My most amazing flight yet

[Sac Arrow]

I think that all points that needed to be made were already made, and the OP has been tried and convicted in the court of POA. In my opinion the the OP is probably guilty more of not accurately describing the conditions of flight in his initial post, vs. willfully violating FAR's, based on his subsequent posts and photos.

Unfortunately, too many othwise interesting and informative discussions revert to a gratuitious slugfest.

 

[onwards]

In the situation you described you might see another aircraft just in time to run into it. Same goes for a tower, rock, tree, or anything else. You endangered yourself, and worse yet, your unwitting passenger.

And where, pray tell, would I find a tower, rock, tree, or anything else but a plane flying 1000ft over the ocean? I'm truly curious.

Yes, the situation I DESCRIBED sounded bad. I am trying to tell you that I described things in a way that wasn't exactly true. In other words, I am admitting to having exaggerated that part (quite a bit). I already said "look, sorry, I told you a tall tale". And all I keep getting back is nasty comments about the tall tale. I'm embarrassed enough as it is. Why pile on?

 

[onwards]

I think that all points that needed to be made were already made, and the OP has been tried and convicted in the court of POA. In my opinion the the OP is probably guilty more of not accurately describing the conditions of flight in his initial post, vs. willfully violating FAR's, based on his subsequent posts and photos.

Unfortunately, too many othwise interesting and informative discussions revert to a gratuitious slugfest.

Sac Arrow, I can't tell you how much I am grateful for this comment. Thank you kindly. And many good comments WERE made earlier on, you're right on that (I've learned quite a bit from the more measured ones, especially about the things - the "what ifs" - that I didn't think about for lack of experience). THAT was quite valuable.

 

[steingar]

And where, pray tell, would I find a tower, rock, tree, or anything else but a plane flying 1000ft over the ocean? I'm truly curious.

Yes, the situation I DESCRIBED sounded bad. I am trying to tell you that I described things in a way that wasn't exactly true. In other words, I am admitting to having exaggerated that part (quite a bit). I already said "look, sorry, I told you a tall tale". And all I keep getting back is nasty comments about the tall tale. I'm embarrassed enough as it. Why pile on?

First, the least bit of inaccurate navigation could land you in any of those, as could an inaccurate altimeter setting (how high up were you?). Moreover, you don't know your range of visibility whilst you were in the layer and in your "hole". We call those sucker holes for a reason.

As for why to harp on this, if any pilot figures you did it so they can, screws up and buys it, I'm done with this website forever. Since I like it a great deal, when I hear about someone doing something questionable, I speak up. So the next guy won't be tempted.

You figure you got the right of it? Well, you were there. But if the clouds weren't memorable, I don't think they'd have made their way into your tale. Like I said, congrats on a nice trip and impressing the lady. But you'd better have some serious minimums in mind. Getting away with it this time will tempt you to do so another. And another. I'm reminded of an NTSB report of a Cherokee that went CFIT in WV. The pilot was VFR, and took off into a thousand foot overcast, saying he'd done it plenty of times. What stuck in my mind was the quote from his passenger, who said "I'm not afraid of thunderstorms anymore".

 

[onwards]

First, the least bit of inaccurate navigation could land you in any of those, as could an inaccurate altimeter setting (how high up were you?). Moreover, you don't know your range of visibility whilst you were in the layer and in your "hole". We call those sucker holes for a reason.

As for why to harp on this, if any pilot figures you did it so they can, screws up and buys it, I'm done with this website forever. Since I like it a great deal, when I hear about someone doing something questionable, I speak up. So the next guy won't be tempted.

You figure you got the right of it? Well, you were there. But if the clouds weren't memorable, I don't think they'd have made their way into your tale. Like I said, congrats on a nice trip and impressing the lady. But you'd better have some serious minimums in mind. Getting away with it this time will tempt you to do so another. And another. I'm reminded of an NTSB report of a Cherokee that went CFIT in WV. The pilot was VFR, and took off into a thousand foot overcast, saying he'd done it plenty of times. What stuck in my mind was the quote from his passenger, who said "I'm not afraid of thunderstorms anymore".

