It was scary today

[TMetzinger]

Tim,

I do appreciate your comments but, honestly, they apply far more to the NTSB reports you've been reading

I never was in danger of losing visual, at any point during the flight. If it got THAT bad, I'd be landing at the airport and dealing with the FAA later, precisely like you suggest. I may have taken a longer time to reach the point of being willing to do so than you or someone else, but in the end, I never lost visual contact with the airport itself (so visibility stayed 3+ miles, because that's how far I was from it).

The challenge I have with applying your words is that it appears like you are reading a lot more into my self-made report than was intended. So let's try and clarify. When I make a post like that, its entire purpose is to share an experience, and hope BOTH to gain from the community interaction, AS WELL as give back (by sharing). I don't see many people writing candidly about bad moments. I learn a lot more from those threads than I do from books, ground school, or AOPA videos (as much as I like those).

What would have turned this into a disaster, and what really prompted me to write the letter in the first place (then share it here), is engine failure. Under less stressful conditions, such a failure is not too big of a deal, especially out here where there are strips literally everywhere to glide into (whether public or private). Had that happened too, we would have crashed into the water and you'd have another NTSB report to go through with fatalities. THAT was the actual thing that scared me, realizing that it got to the point where "one more thing" would have turned a fairly routine flight into "real bad".

In the end, nothing happened. I circled for 30 minutes at 500ft over water, saw the same bridges about 15 times, got really frustrated, had adrenaline pumping through my blood for hours later, and my kids hit several new levels on their respective DS games. My ex, who was also on board, got a pretty good scare too (she stayed on the radio the whole time so listened to it unfold). I did not break any rules nor airspace, to which in retrospect I paid too much respect (and that's another lesson learned; I really should have 7600ed it, but I guess in the moment I felt comfortable enough to continue circling). This was not an "incident", but it sure was a big learning moment, which I chose to share with you all.

And it makes it hard to do that when you get jumped on with comments like yours and others. So I want to turn the tables and ask you this: would you rather I DON'T share these stories, and just stick to the good stuff? because getting "condemned", as you put it, doesn't do anything to further any goal other than shut me down. Is there a reason you would want that result?

From your original post:

I must admit that for a moment or two today, I wasn't entirely certain we'd come out of it alive...


...There was also no getting back out, visibility was down close to the
lower limits of SVFR, and the mist was collecting fast...

Certainly sounds "that bad" to me. Your post sounds very much like one of the "Never Again" articles in a magazine, except it's missing (to me anyway) the vow never to get in that situation again! Circling 500 feet above water with fog/mist building would scare the crap out of me in anything other than a seaplane.

I use the word condemn in the way that Grant said it. And it certainly a good thing for us all to post stuff like this. But part of the learning from our own stupidity is the smacking around we get from ourselves and others when we admit it. The internal smackdown is most important, but the evaluation or condemnation of our peers is valuable too. Yes, it hurts. It's supposed to - shame is a highly developed mechanism in people to insure that they remember when they've done things that they shouldn't have.

I have vivid memories of the times I've done stupid stuff, including showing my a$$ in this forum when I didn't quite know what I was talking about. They work to keep me from doing it again. At least until I find a new (to me) way to screw up.

The lesson I want you to take from this is that you put yourself and your family in danger needlessly by electing to press on into weather that was deteriorating rather than immediately finding and heading for better weather. For your area of the country, just as in mine, the IR is pretty much a necessity if you want to be able to make most of your flights as planned. Until you get that rating, I'd like you to make a vow that you will not fly into conditions less than 2000 feet and three miles (the same conditions that REQUIRE IFR pilots to plan for an alternate) with passengers on board.

I don't want to end up using this thread as a "teaching example" of how unsafe attitudes can prove deadly.

Best wishes,

 

[Clark1961]

Just one little comment, since it doesn't look like anyone brought it up yet. You mentioned you got a DUAT briefing, which is fine. But as a word of advice for a relatively new VFR-only pilot... If there's *any* question or chance that the weather will deteriorate to IMC conditions, or even MVFR conditions, I *highly* recommend calling flight service and getting a phone briefing. Some of those flight service specialists really know their stuff, and can tell you things about the weather that you probably wouldn't catch with a text briefing. I'd venture to guess that the VFR-only pilot community is missing more than just a few pilots as a result of passing over the opprtunity to get a briefing with flight service...

+1 - I speak to a briefer anytime things look "interesting" on the other end. I've had some really good conversations with specialists who have explained the sources on local forecasts and why they might vary from the "big picture." A few specialists are really duds but all it cost me was a few minutes of my time so basically it never hurts to call.

