Second solo XC - problems

[GauzeGuy]

If things don't go well with the "safety report" there are plenty of other training operations around Denver. Some folks may react poorly to your decision but obviously many of us think you did good.

Perhaps the only thing you missed was calling your instructor from the ground at GXY. While you are PIC on the solo, his ticket is also on the line.

Thanks, I agree, should have made the call.

 

[rbridges]

maybe you didn't make the official right call, but I'd rather you do that than have to explain why you broke a landing gear or rolled off the side of the runway. The CFI may be just covering his butt just in case anything ever comes of it.

 

[GauzeGuy]

I know you were "in the moment" and all that, but I think the correct thing to do would have been to get some altitude, out of the turbulence, calm yourself, and go home.

Given a lack of experience, training and knowledge with the conditions present in the area, the only sure answer that I had at the time was that the conditions were due to proximity to mountains. Therefore by flying away from the terrain, likely I would find smoother air (which worked).

All I could safety assume at the time is that given the issue started with increased proximity to terrain, that a route of flight back that included staying in that proximity would lead to similar or increased exposure to the very elements I was trying to escape. A bug smasher isn't going to out climb much.

You can preplan alternatives ahead of time, but that's 20/20 hindsight.

I agree, and I actually did. Had my CFI provided the requested endorsement, this would have been a non-issue. All the freqs, runway lengths, elevations, etc, were written on my navigation log as a back up plan.

I don't think landing with the "shakes" is a good idea unless there is no reasonable alternative.

Assumes facts not in evidence. I can focus on the mission pretty well even when things go wrong. When the situation is over, that when physical effects tend to set in with me. Yes, I was shaken but not unable to function.

 

[GauzeGuy]

Not that I know anything, but seems like you did the right thing.

One question though. Why was your flight plan both directions even numbered? (6500 and 8500). Were you going due north/south? I thought when heading east, you want to fly odd numbers.

Look at the KDEN Terminal Area Chart. Those are the recommend VFR routes around the KDEN Bravo airspace.

Also, as mentioned by the other posters, that requirement only exists for above 3000 AGL. Non issue in my situation.

 

[GauzeGuy]

If the CFI didn't like what you did, what does the school think? If neither approved of what you did, time to consider another CFI and another school

What airplane type of were you flying? LSAs are much more prone to being uncomfortable in bumps than in larger airplanes (except a 152 of course).

Not a school, more an independent instructor with a flying club. Not sure what the club thinks, and at this point, don't care. Got their plane back in one piece.

I was flying a 172.

 

[GauzeGuy]

I'm just glad you didn't become a statistic. Nothing wrong with landing when you don't feel comfortable up there anymore. Flying is fun not torture!

Thanks.

I decided long ago that I was going to have very low personal minimums until I had the proper training and experience to increase them.

 

[Apache123]

I call BS. Go back and re-read the original post. It was not a PANIC landing. The OP stated that they were shook up by the original situation and felt that they needed to fly a different route back to home base. They diverted/landed to sort things out on the ground. NOT because they were shook up to a point where they couldn't fly the airplane.

That is not a sign of a pilot panicking. That is a sign of someone who understands that there is no 'pause' button to freeze things so they can re-group their thoughts in flight.

Precisely how I read it as well.

 

[LDJones]

If you were MY student, you'd be getting a "attaboy" for your decision. You did a good thing. With more experience you may find that the turbulence is something you'll fly through in the future, but you did EXACTLY the right thing by deciding to get on the ground when you were scared.

You'll be just fine. Focus on finishing up your license.

 

[Mike5250]

Good call. And the only person who can really get in trouble is your CFI until you pass your checkride... At least that was always my understanding.

 

[zaitcev]

Look at the KDEN Terminal Area Chart. Those are the recommend VFR routes around the KDEN Bravo airspace.

Actually, my chart says 8500 southbound over BJC and 7500 northbound west of I-25. There's a multiply tower obstruction tipping at 5900 at the south end and a hillcock of 5200 at the north end of the corridor. Going 6500 would've been a little claustrophobic. But I always feel oppressed by the Bravo in your area.

P.S. My Denver TAC expired in 2011, so there's a possibility that they moved the suggested altitude 1000 ft down. But more likely it was a typo

P.P.S. For some reason I am not comfortable flying the TAC. I take the major things I need and re-plot them on the sectional, which provides a convenient and familiar scale. Strange, since I chage zoom on GPS all the time.

 

[poadeleted20]

I don't think there will be an issue with landing at an airport where you weren't endorsed - that's a safety of flight issue. There may be some explanation necessary as to why you took off again, though, from an airport where you weren't endorsed.