Excellent comments, all of these. Thank you. That's constructive criticism, and I really do truly appreciate it.

You're probably right, I shouldn't have tried it, and I did get lucky. It wasn't anywhere near as crazy as I made it sound first off, but I was definitely pushing my own envelope. I concede (and have before) as much. I would not recommend that anyone else try it in a similar situation, with a similar level of experience.

And the cloud layer was memorable, I think, more because of the overall experience of getting there (which was mostly over the more typical white layer that you can't see through, until that hole) and the context of the overall flight which was very exciting, than anything else. So it stuck in my mind because of that, as you surmise, although in a greater sense.

What's a thunderstorm, again? we don't get those here on the left coast

 

[steingar]

What's a thunderstorm, again? we don't get those here on the left coast

You do, but not at all frequently. Do any flying back east and you'll make their acquaintance. Then again, we don't get regular marine layers.

 

[jason]

I just wanted to clear one thing up about airplanes on an IFR flight plan. You mentioned that you would have been a danger to them "only if you wouldn't have been on the radio".

This is a moot point with regards to Shelter Cove as there are no instrument approaches, but I wanted to explain how it works for non IR pilots that may not think it's a big deal to punch through a layer.

So you know, good instrument pilots would *probably* have been monitoring CTAF as they were coming in, but you should have had absolutely no expectation that they were.

When an instrument pilot is flying on an instrument flight plan, they are talking to whatever facility controls the airspace that they are flying in. When they are flying into an uncontrolled field, they will not be released to switch over to CTAF until they are cleared for their respective approach. When they are under radar coverage and are being vectored to final, this will likely happen somewhere just outside of the final approach fix (which is often within about a 10 nm ring of the airport). When not under radar coverage, it'll happen when they let the controller know that they are close to their initial approach fix.

So the pilot is free to *monitor* CTAF to get a picture of the VFR traffic at the airport but is by no means expected to. It's quite likely that you'll first hear from him once he's been cleared for his approach and told to switch.

Being outside of radar coverage makes things even worse. When outside of radar coverage there is essentially a "one person in the system" rule. The controllers will not let any other plane into the IFR system until they know for certain that it won't conflict with the inbound traffic. The pilot on the IFR flight plan is, of course, required to "see and avoid" when in VMC, but makes a 100% valid assumption that while they are in IMC, and in controlled airspace, there will not be another airplane anywhere near them.

Things change, of course, in class G. But I would caution any VFR pilot not to make assumptions about what an instrument rated pilot may or may not be doing while in the clouds.

 

[MSPAviator]

Dumb question.... what is this "other forum" that has been alluded to?

 

[jason]

Dumb question.... what is this "other forum" that has been alluded to?

I don't know to which they are referring, but there are several.

"the blue board" = us
"the purple board"
and
"the red board"
(among others)

 

[onwards]

I just wanted to clear one thing up about airplanes on an IFR flight plan.

Jason, thank you, that was very informative. I have a followup question - once you are on that final 10m approach, are you not required to be on CTAF?

I ask because I pretty much always use VFR following, and they always terminate me automatically when I'm 10-15m out telling me to switch freqs. Is this a different procedure for IFR pilots?

I am going to start my actual "formal" IFR training in the next few weeks (just as soon as I'm done with the highperf/complex) so I'm sure I'll get all these answers but would love your insight.

EDIT: also, I tend (I write these on my little notepad on my kneeboard) to monitor the CTAF at most airports I fly next to or above while en-route to anywhere; it's easy enough to do on the second radio while being with ATC on the first, unless stuff gets real hectic, but I usually fly in pretty non-busy areas. There is an implication in your post that this is actually a requirement for IFR pilots - or am I reading it wrong?

 

[jason]

Jason, thank you, that was very informative. I have a followup question - once you are on that final 10m approach, are you not required to be on CTAF?

I ask because I pretty much always use VFR following, and they always terminate me automatically when I'm 10-15m out telling me to switch freqs. Is this a different procedure for IFR pilots?