 

[Dr. O]

You NEED the instrument ticket - and you are working on it so, good on ya...

And F I L E for IFR when the wx is marginal...
Just having the rating while banging around in deteriorating weather while VFR gets pilots killed just as dead as not having the rating...

You see, being able to keep the airplane upright on the gauges is not what makes for IFR flight in IMC... It is an entire system of checks and balances, communication (demand that they get that airplane fixed), procedures and procedure turns, MEA and DH, and rehearsed responses to problems (like dead radios)...
It is a dance where where all the dancers know what to expect from you - and vice versa... When a non-dancer blows into the middle of the dance, it all gets really bad (like a skunk running through the ballroom just as the caller tells the group to do-si-do to the right)

Anyway, I am not going to beat on you... You handled the situation... After a few smacks across the head from your fellow POA you now see where you could have done a lot better and you admit that... That single act in itself makes me believe that you have the insight that it takes to make a good pilot... Every pilot on here has made at least one marginal/bad decision in flying - this old bird included... The key is to realize it, figure what you should have done, and never make the same bad decision twice...

cheers
denny-o

 

[Anthony]

Great thread. Thanks to the OP for having the guts to post, admit his errors, and use it as a learning experience.

Not to make light of the subject, but the title of the thread does remind me of this line......."The sea was angry my friend, like an old man trying to send back soup in a deli......"

 

[wabower]

We already have that thread going this weekend, with four funeral notices in Indiana as the result. A quick comparison of the two threads seems to indicate that the primary difference was in the outcome.

From your original post:



I don't want to end up using this thread as a "teaching example" of how unsafe attitudes can prove deadly.

Best wishes,

 

[dmccormack]

Just one little comment, since it doesn't look like anyone brought it up yet. You mentioned you got a DUAT briefing, which is fine. But as a word of advice for a relatively new VFR-only pilot... If there's *any* question or chance that the weather will deteriorate to IMC conditions, or even MVFR conditions, I *highly* recommend calling flight service and getting a phone briefing. Some of those flight service specialists really know their stuff, and can tell you things about the weather that you probably wouldn't catch with a text briefing. I'd venture to guess that the VFR-only pilot community is missing more than just a few pilots as a result of passing over the opprtunity to get a briefing with flight service...

Absolutely +1

 

[dell30rb]

I apologize if this has already been discussed,

After a few minutes of lost comm, would it have been beneficial to squawk lost comm, fly to the airport doing your best to avoid the approach/departure routes and look for a light signal from the tower?

Also I don't know how far you were from the airport, but there is a possibility that the problem was not with your radios, but your lack of sufficient altitude to ensure a clear signal.

PS I have not used svfr before but as SkyHog mentioned earlier, its only prudent use is to cut the corner on improving weather, not worsening weather.

 

[Anthony]

Absolutely +1

Especially in more recent years, I don't find many briefers that knowledgeable about the finer aspects of weather, and reading the atmospheric tea leaves.

 

[Morne]

Also I don't know how far you were from the airport, but there is a possibility that the problem was not with your radios, but your lack of sufficient altitude to ensure a clear signal.

Being a Ham also, 500' AGL is PLENTY for a VHF transmission of even very modest power (say, half a watt) to reach 3 miles away. In the OP's postings he mentioned maintaining visual with the field and that's how he knew he had at least 3 miles visibility.

VHF is line of sight. Few Hams have towers in excess of 100' AGL and yet hit repeaters much further away than 3 miles.

 

[dmccormack]

Especially in more recent years, I don't find many briefers that knowledgeable about the finer aspects of weather, and reading the atmospheric tea leaves.

Since the early troubles it seems there has been a steady improvement. I don't rely on the FSS briefer, either, but I know more about weather now than I did when I was a VFR-only private pilot.

In this case the OP needs to expand his ADM inputs.

 

[gcd89]

Onwards - glad you're still around to have posted your story.
The radios were NOT the problem here; it was the nut behind the yoke.
Stop playing around in special VFR like it's no big deal. If the wx is truly such that SVFR is routinely needed at CCR, either get your IR or find another airport to call home base until you do.

+1

This pretty much sums it all up. Cocky + pilot = 0.

 

[dennyleeb]

From your original post:


Certainly sounds "that bad" to me. Your post sounds very much like one of the "Never Again" articles in a magazine, except it's missing (to me anyway) the vow never to get in that situation again! Circling 500 feet above water with fog/mist building would scare the crap out of me in anything other than a seaplane.