Yup. You should have consulted your instructor and obtained a new endorsement before launching again. What you did is a violation of 61.93, and could have serious consequences.

That said, an ASRS report will not save you from sanctions for your deliberate violation of that rule if the FAA gets involved. The waiver of sanction is only available if your action was "inadvertent, and not deliberate." Since you made a conscious decision to launch without obtaining a new endorsement, waiver of sanction is not possible.

However, since nothing bad happened, the odds of the FAA finding out are pretty slim unless one of your local FSDO inspectors reads this board, which is why it would have been better to post it anonymously and without any information which could be used to locate you.

 

[Mafoo]

will not save you from sanctions for your deliberate violation of that rule if the FAA gets involved. The waiver of sanction is only available if your action was "inadvertent, and not deliberate." Since you made a conscious decision to launch without obtaining a new endorsement, waiver of sanction is not possible.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I would think a deliberate violation would require the individual to know he was violating the rule.

 

[denverpilot]

The mistake was not calling the CFI on the ground at KGXY. Ron's covered that, so let's move on.

Real-world flying-wise, good job diverting away from conditions you weren't comfortable with and landing. Your number one job aloft is to return yourself to Terra Firma in one piece.

You also got some invaluable experience flying near the Front Range.

If by "yesterday" you mean Sun 18 Nov 2012, I was also up in the afternoon, and as you probably noted, further east was smooth as it gets.

Light continuous wind from the West likely gave you a bumpy ride along the foothills, mainly mechanical turbulence and mixing layer, I suspect. And that's a very common thing around here.

I'll often go around the Bravo to the East to avoid that. Depends on the conditions. It was dead smooth with light West winds at both KAPA and KFTG.

Also, you had another option now that you've had some time to reflect, I'll mention it. With the wind from the West, DIA probably wasn't landing anyone Eastbound, so a call to Denver Approach and a request to enter the Bravo and climb, was probably an option over there on the West side. Especially if you let Denver Approach know you were a Student Pilot and you were in turbulence down low. They're helpful here unlike many Bravo areas and they'd move traffic to give you direct Centennial and higher.

Unfortunately there was also a TFR up over Sports Authority Field at Mile High all afternoon so your options to go East once south of KBJC were limited.

At your experience level and concern level at the time, I like your decision to exit Eastbound further north, far better. Kept you away from the hills and from the TFR if you flew that late.

Just a reminder that sometimes you're in that mixing zone between eastbound air coming over the Rockies and the relatively calm air in the Denver "bowl" and you can often climb above that mixing and turbulence caused by the foothills and be smooth above with a large West wind over Denver. Or just get further East over the city in the Bravo.

Just pointing out our local weather phenomena for future reference.

Flying around in the bumps isn't fun. Judging by what I saw yesterday, I also suspect you only experienced light turbulence with maybe touches of moderate (you can look up the definitions as homework) and I bet if you ask, all of us locals on PoA have eventually made a mistake in not looking at winds aloft and have been bounced around real good around here on the wrong day around here.

I've been bounced off the ceiling of my 182 at least once, and I'm sure others have similar stories. Cinch up that seatbelt as tight as you can get it as one of the first steps if you encounter strong turbulence and keep the wings level and don't fight too hard. And then get out of it. Back the way you came, up, down, somewhere else.

Another thing to look for is the formation of altocumulus lenticular clouds or "lennies" on the lee side of the Rockies. Flat, dome or lens-shaped clouds hanging just East of the Front Range are a sign of Mountain Wave caused by high winds aloft pushing across the mountains. Often a sign of a rough ride out past the mountains sometimes on the strongest days, as far away as the Kansas border.

I don't remember when you started flying here, but if it was in the isolated-thunderstorm-pattern of summer, you haven't seem the high winds from the northwest of Fall and Winter yet, so the transition to bumpy rides along the foothills may be a bit emotionally jarring. Your CFI should spend some time introducing you to our weather in winter and wind. It will continue right up until late Spring. It'll also be down at the surface at times. Blow blow blow on those days.

Reading the wind is important here, both what effect it will have to the West and also the mighty winds of the Great Plains to the East. Denver is a weather crossroads of sorts.

The Palmer Divide between Denver and Colorado Springs is both a big weathermaker as well as a weather block at times (totally different weather on either side of it).

Plan a cross country to Cheyenne with your CFI. It's a rare day the wind isn't blowing blowing blowing out of the West in Cheyenne. I did a night flight up there this year and was shocked to find the wind out of the East. I landed runway 9 for the first time ever -- and at night -- in my logbook and have been flying around here since 1991.

