100% of the time...BUT I have been trained extensively to use the avionics in the aircraft and I have a F/O and two autopilots.
NOW, I am coming back to my roots and flying a 182RG with a 530w and an STEC 30. I fly along with the manual and play with all the features of the 530 so as to make it second nature but still forget and get confused. I just did my first real IFR flight with bases of 1700 and tops about 6000. I will admit tension on getting it set up and hoping it was right. Still working with an instructor but what some of you might consider easy weather I still sit up and take notice.

I talk with my friends and what we did when we were younger would ground us now. Time and confidence will help but depart and fly somewhere with the weather near minimums? No way.

Beware the guy who says "it's got wings, I can fly it"...yes but what about the panel?
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting that, MD11 Pilot. It has been my argument for a good while that flying newer equipment as opposed to analog gauges is a lot more difficult unless the pilot flies with that equipment a lot. Although situational awareness is definitely worlds ahead, making sure (positively sure) the equipment is properly set up, since your life depends on it, requires intimate familiarity. Intimate familiarity is difficult to acquire and maintain with occasional instrument flight. In this case, I think a pilot would be safer scud running rather than trying to figure out the equipment (and possible anomalies) while simultaneously trying to talk/listen to ATC and maintain aircraft control. At least his/her attention can be focused on aviating first and foremost.
 
iflyvfr said:
For the purposes of discussion, Coloradobluesky's (#46) definition seems to work well IME. If you're flying your ultralight (for example) at 600' agl with an 800' deck, and you know there are 800' towers out there, seems like you'd better know where they are.
Click to expand...

True... but at ultralight speeds, you have plenty of time to steer around them.
 
mscard88 said:
Used to fly into FTY all the time, and that stack was on the sectional. If you could see it visually man it was huge and very noticeable.
Click to expand...
Is that the stack near Atlanta that you typically see the top poking up through the cloud layer?
 
Fearless Tower said:
Is that the stack near Atlanta that you typically see the top poking up through the cloud layer?
Click to expand...

I guess if the cloud top wasn't too high you'd see it. I do know I've seen those antennas poking up just south of PDK. Years ago ATL built a new control tower and that thing is around 400' agl.
 
So weather in Juneau was IFR and was expected to improve. I was listing to the tower on my handheld. Cub "XYZ" reported to tower "X" miles out, tower replied "remain clear of class D". I think he asked the "XYZ" Cub if the wanted to file a special VFR. The pilot said yes. 2 minutes later the tower said "Juneau is VFR" and asked the pilot of "XYZ, Cub do you want to cancel your special"..
 
Fearless Tower said:
Is that the stack near Atlanta that you typically see the top poking up through the cloud layer?
Click to expand...
w
Probably. It is the only one near the city that I can think of which is anywhere near that tall. It is on the W/NW side of town.
 
somorris said:
Thanks for posting that, MD11 Pilot. It has been my argument for a good while that flying newer equipment as opposed to analog gauges is a lot more difficult unless the pilot flies with that equipment a lot. Although situational awareness is definitely worlds ahead, making sure (positively sure) the equipment is properly set up, since your life depends on it, requires intimate familiarity. Intimate familiarity is difficult to acquire and maintain with occasional instrument flight. In this case, I think a pilot would be safer scud running rather than trying to figure out the equipment (and possible anomalies) while simultaneously trying to talk/listen to ATC and maintain aircraft control. At least his/her attention can be focused on aviating first and foremost.
Click to expand...


The confusion factor. Where are we and what's it doing now and how do I get it to something.
 
I much prefer being under layers even though visibility may suck and the turbulence is uncomfortable, because I'm afraid of being stuck on top and of losing power with a resulting emergency landing through clouds. For that reason I gained some small experience getting pressed into the ground by clouds. My resulting view is that the most important thing you need to fly under clouds is discipline. For example, one rule I follow is never fly under clouds at night, no matter how close I am to the destination.
 
mtuomi said:
The highest one you see is 2550ft and almost directly halfway between PDK and
Athens.
Click to expand...

And the one the Cessna hit was dismantled a year or three ago. They closed that coal burning plant...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top