I use the word condemn in the way that Grant said it. And it certainly a good thing for us all to post stuff like this. But part of the learning from our own stupidity is the smacking around we get from ourselves and others when we admit it. The internal smackdown is most important, but the evaluation or condemnation of our peers is valuable too. Yes, it hurts. It's supposed to - shame is a highly developed mechanism in people to insure that they remember when they've done things that they shouldn't have.

I have vivid memories of the times I've done stupid stuff, including showing my a$$ in this forum when I didn't quite know what I was talking about. They work to keep me from doing it again. At least until I find a new (to me) way to screw up.

The lesson I want you to take from this is that you put yourself and your family in danger needlessly by electing to press on into weather that was deteriorating rather than immediately finding and heading for better weather. For your area of the country, just as in mine, the IR is pretty much a necessity if you want to be able to make most of your flights as planned. Until you get that rating, I'd like you to make a vow that you will not fly into conditions less than 2000 feet and three miles (the same conditions that REQUIRE IFR pilots to plan for an alternate) with passengers on board.

I don't want to end up using this thread as a "teaching example" of how unsafe attitudes can prove deadly.

Best wishes,

I agree 100%. Look at the thread about the sr20. However I don't think he looks at it the same way.

 

[John Baker]

Being a Ham also, 500' AGL is PLENTY for a VHF transmission of even very modest power (say, half a watt) to reach 3 miles away. In the OP's postings he mentioned maintaining visual with the field and that's how he knew he had at least 3 miles visibility.

VHF is line of sight. Few Hams have towers in excess of 100' AGL and yet hit repeaters much further away than 3 miles.

This doesn't have much to do with anything other than the towers ability to transmit. My house is on a hill about ten or so miles away from Montgomery Field, and about 100' lower elevation. I can pick up the ATIS loud and clear on my little handheld radio at home. Gillespie Field is about 15 or so miles away, I can pick up their ATIS as well. My house is clear sight to both airports, although I can see neither from there. I've not tried the tower chatter, I imagine it would be the same.

John

 

[onwards]

Whoa. So many replies, so little time.

Alright, a couple things.

1) yes, I canceled the next day's flight and the plane went into the avionics shop the next morning. I asked the maintenance officer to tell me what if anything they find.

2) I thought about the idea that I may have been too low which interfered with the radios. I don't think that was it though, or at least not the only cause, because the first time radio 1 acted funny I was 3500 in the SFO Bravo (and cleared up afterwards).

3) I just can't understand the mentality of judging something from one's keyboard. So many assumptions... I would like to try and make something perfectly clear, although I keep failing: I was NOT, in any way shape or form, believing that I was coming into "deteriorating weather". That's an assumption some folks here made, and others picked up on. The weather was MVFR earlier in the day at CCR too, then went to VFR, then back to MVFR, then to VFR... as it does pretty much 80% of the days between Nov and May. Visibility normally stays excellent under the low broken, 10 miles is normal, sometimes down to 8. It's just a matter of where the wind blows, really, as to whether that low layer makes VFR or MVFR.

When I went low I had plenty of visibility, a clear route, and zero problems. Then I was told to wait for IFR traffic because they had priority, and trying to acknowledge that, found that the radios stopped transmitting. I STILL had no expectation that things would go bad as I found a place to circle and wait. By the time I noticed they were getting bad and just how bad they had gotten, I was running out of options fast. So yes, fixating on the comm issue distracted me from looking at the more important stuff (ah, noticing the fog buildup), which was dumb and I fully acknowledge. But by no means did I make a "decision to go into deteriorating weather". I made a decision to go into the kind of relatively stable weather I am quite familiar with over here, except this time it went into a place I was NOT familiar with, coupled with an instruction to wait exacerbated by a communications issue. And yes, in retrospect, there were some telltale signs that in the future, I will be far more clued in to. This flight and experience, if anything, made me a better aviator weather-wise.

And even with all that, I never lost visual contact with the airport, and at the moment where it became unbearable to ME (and how I felt about it while being in it is the only thing that counts here), I made straight in and landed perfectly safely.