You encountered weather you weren't prepared for and weren't comfortable with, kept your head going, diverted, and brought you and your craft back to Earth safely away from the conditions that made you uncomfortable. I can't think of any pilot saying that was wrong.

FAA may not like that a rule was bent. Or they may not notice at all. It is what it is.

However that all works out, you made the outcome of the flight, a good one.

 

[GauzeGuy]

You also got some invaluable experience flying near the Front Range.

If by "yesterday" you mean Sun 18 Nov 2012, I was also up in the afternoon, and as you probably noted, further east was smooth as it gets.

Light continuous wind from the West likely gave you a bumpy ride along the foothills, mainly mechanical turbulence and mixing layer, I suspect. And that's a very common thing around here.

For as common as it is, the sad thing is that since I started training back in May, I have zero experience in anything other than light turbulence.

Also, you had another option now that you've had some time to reflect, I'll mention it. With the wind from the West, DIA probably wasn't landing anyone Eastbound, so a call to Denver Approach and a request to enter the Bravo and climb, was probably an option over there on the West side. Especially if you let Denver Approach know you were a Student Pilot and you were in turbulence down low. They're helpful here unlike many Bravo areas and they'd move traffic to give you direct Centennial and higher.

Being cleared into Bravo wasn't an option -- had no endorsement for that, either. Of course, in retrospect it seems that any way I would have gone, some rule would have been broken. Unless I just continued along the planned route and let the chips fall where they may (isn't resignation a hazardous attitude, though?)

Unfortunately there was also a TFR up over Sports Authority Field at Mile High all afternoon so your options to go East once south of KBJC were limited.

I was extremely glad that I decided to had to the east after I found out about the TFR. I picked up the info on that when coming back into KAPA from the ATIS. I had thought about following 85 down from Greeley but wasn't too pleased with the minimal altitudes I'd have between the bravo shelf above and the ground below...

Just a reminder that sometimes you're in that mixing zone between eastbound air coming over the Rockies and the relatively calm air in the Denver "bowl" and you can often climb above that mixing and turbulence caused by the foothills and be smooth above with a large West wind over Denver. Or just get further East over the city in the Bravo.

Just pointing out our local weather phenomena for future reference.

Yeah, if I do continue with this process, I'll definitely be getting some more instruction related to weather.

Flying around in the bumps isn't fun. Judging by what I saw yesterday, I also suspect you only experienced light turbulence with maybe touches of moderate (you can look up the definitions as homework) and I bet if you ask, all of us locals on PoA have eventually made a mistake in not looking at winds aloft and have been bounced around real good around here on the wrong day around here.

I would agree that for the most part, it was light turbulence that I was in. It become moderate closer to the mountains, which is what became rather disconcerting as I have zero experience with it.

I don't remember when you started flying here, but if it was in the isolated-thunderstorm-pattern of summer, you haven't seem the high winds from the northwest of Fall and Winter yet, so the transition to bumpy rides along the foothills may be a bit emotionally jarring. Your CFI should spend some time introducing you to our weather in winter and wind. It will continue right up until late Spring. It'll also be down at the surface at times. Blow blow blow on those days.

Started back in May. So while I've seen some useful things (like convective turbulence, and density altitude effects), I have seen little of what occurs this time of year.

 

[GauzeGuy]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I would think a deliberate violation would require the individual to know he was violating the rule.

Don't bet on it.

 

[GauzeGuy]

Actually, my chart says 8500 southbound over BJC and 7500 northbound west of I-25. There's a multiply tower obstruction tipping at 5900 at the south end and a hillcock of 5200 at the north end of the corridor. Going 6500 would've been a little claustrophobic. But I always feel oppressed by the Bravo in your area.

You are correct. I had mixed the altitude I flew north in, with the returning altitude I used.

 

[somorris]

I will look this up later, but for some of you CFI's, does the endorsement have to be to a specific airport? I was thinking the endorsement was necessary for flight beyond 25 miles from the training airport, but not necessarily requiring an endorsement for every airport that was landed at. I think the ASRS report may be a little over reaction.

 

[somorris]

I looked it up, and yes, the endorsement is required in the FAR's for each airport. Goes to show what memory can do for you! Maybe the ASRS report would be good and perhaps helpful to others in the future.

 

[Jaybird180]

Yup. You should have consulted your instructor and obtained a new endorsement before launching again. What you did is a violation of 61.93, and could have serious consequences.