I am going to start my actual "formal" IFR training in the next few weeks (just as soon as I'm done with the highperf/complex) so I'm sure I'll get all these answers but would love your insight.

EDIT: also, I tend (I write these on my little notepad on my kneeboard) to monitor the CTAF at most airports I fly next to or above while en-route to anywhere; it's easy enough to do on the second radio while being with ATC on the first, unless stuff gets real hectic, but I usually fly in pretty non-busy areas. There is an implication in your post that this is actually a requirement for IFR pilots - or am I reading it wrong?

At an uncontrolled airport, neither VFR nor IFR flights are *required* to do anything once we're told the magic words "frequency change approved". You'll notice that they don't assign you a frequency to switch to...they just tell you "frequency change approved"...which essentially means "I don't expect you to hear me anymore if I try talking to you". So, we will call up CTAF and attempt to give our position and intentions as bandwidth allows...but we aren't *required* to do anything.

As a matter of practice, a pilot flying IFR will be monitoring the CTAF on the second radio as he's getting close, but we'll also be trying to get the weather off of the ASOS, briefing the approach, taking vectors from the controller, etc. It's the definition of the "hectic" that you referred to.

 

[JoeSelch]

In the situation you described you might see another aircraft just in time to run into it. Same goes for a tower, rock, tree, or anything else. You endangered yourself, and worse yet, your unwitting passenger.

Not to mention the unwitting folks who might have been another nearby plane...

 

[onwards]

At an uncontrolled airport, neither VFR nor IFR flights are *required* to do anything once we're told the magic words "frequency change approved". You'll notice that they don't assign you a frequency to switch to...they just tell you "frequency change approved"...which essentially means "I don't expect you to hear me anymore if I try talking to you". So, we will call up CTAF and attempt to give our position and intentions as bandwidth allows...but we aren't *required* to do anything.

As a matter of practice, a pilot flying IFR will be monitoring the CTAF on the second radio as he's getting close, but we'll also be trying to get the weather off of the ASOS, briefing the approach, taking vectors from the controller, etc. It's the definition of the "hectic" that you referred to.

Ah.

See, now I'm getting a much better sense as to why what I did Sunday was really dumb I learned at a class D airport, and the vast majority of my flights have been to towered airports too (KSTS, KPAC, KOAK, and so on), or at the very least in class E with ATC right there with the advisories. I think this was the first (or maybe second) time I ever went to a completely uncontrolled environment with no ATC contact even possible (due to the terrain). I mean, shoot, even when I went to Harris ATC stayed with me almost until I was on top of it, I'm guessing because of the Lemoore MOA. Lots of implications that I had not fully considered, especially when combined with the vastly reduced class G minimums.

I really appreciate the feedback there, Jason. Thanks again. Very enlightening.

 

[jason]

Ah.

See, now I'm getting a much better sense as to why what I did Sunday was really dumb I learned at a class D airport, and the vast majority of my flights have been to towered airports too (KSTS, KPAC, KOAK, and so on), or at the very least in class E with ATC right there with the advisories. I think this was the first (or maybe second) time I ever went to a completely uncontrolled environment with no ATC contact even possible (due to the terrain). I mean, shoot, even when I went to Harris ATC stayed with me almost until I was on top of it, I'm guessing because of the Lemoore MOA. Lots of implications that I had not fully considered, especially when combined with the vastly reduced class G minimums.

I really appreciate the feedback there, Jason. Thanks again. Very enlightening.

You bet.

We've all learned lessons the hard way. I found myself in inadvertent IMC at one point with much much less instrument time than you have (we had no three hour requirement with I got my PP).

I was lucky to survive that episode and walked away with a renewed promise to myself to set personal minimums and stick to them.

This board has, if nothing else, an extreme appreciation for this activity that we all love so much. We can sometimes be the judge, jury and executioner...but it's just because we all want to educate ourselves and each other. And, above all else, we want to promote a culture of safety. There aren't enough of us as it is...and every pilot that drives himself into a tree just does more damage to the perception that the non-flying public has of us.