Please stop the preaching. There are plenty lessons to be learned here. One of them is NOT that I should stop utilizing the SVFR tool. And anyway, i will not stop, so preaching it with a holier than thou attitude serves to do nothing but take away from what can be a rather useful discussion. I have already learned a lot of things from this thread, even from those of you that, in the same breath, seem to want to put me down, and I am grateful for that. Just lay off the preaching, please. Respect that I was up there, you are down here, and the results - no rules were broken, no emergency declared, no issues created for anyone, no forms to fill, no numbers to call, no FSDO guy to explain things to, and a perfectly safe landing - would seem to indicate, at least somewhat, that things were as I explained them, not as some of you seem to want to interpret them. You say i got lucky. I say I got rather unlucky. Let's agree to disagree, OK?

 

[Everskyward]

Well... the SVFR thing is almost a necessity here - it's very common to ask for it, whether you are VFR or IFR or whatever, just for that last mile. I had it shown to me during primary training a couple times, and used it myself with the instructor, although it took a couple months after I got my certificate to need it myself for the first time, but since then I've used it several times.

Every time I've used it to this point it's always been this way - you get excellent visibility, and a low thin broken layer sitting over the airport, so you duck under it and come in, or go out under it into clear skies. It LOOKED that way today.

And then, it didn't.

This is what happens to people. You have apparently used SVFR multiple times successfully so your experience has conditioned you to believe that in the future you will continue to have good outcomes using this technique. The problem is that you were lucky with the weather the first few times. This time you weren't so lucky and you could have potentially been even more unlucky. There are times when SVFR might be appropriate. As someone else mentioned, one of those times could be when conditions are improving as opposed to deteriorating. On the other hand I would especially not want to depend on SVFR to get you into an airport where conditions are getting worse.

Look at this air traffic publication from the FAA. IFR flights generally get priority over SVFR flights. When the field goes IFR then all the IFR rated pilots who are not already on IFR flight plans are going to be getting pop-up IFR clearances for an approach. Where does that leave you?

7-5-2. PRIORITY

a. SVFR flights may be approved only if arriving and departing IFR aircraft are not delayed.

EXAMPLE-
1. A SVFR aircraft has been cleared to enter a Class B, Class C, Class D, or Class E surface area and subsequently an IFR aircraft is ready to depart or is in position to begin an approach. Less overall delay might accrue to the IFR aircraft if the SVFR aircraft is allowed to proceed to the airport and land, rather than leave, a Class B, Class C, Class D, or Class E surface area or be repositioned to provide IFR priority.

2. A SVFR aircraft is number one for takeoff and located in such a position that the number two aircraft, an IFR flight, cannot taxi past to gain access to the runway. Less overall delay might accrue to the IFR aircraft by releasing the SVFR departure rather than by having the aircraft taxi down the runway to a turnoff point so the IFR aircraft could be released first.

NOTE-
The priority afforded IFR aircraft over SVFR aircraft is not intended to be so rigidly applied that inefficient use of airspace results. The controller has the prerogative of permitting completion of a SVFR operation already in progress when an IFR aircraft becomes a factor if better overall efficiency will result.

b. Inform an aircraft of the anticipated delay when a SVFR clearance cannot be granted because of IFR traffic. Do not issue an EFC or expected departure time.

PHRASEOLOGY-
EXPECT (number) MINUTES DELAY, (additional instructions as necessary).

REFERENCE-
FAAO JO 7110.65, Para 2-1-4, Operational Priority.
FAAO JO 7110.65, Para 5-6-1, Application.

http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/atc/atc0705.html

I flew as a VFR only pilot in the SF Bay area for at least two years before I moved away. I might have been shown how to use SVFR but I can't recall actually using it. I certainly didn't use it routinely. I just didn't go flying when the weather was that bad.

 

[onwards]

This is what happens to people. You have apparently used SVFR multiple times successfully so your experience has conditioned you to believe that in the future you will continue to have good outcomes using this technique.

Yes, fully agreed. Moreover, I will add that beyond just "complacency kills" (and I WAS complacent, which was very wrong), I also learned some interesting detail about the difference between "what I'm used to" and "what it looks like when it's gonna get worse". THAT will be very helpful in making decisions around when to use this.

Look at this air traffic publication from the FAA. IFR flights generally get priority over SVFR flights. When the field goes IFR then all the IFR rated pilots who are not already on IFR flight plans are going to be getting pop-up IFR clearances for an approach. Where does that leave you?

In this situation, declaring an emergency via the 7600 squawk code, and landing, damn the consequences. Remember, I was never in danger of getting into IMC. But I do see your point, and that's an excellent quote from the regulation, thank you.

 

[dell30rb]

Being a Ham also, 500' AGL is PLENTY for a VHF transmission of even very modest power (say, half a watt) to reach 3 miles away. In the OP's postings he mentioned maintaining visual with the field and that's how he knew he had at least 3 miles visibility.