That said, an ASRS report will not save you from sanctions for your deliberate violation of that rule if the FAA gets involved. The waiver of sanction is only available if your action was "inadvertent, and not deliberate." Since you made a conscious decision to launch without obtaining a new endorsement, waiver of sanction is not possible.

However, since nothing bad happened, the odds of the FAA finding out are pretty slim unless one of your local FSDO inspectors reads this board, which is why it would have been better to post it anonymously and without any information which could be used to locate you.

After looking it up, I see the 61.93 violation(s), however I think 91.3 may defend the diversion. No help on the decision to launch from there.

 

[MAKG1]

Being cleared into Bravo wasn't an option -- had no endorsement for that, either. Of course, in retrospect it seems that any way I would have gone, some rule would have been broken. Unless I just continued along the planned route and let the chips fall where they may (isn't resignation a hazardous attitude, though?)

You and the aircraft survived, and your choices were reasonable. Had you completed your certificate, it would also have been completely legal. But that is indeed less important than finishing in one piece.

There was one legal option available to you. Skip the landing in Greeley and go home via an alternate route away from the mountains (the one you used would work).

Let's hope the FAA is reasonable on this. There was a violation, but it was a minor one. I don't think you can cite 91.3(b) successfully, but let's hope it's a no-harm-no-foul thing.

In retrospect, a little Class B training and endorsement might have been helpful, but I've never heard of a CFI doing that for training at a site that isn't actually IN Class B. There isn't much to it. It's harder to avoid than to fly into it. You just have to pay close attention to instructions, fly assigned headings and altitudes, and so on.

I would encourage you to continue. Many of us have at least one "oh ****" moment during training (yours truly included -- my first go-around and my first unassisted takeoff were both a wee bit hairy -- I had to learn that climbs with full flap don't work very well in a 172, and there is this effect on rotation called P-factor....). With more experience under your belt, moderate turbulence isn't so scary. Now, loud digestive sounds from the passengers is another story.....

 

[TommyG]

I don't see the need to file any reports, it was not a malicious violation, he had a decision to make he did. The instructor on the other hand should have put time and effort into teaching him to fly in windy turbulent conditions, especially in that region. Re I structor should have taught him and endorsed him for class b operations. You can't have a student fly under class b for a x country and not have an option to get clearance into, if he is near or under class b he might have to enter for safety reasons.

Should he have kept flying to re evaluate his options, maybe. Only he knows what his comfort level is and what was going on.

So you lived, no injury, no damage, and you were put into a situation you had to use your head and deviate from the plan, that is what being a pilot is about.

 

[Everskyward]

Today I sent a txt to my CFI explaining the situation, and its not sounding good. There's some "safety report" that I get to fill out. My guess is that I'm going to catch hell for landing at an airport that I was not endorsed for. Understandable, but my thought has always been that if I wound up in a situation that I had not anticipated at my level of (in)experience, then the best idea might just be to get out of dodge and figure out a different plan. It just suck to think that anything significant could result of this when I should be a matter of a few weeks away from my check ride (aside from my long XC, everything else is done). I did what I could under the conditions I felt I was under and with the experience that I had. I wasn't perfect but I did get the aircraft back without damage and without busting airspace. I was honest with my CFI, when I could have just pencil whipped my logbook. If that isn't good enough, well...

Comments will be appreciated.

You did the best that you could based on your knowledge. I don't think you're going to be in any kind of trouble since you are only a student pilot. Many companies have internal "safety reports" to fill out when something unusual happens but that doesn't mean that there are going to be any negative consequences.

 

[kimberlyanne546]

Thank you for posting. I think other students learn a lot from stories like this.

My CFI always said I "was not scared enough." I didn't solo until 40 hours because I did not fear the airplane. Whatever that means.

Then, one day, I had to do a long solo XC that crossed a mountain range. There was turbulence - some worse than I've ever been in - and I flew a 152. I was VERY SCARED. I even asked the flight following if I could go off frequency to contact flight watch / weather. Not to give a PIREP but in the hopes that they could tell me where it wasn't so scary! By the time I got there, I was fifth in line, and just went back flight following, and the turbulence ended when the mountains did.

Now I know to expect turbulence over mountains, and, if time etc permit, I'll simply fly higher over them.

Kimberly

 

[Z06_Mir]

I didn't even think about the fact that he did not have the Bravo endorsement. Yikes. I wouldn't want to live and fly in that area without that experience. Whether he does it on a student solo or not he needs to be taught that. I did it 2 times dual and once on a solo XC.. it makes the bravo not a big deal, and if you fly under one you should know those operations IMO.

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

There was one legal option available to you. Skip the landing in Greeley and go home via an alternate route away from the mountains (the one you used would work).