With all of that said, I hope that you stick around and continue to post. I think that you'll find it as rewarding as it can be frustrating. I have more "real life" pilot friends than I've ever had in my life...but I met all of them right here.

 

[JoeSelch]

I've read this entire thread. I wasn't there and don't know what really happened. Based on the photos, it doesn't look so bad - THIS time. Again, I don't know.

That said, I have a few comments that may be of use to somebody somewhere...

could it be that what I've been trying to say repeatedly since I made the original post is that I exaggerated (embellished) the truth, on account of the excitement I felt coming back?

Yes. Yes. Got it. In fact, you seem to have a history of over-excited posting (given threads here and on the "other" board, AKA studentpilot.com) that requires significant explanation after the fact.

Clearly, signs of one of the Hazardous Attitudes... "Impulsivity"
(Which seems pretty alarming, considering the time lapse between the flight and posting; really, it's no longer the "heat of the moment.")

and all these veiled threats about the FAA and FSDO - what are they good for?

My guess is that he's hoping they're good enough to keep you from a repeat scenario.

this was NOT IMC. For the brief moments I spent in "it", if a plane flew above, I'd see it. If a plane flew below, I'd see it. If a plane came nearby, I'd see it. I could look down and see the ocean while in that bit of misty haze or whatever you want to call it. If I tried real hard, I could even make out the hillsides a few thousand feet away.

See it when? Before it's too late?

Fact is, I have flown with a CFI before in similar conditions, more than once, and was instructed every time that it was not IMC. I had and have no reason to think it was IMC.

OK - you've pulled out this "wouldn't have done it if I hadn't have done it with a CFI" line a few times. Just to be clear, that does NOT necessarily mean that 1) what you did with the CFI was safe or 2) this was a reasonable thing for you to go off an do on your own.

At some point, in this thread or maybe somewhere else, you talked about being prepared to go on instruments - you were expecting it and hence, ready. That's a good thing. But...as a VFR pilot, you should not be needing to do this unless it is an emergency.

Another hazardous attitude? "It can't happen to me."

Coupled with the prior "I'm a man" statement about seeking a more "challenging" route (to Las Vegas) and few other comments, I'd say I'm also seeing a bit of the "Macho" attitude too.

So just chill, alright? I'm sorry I made the post. I'm sorry I ever came to imagine that this forum was a place where I could share my flying excitement (yes, with all the silly chest beating that sometimes comes with it). That notion is certainly gone forever. I'll work on finding real-life pilots to talk to, so I don't have to ever try to this here again.

Please don't go away. You're very entertaining.

 

[denverpilot]

Think back to the stuff you memorized about controlled airspace. Look at a VFR chart at an uncontrolled airport. Where does the controlled airspace end?

We teach in altitudes "up" from the airport, but realize that's where the IFR flight's protection ends on the way "down" and it makes more sense.

The "systems" interact deeply. Note what an uncontrolled airport with Instrument approaches looks like (hint: what's around it) versus one with no published approaches.

Cloud clearance requirements for VFR change per what...? What kind of airspace you're in. It's engineered to give you X number of seconds at typical airspeeds in that sort of airspace before a collision.

One of the downsides of how us VFR pilots somehow get taught is we're just memorizing a table... Until someone shows the relationship of the VFR rules to the overlying IFR system, sometimes we don't quite "get it".

Even though they're out of vogue with GPS... Look at the Victor Airway system, and overlaid IFR routes. Same design care.

Fun to look at what happens where Victor airways, IFR routes, and Instrument Approaches all "collide" over an airport with a busy/popular navaid too.

Cut-outs in those magenta and blue shapes... Mean something.

 

[onwards]

Yes. Yes. Got it. In fact, you seem to have a history of over-excited posting (given threads here and on the "other" board, AKA studentpilot.com) that requires significant explanation after the fact.

I do?

I mean, I AM excited about flying, no question or doubt about that. I hope it never goes away! that would kinda suck. Anyway, if you don't mind, could you send me a private message with more input as to why you made the above comment?