VHF is line of sight. Few Hams have towers in excess of 100' AGL and yet hit repeaters much further away than 3 miles.

Ah I missed the part where he said he was maintaining visual contact with the airfield.

You really should not go flying if you think you may need an SVFR clearance. What are your personal minimums? It makes sense to have them and stick to them. Mine are something like 2000 feet min for day flights (local w good visibility and very conscious of towers) and 3500 (w good vis) at night. SVFR is not something I want to play with.

 

[onwards]

Ah I missed the part where he said he was maintaining visual contact with the airfield.

Yes, at all times. That's why I felt safe. As it turned out, at some point I STOPPED feeling safe when it looked like I was getting boxed in by fog. The option to divert at that point was, in my mind, lost to me, because I KNEW where my airport was, and I did NOT KNOW what the conditions were en route to any of the other ones. So I lost my outs because I fixated on the comm. That was plenty stupid. That's life. I learn from it and move on. Next time I will divert or declare much, much faster.

 

[onwards]

By the way, for other VFR pilots hoping for lessons from this thread. I mentioned a couple telltale signs that will in the future clue me in (I went and read about weather stuff after this event, which clarified a couple things).

First, what i'm used to in these "SVFR situations" is completely stable air with excellent visibility, usually 10 miles or more.

Two things were radically different this time, which I am still kicking myself for ignoring, because they were so easy to spot.

1) it was hazy.

2) it was bumpy.

These two things should have really clued me in to the fact that this was not what I think of as a normal day, and was getting worse. That's where the complacency comes in, and I vow will not happen again in the future, for me anyway.

 

[Flying h4x0r]

Please stop the preaching. There are plenty lessons to be learned here. One of them is NOT that I should stop utilizing the SVFR tool. And anyway, i will not stop

I'm sorry that you feel like you're being preached to. There are many experienced pilots on this board and everyone is telling you to stop flying VFR in marginal conditions. Yes it's legal under SVFR and yes you've done it safely many times, but this one time you pushed your luck and you weren't even "entirely certain we'd come out of it alive."

I'm not sure how "fog rolling in" doesn't = "deteriorating weather" but what would you have done if you lost visual contact with the airport? What if you lost contact with the ground?

No one is perfect pilot, everyone exhibits poor judgment at times, makes stupid mistakes, and everyone feels embarrassed, get over your ego. We've all been there. Get over it and reevaluate your personal minimums, especially if you're going to be taking your kids onboard.

I vow will not happen again in the future, for me anyway.

I'm not sure what that means if you're going to still fly VFR in marginal conditions.

I have nothing to gain from offering this advice. I have no family or property in California that I have to worry about you CFIT or graveyard spiraling into, and you are welcome to keep flying how you want.

 

[Richard]

Ah I missed the part where he said he was maintaining visual contact with the airfield.

It would be easy to miss because some details have been slow to be revealed, regardless of how relevant they are.
In fact, in a post of this morning I finally got the answer to my question of why he loitered in the area of CCR; he was waiting for a clearance between IFR traffic. That hadn't been mentioned until this morning.

I'm a bit dismayed at the OP's attitude of this morning. All we have is our keyboards and his words...and our experience. Some significant details have been slow to emerge leaving us to figure based on the information previously given. Yet, there is also the factor that none of us were there. That coupled with spotty details, we try to figure it out and somewhat fall short.

I'm dismayed that he once again seems irate. There are some very skilled pilots who have commented, pilots one would be honored to share a cockpit with. Their experiences and knowledge gained should not be dismissed. If that means sucking it up and taking your lumps, so be it.

I suggest the OP think of it this way: perhaps they are being kind by only cyber-smacking upside the head. I can imagine the bit tongues trying not to say what some really want to say. This to better enable a transfer of knowledge.

 

[onwards]

I'm not sure how "fog rolling in" doesn't = "deteriorating weather" but what would you have done if you lost visual contact with the airport? What if you lost contact with the ground?

That happened AFTER I was already in there, and was unexpected to me at the time. I am reacting to the notion that I CHOSE to go in there KNOWING this will happen, which is utterly wrong, has no basis in reality, and is purely conjecture from those same experienced pilots. The sad thing is that I do value all of your input - stone throwers included - but parts of it are irrelevant.

No one is perfect pilot, everyone exhibits poor judgment at times, makes stupid mistakes, and everyone feels embarrassed, get over your ego. We've all been there. Get over it and reevaluate your personal minimums, especially if you're going to be taking your kids onboard.

Dude, read all my posts. I am far from being unable to acknowledge my mistakes, poor judgment and plain stupidity. I just won't acknowledge something that is plainly untrue, no matter how strongly someone tries to shove it down my throat. And I WILL stand up and say so, too, because I find it takes the discussion away from being useful to being a needless flamewar.

 

[onwards]

It would be easy to miss because some details have been slow to be revealed, regardless of how relevant they are.
In fact, in a post of this morning I finally got the answer to my question of why he loitered in the area of CCR; he was waiting for a clearance between IFR traffic. That hadn't been mentioned until this morning.

I have a question to you, sir: would it have been easier to ask for more detail, than to assume the answers and jump into conclusions? would that not feel more respectful to the recipient - me? can you not see that it is hard enough to come to this public board and discuss something of this nature, without being jumped on needlessly? can you not understand that the mere action of doing so already represents a leap of faith that many will not take, a personality that is willing to take criticism, and a spirit that is constantly trying to improve? note that I did not go into the anonymous "lessons learned" forum.

My goal in coming in and posting is to share an experience, gain insights from all of you who are far, far more experienced than I am (that's the motivation), and hopefully contribute back to the community by the mere action of discussing a rather uncomfortable, embarrassing and frightening moment flying, thereby ALLOWING all of you with all your experience to provide comment. How is the shooting down helpful? why would you feel it necessary to do so? why is it so hard to ask for clarification? would you do the same thing if we were chatting in person?

 

[Richard]

To me, and apparently to others, it was unclear exactly what the conditions were, time intervals, and your response. Only over many posts did more details emerge. Significant details that changed the picture in our eyes yet were 'always there' in your mind. Evident is your frustration of trying to make clear to us what is crystal clear to you.

Being pilots we seek a certain exactitude, including disecting certain flights or phases of flight.

Referring to a comment you made of this morning, most do not intentionally fly VFR into IMC...it just happens. That is the idea I had when reading your posts. Thank you for making this thread, I know you have learned from your flight and the posts here. Reflect upon it and let it sink in. Do not be adverse to further insight whether it comes from your insight or that of others.

 

[Richard]

I have a question to you, sir....

Flying is risky business. As pilots mature in skill there is less acceptance of hazard. Being precise is the name of the game, thereby it may be understood that pilots eat their young. It was just your turn in the barrel. Who's turn is it today, tomorrow, the next day.... Each of us is tasked with avoiding two days in a row.

Have you considered perhaps the value of this thread to up and coming pilots? Perhaps by posting you have broadened their knowledge if only by a little or a lot. And that is not to say there is no value to those more experienced pilots. Complacency does not discriminate.

 

[onwards]

To me, and apparently to others, it was unclear exactly what the conditions were, time intervals, and your response. Only over many posts did more details emerge. Significant details that changed the picture in our eyes yet were 'always there' in your mind. Evident is your frustration of trying to make clear to us what is crystal clear to you.

Being pilots we seek a certain exactitude, including disecting certain flights or phases of flight.

Referring to a comment you made of this morning, most do not intentionally fly VFR into IMC...it just happens. That is the idea I had when reading your posts. Thank you for making this thread, I know you have learned from your flight and the posts here. Reflect upon it and let it sink in. Do not be adverse to further insight whether it comes from your insight or that of others.

Thank you Richard!

And yes, all I was reacting badly to was the idea that I was knowingly making a choice to risk the life of my family. I wasn't. I was over-confident and somewhat naive (and that's pretty hard to admit, certainly in public). That comes from NOT being an experienced pilot, although situations like this certainly help build up said experience, and subsequent input from folks like you do so as well. So I do appreciate the feedback, and that goes to all y'all, even those I perceive as needlessly harsh. Thank you.

 

[onwards]

Flying is risky business. As pilots mature in skill there is less acceptance of hazard. Being precise is the name of the game, thereby it may be understood that pilots eat their young. It was just your turn in the barrel. Who's turn is it today, tomorrow, the next day.... Each of us is tasked with avoiding two days in a row.

"eat their young"... loved that. I hope for the day when I can look back on all this and do that, too

Have you considered perhaps the value of this thread to up and coming pilots? Perhaps by posting you have broadened their knowledge if only by a little or a lot. And that is not to say there is no value to those more experienced pilots. Complacency does not discriminate.