Clearly, signs of one of the Hazardous Attitudes... "Impulsivity" (Which seems pretty alarming, considering the time lapse between the flight and posting; really, it's no longer the "heat of the moment.")

I'm at a bit of a loss as to connecting the two things (being excited when talking about flight experiences and impulsivity) to be honest. And for what it's worth, I wrote most of it very soon after landing, just didn't get to post it until later.

OK - you've pulled out this "wouldn't have done it if I hadn't have done it with a CFI" line a few times. Just to be clear, that does NOT necessarily mean that 1) what you did with the CFI was safe or 2) this was a reasonable thing for you to go off an do on your own.

Fair enough, and I think at this I acknowledged both of these points. But if I didn't do so clearly enough, here you go.

Another hazardous attitude? "It can't happen to me."

Where did I ever say that?

Coupled with the prior "I'm a man" statement about seeking a more "challenging" route (to Las Vegas) and few other comments, I'd say I'm also seeing a bit of the "Macho" attitude too.

... or another way of looking at it, which is, I am very excited about flying and I like to try new things and stretch my limits. That doesn't make me "macho", or does it? a bit of a risk taker, sure, but I have come to believe that having a somewhat higher risk profile than the general population is sort of a pre-requisite to becoming a GA pilot

Please don't go away. You're very entertaining.

You DO realize, hopefully, that this sentence comes across as quite condescending... right?

 

[onwards]

We teach in altitudes "up" from the airport, but realize that's where the IFR flight's protection ends on the way "down" and it makes more sense.

That's a golden nugget right there. I never thought of it that way until you just posted it. That's certainly an interesting way of thinking about it.

One of the downsides of how us VFR pilots somehow get taught is we're just memorizing a table... Until someone shows the relationship of the VFR rules to the overlying IFR system, sometimes we don't quite "get it".

Yes... I think I'm starting to see the light here, which AFAIC means the entire experience was more than worth it. You are right, of course. It's just a table to memorize and follow woodenly.

Fun to look at what happens where Victor airways, IFR routes, and Instrument Approaches all "collide" over an airport with a busy/popular navaid too.

Yeah... I'm going to pore over the "other side" of the SFO TAC tonight after reading your comments. Sounds like I can see it with fresh eyes.

 

[SCCutler]

Okay, how about:

"Don't go away - your enthusiasm and passion for flying is engaging, and we will enjoy continuing the conversation."

That works, right?

 

[onwards]

Okay, how about:

"Don't go away - your enthusiasm and passion for flying is engaging, and we will enjoy continuing the conversation."

That works, right?

Oh, absolutely... I didn't THINK he meant it in a condescending way, which is why I didn't react angrily, just pointed it out. It's hard to "see" the intention on the interwebs (just like none of you could see my excitement and bright eyes and all that when I made my original post... trust me, had you been sitting across from me, you'd have stopped me right when I got to the takeoff part and made me take a breath and restate what I was saying and made a little fun of me and I'd blush a little and it would have been cleared up right there and then. No workie like that in here unfortunately).

And with that said, thank you. That was kind of you to say.

 

[ChrisS]

There is just so much wrong with this story that I don't know where to begin. In fact I won't.

'onwards' biography ...

Still in the "kill zone" with less than 100 hours... but trying hard to make my way safely out of it.

 

[steingar]

This reminds me of the flight back from Michigan. I had my buddy at the controls, and to ascend he pushed the mixture all the way in. I told him there was no reason to do so, the air was only going to get thinner, making a more lean mixture setting more appropriate. He responded "that's how my CFI taught me to do it, so that's how I do it". After pointing out that his CFI was not an airplane owner and probably had significantly less cross country time than he himself, I said that if all you do is what your CFI told you, you never get any better.

 

[GMascelli]

To the OP....

Obviously you're thick skinned enough to take it all in and respond, and do so with a pretty cool head. People jump on posts like this (me included) not just to flame away but drive home a point about the safety of it all. You're listening and thats positive! POA is a good group of pilots, at least all thge folks I have met, and if there is one thing I would add is that it's the right thing to do looking out for each other.