Yes, that is one of the goals. Primary is to get feedback for myself. Secondary is the hope to further knowledge for anyone. I may have mentioned it in another post, but I gain SO MUCH from the discussions of "things gone bad", probably more so than any other type of knowledge acquisition. Thing is, these discussions are rare (the need for an anonymous forum like "lessons learned" is evidence of that - and even so, it's a relatively quiet forum). If I can contribute by posting one, it is a happy thing.

 

[Richard]

...why is it so hard to ask for clarification?

Perhaps more than the general population pilots are deliberate but swift. It is not difficult to ask for clarification, in fact it is desireable to do so. Yet it was not apparent clarification was needed. You controlled the dissimination of facts and details. Should we have guessed if it was this or that?

would you do the same thing if we were chatting in person?

Simple answer; yes I would. But you know a conversation is different than posting in a forum. I suspect the largest difference would be the time delay between Q and A. Face to face I suspect all the pertinent details would be known fairly soon.

 

[FlySince9]

"I will continue to fly and gain experience and inevitably run into unexpected trouble and hopefully survive so I evolve my skills until the day I die. If that happens to be in a plane, cest la vie, it's a risky activity to begin with"

Okay for you, but you might want to ask your kids and other passengers if they want to "hopefully survive" as you evolve your skills.... Get the IR!!

 

[NoHeat]

I'm sorry that you feel like you're being preached to.

Note to self:

Post only about pleasant trips on sunny days when all equipment works well.

If anything goes wrong, do not post about it. Nobody else will learn from it anyway, and they'll just descend upon you like a pack of wolves.

 

[Richard]

Expanding on my comment of "less acceptance of hazard", to some that may mean holding the centerline on takeoff and landing like it's their life or not scaring the passengers. Evermore it is a broadening envelope which comes to encompass weather watching from your easy chair to before leaving out the door to thoughts on the drive to before engine start and so one till stopped in the chocks. I believe most pilots come to have this mantra.

Something to think about, empahsis on 'think'.

 

[Richard]

Note to self:

Post only about pleasant trips on sunny days when all equipment works well.

If anything goes wrong, do not post about it. Nobody else will learn from it anyway, and they'll just descend upon you like a pack of wolves.

Anti-authority, invulnerability, macho.

 

[denverpilot]

Just keep in mind... "Legal" is not equal to "safe".

SVFR is legal. It's also generally quite far past center toward "not safe" on the sliding scale of safe vs. not safe.

Being distracted by avionics problems -- not safe.

Circling in deteriorating weather conditions -- not safe.

Pushing on to a destination where specific equipment is required and that equipment is intermittent -- not safe.

I think safe vs. legal is the key to unlocking what we're all trying to get across.

Mentally throw the rule book out and pretend it doesn't exist. Now analyze your performance as a pilot against the accident statistics.

You were a couple of links into the typical CFIT accident chain. It would have only taken one more thing to happen... If you recognize that, good.

I see signs of denial in the replies but text doesn't convey emotional content very well.

I agree with you that threads like this are great for all pilots to learn from.

I would want them to learn, "Do not utilize SVFR on a regular basis. Period. Full stop. It's just begging for a CFIT accident for you and your passengers." We have enough of those every year.

 

[Clark1961]

Note to self:

Post only about pleasant trips on sunny days when all equipment works well.

If anything goes wrong, do not post about it. Nobody else will learn from it anyway, and they'll just descend upon you like a pack of wolves.

I'm thinking these comments have some truth and some exaggeration. An author needs to keep the audience in mind if true communication is desired. In this case, the author seems to have overlooked a few important details in the initial post. That said, the author also seems to be less than open to rather direct statements/advise about utilizing SVFR. It's not the missive about things going wrong that has certain CFI types riled up. I take it that the reluctance to join the "group think" on SVFR keeps the wolf pack agitated.

I've posted a couple times about my mountain flights that folks could have jumped on. I found no canine herd at my throat. Maybe no one read my posts?

 

[Richard]

I git ascirt when I see Franken anything.

 

[Clark1961]

I git ascirt when I see Franken anything.

Only the A&P's invoices are scary...

But I do need to get the paint shop to apply proper Frankenkota nose art.

 

[TMetzinger]

Ok, I went back through the chain of posts. Based on what I'd read up to the point in time where I made each of my posts, I still stand by all of them.

By your own words, you continued to fly into a situation where the reported weather had ceilings less than 1000 feet:

Coming in, weather was reporting at 9 miles, 800 broken - typical of the area and stuff I've previously flown and approached under via SVFR a few times with no issue. It felt rather familiar.

I don't know who provides your airplane, but I'm wondering if the club or other organizations have weather minimums as part of their rental agreement? I know that at any of the places around here you'd have violated the rental or membership agreement by flying into that sort of reported weather.

I'm really not trying to be "holier than thou", I'm trying to get you to understand (first) and admit (second) what you did that was so wrong. Think of it as the scene in "Top Gun" where they get told "...you'll be flying a cargo plane full of rubber dog **** out of Hong Kong". But instead of an attitude that indicates you understand and will do better, what I get out of your posts is defensiveness and an anti-authority attitude.

Now, some or maybe a lot of this is because of how god-awful forums like these are for all the tone and non-verbal cues that occur in a face-to-face discussion. I may be coming across differently than I intend. So what I suggest you do is go find a CFI and have this discussion with him/her. An examiner or FAASTeam Rep would be even better. Tell them exactly what you told us, and see where this goes.

 

[Morne]

Anti-authority, invulnerability, macho.

Respectfully, your post is condescending.

Continuing to flame the OP is not helpful. NOT because it might anger him or help him see the error of his ways, but rather because you are ACTIVELY DISCOURAGING other folks from admitting to scary situations that we could all learn from.

Shutting down a pipeline of vital information is dangerous. How many pilots who might have learned from the dozens of lessons your attitude kept secret will have to die? Free flowing information is life. Suppress it, directly or indirectly, at everyone's peril.

The OP might be anti-authority. That said, YOU are NOT the authority. That is, unless you are the Chief muckity-muck at the FAA, in which case I shall begin grovelling for forgiveness at your earliest convenience.

 

[onwards]

I don't know who provides your airplane, but I'm wondering if the club or other organizations have weather minimums as part of their rental agreement? I know that at any of the places around here you'd have violated the rental or membership agreement by flying into that sort of reported weather.

No, that wouldn't work out here. Neither, in fact, does the FBO where I got trained (and where I occasionally still rent). I mean, they both have language around personal minimums and staying safe, but nothing beyond if you knowingly break the rules and have a booboo, it's your own ******n responsibility.

I'm really not trying to be "holier than thou", I'm trying to get you to understand (first) and admit (second) what you did that was so wrong.

But it's coming off as preaching. You admit it yourself, with the condemn comment, and even in this post with the whole "I stand by what I said". You are leaving no margin for error on your part, at all.

what I get out of your posts is defensiveness and an anti-authority attitude.

Well, that's an interesting observation, since I don't know you at all. Why would I presume an authority is even present in the discussion? can you understand that this works both ways? if you were my IFR instructor, for example, I'd be a lot more inclined to accept verbal abuse. After all, to me, you're just a random dude on an internet forum (much as I am to you).

I therefore reject the anti-authority argument. I WAS defensive there for a moment - and admitted it. Can you admit that you might have communicated in a way that could be easily interpreted as "holier than thou"?

 

[TMetzinger]

No, that wouldn't work out here. Neither, in fact, does the FBO where I got trained (and where I occasionally still rent). I mean, they both have language around personal minimums and staying safe, but nothing beyond if you knowingly break the rules and have a booboo, it's your own ******n responsibility.



But it's coming off as preaching. You admit it yourself, with the condemn comment, and even in this post with the whole "I stand by what I said". You are leaving no margin for error on your part, at all.



Well, that's an interesting observation, since I don't know you at all. Why would I presume an authority is even present in the discussion? can you understand that this works both ways? if you were my IFR instructor, for example, I'd be a lot more inclined to accept verbal abuse. After all, to me, you're just a random dude on an internet forum (much as I am to you).

I therefore reject the anti-authority argument. I WAS defensive there for a moment - and admitted it. Can you admit that you might have communicated in a way that could be easily interpreted as "holier than thou"?

I thought I just did in my third paragraph, but let me try again. I'm sorry if I came across in a way that you found offensive (as opposed to being critical, which I did intend).

And you're right, I should have put my credentials down:
Certified Flight Instructor (which of course implies commercial pilot and instrument rating)
Ground Instructor, Instrument and Advanced
FAA Safety Team Lead Representative
Project Pilot Mentor
Cessna FITS Instructor

Please go talk to a local authority, like your CFII, and tell him that some boneheaded CFI in the Mid-Atlantic thought you were stupid to fly towards weather (800' Broken) that would require special VFR with your family on board. That's the gist of my criticism to you. And then take what he tells you to heart.

Best wishes,