The pilots I see on a regular basis from POA can comment on anything I do while flying and I would step back and listen to what they say, constructively, and learn from it. That's the best part about this place.

I hope you do stick around. As far as entertaining, well, any time I learn from what others post it's entertaining to me. I'm sure there are others who have been there and done that and don't post. I hope what you shared makes another pilot stop and think before they post some "hangar flying" episode or in fact take the chance to fly through IMC conditions.

It's a license to learn....hope we all keep learning.

About the comment ".....a bit of a risk taker, sure, but I have come to believe that having a somewhat higher risk profile than the general population is sort of a pre-requisite to becoming a GA pilot"

I just wanted to fly, my risk taker days are so far behind me. At 54 I just want to get in the air, get there, and land the plane.

 

[ronnieh]

Onwards, check private mail

 

[bobmrg]

Onwards, keep in mind that the non-flying public has a jaundiced view of general aviation and its rich playboy pilots (their view, obviously not mine). Every time a GA pilot does something that, to a non-pilot, looks dangerous or dumb, like flying at 50 feet over water or entering a cloud, this misapprehension is strengthened. Non-pilots don't know about instrument ratings or Class E/G airspace, all they know is "I was in the parking lot at Shelter Cove and this little airplane came right out of the clouds!" or "The clouds were really low at Shelter Cove and this little airplane just took off and disappeared into them!!!"

Others have referred obliquely to Aeronautical Decision Making...I'll take the more direct approach: FAR 61.105 requires that you receive training in ADM and judgment; I wonder how much effort your instructor put into this. The FAA has a whole book on the subject: FAA-H-8083-2 "Risk Management Handbook," and the Pilots Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge devotes Chapter 17 to the subject. I recommend strongly that you do a little research and consider how actions that are meet the letter of the law can still give general aviation a black eye.

I see in your more recent posts that you are having misgivings, and that is a good thing. My point is that there is plenty of guidance available to deter you from repeating this experience.

Looking back over my career I think it was a reluctance to do anything exciting and to always choose the conservative option that kept me out of trouble.

Bob Gardner

 

[FlySince9]

I'm sure you've heard the old vs bold pilots analogy. 'Nuff' said.

Yeah I'm aware of the one on opinions too. But that's
Mine.

 

[sferguson524]

Onwards,

I agree that you have been crucified here, but i am going to hammer on the nail a bit more. Please read this article and try and understand how quickly things can go bad VFR into IMC. Flying under the hood is not the same as flying in the clouds. I've been climbing thru a fairly thick marine layer in my IFR training and got VERY disoriented. http://www.aerosafe.net/page6.html

 

[denverpilot]

Until you've had a case of "the leans" so bad you're about to pop the pilot's side door open pushing on it while trying to trust the instruments in front of you, it doesn't make sense.

Mine was of course, with a CFII on board who was laughing to the point of tears at my wing waggle technique of trying to sort it all out. Bank to match the inner ear, read/scan AI, bank back... Wash, rinse, repeat.

"Got the leans, huh?" he said between the laughter from both of us.

Then a touch more seriously, later on... "It's pretty clear how easily this could kill you, right?"

Onwards just hasn't gotten there yet.

 

[sferguson524]

Until you've had a case of "the leans" so bad you're about to pop the pilot's side door open pushing on it while trying to trust the instruments in front of you, it doesn't make sense.

Mine was of course, with a CFII on board who was laughing to the point of tears at my wing waggle technique of trying to sort it all out. Bank to match the inner ear, read/scan AI, bank back... Wash, rinse, repeat.

"Got the leans, huh?" he said between the laughter from both of us.

Then a touch more seriously, later on... "It's pretty clear how easily this could kill you, right?"

Onwards just hasn't gotten there yet.

I got there under the hood once. was BAD.. got to the point where i was a lil nauseous. Then my CFII said i was getting sick, and she was right. I was sidelined the next day with a horrid head cold.