However, landing and sorting it out on the ground was the sensable option.

 

[GauzeGuy]

There was one legal option available to you. Skip the landing in Greeley and go home via an alternate route away from the mountains (the one you used would work).

Indeed I had considered that option, among others. In the end however, landing won out since my abilities to multitask in the air are rather limited at this point, I was well behind everything already.

As stated earlier, the biggest mistake made was failing to call my CFI before taking off from there.

Let's hope the FAA is reasonable on this. There was a violation, but it was a minor one. I don't think you can cite 91.3(b) successfully, but let's hope it's a no-harm-no-foul thing.

Nothing happened that would have triggered an investigation. No phone numbers to call, nothing. I've discussed things over with my CFI, we agreed that some additional instruction is in line that will clarify a better course of action for next time. Moreover, I've also contacted instructor who had a ton of experience with flying in windy conditions so I'll be getting some additional ground and possibly dual from that CFI as well.

So, at this point chalking it up to some lessons learned, and I think the most useful thing that it pointed out is my absolute ignorance of mountain effects on the wind and my need to receive additional training on that area. I'll be addressing that in a couple hours.

I would encourage you to continue. Many of us have at least one "oh ****" moment during training [...] With more experience under your belt, moderate turbulence isn't so scary.

Thanks. I will be after taking a short break. I cancelled the long XC I was supposed to do this morning and will be going out of town for a week. I figure that will give me a bit of time to chill out and learn a bit more about weather.

 

[MAKG1]

I didn't even think about the fact that he did not have the Bravo endorsement. Yikes. I wouldn't want to live and fly in that area without that experience. Whether he does it on a student solo or not he needs to be taught that. I did it 2 times dual and once on a solo XC.. it makes the bravo not a big deal, and if you fly under one you should know those operations IMO.

I fly under Class B almost every time I fly, and I never got the student pilot Class B endorsement either. It's a lot more common than you're thinking.

It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me, but Class B is treated like it's some kind of really hard, dangerous thing, and it just isn't.

 

[Clark1961]

Indeed I had considered that option, among others. In the end however, landing won out since my abilities to multitask in the air are rather limited at this point, I was well behind everything already.

As stated earlier, the biggest mistake made was failing to call my CFI before taking off from there.



Nothing happened that would have triggered an investigation. No phone numbers to call, nothing. I've discussed things over with my CFI, we agreed that some additional instruction is in line that will clarify a better course of action for next time. Moreover, I've also contacted instructor who had a ton of experience with flying in windy conditions so I'll be getting some additional ground and possibly dual from that CFI as well.

So, at this point chalking it up to some lessons learned, and I think the most useful thing that it pointed out is my absolute ignorance of mountain effects on the wind and my need to receive additional training on that area. I'll be addressing that in a couple hours.



Thanks. I will be after taking a short break. I cancelled the long XC I was supposed to do this morning and will be going out of town for a week. I figure that will give me a bit of time to chill out and learn a bit more about weather.

Ya know...you're showing a really good attitude towards the feedback offered here. On top of the reasonable choices you demonstrated on the X-C it seems to me that you're a good, albeit inexperienced pilot. Stick with it and that "inexperienced" part goes away. (at least the inexperienced part goes away at some level. Ask Teller about Clark following the GPS around saying "what does it want me to do now?)

Getting additional training on a bouncy/windy day is good. I was in the pattern (with an instructor) at BJC when a front moved through - rather eye opening to say the least.

Choosing to land in order to plan the return flight was certainly a reasonable choice. The airspace between FNL, GXY, and APA can be busy and ya really want to keep your eyes outside. I almost always get flight following or traffic advisories around DEN just because traffic gets concentrated near the Bravo surface area.

 

[MAKG1]

Thanks. I will be after taking a short break. I cancelled the long XC I was supposed to do this morning and will be going out of town for a week. I figure that will give me a bit of time to chill out and learn a bit more about weather.

I think you may have found a mountain wave, but it just may have been the usual leeward turbulence. The worst mountain wave turbulence is in the "rotor," usually well below the peaks. If it's humid, you can see it as a long, not very large, linear cloud, parallel to the range (so, roughly north/south where you are). Usually, there will be lenticular clouds at higher altitude. If it's dry, it can be invisible.

The FAA weather book (not the weather services book) has some interesting tidbits, but it's a huge topic. Try to ignore the really dated illustrations....

 

[Clark1961]

I think you may have found a mountain wave, but it just may have been the usual leeward turbulence. The worst mountain wave turbulence is in the "rotor," usually well below the peaks. If it's humid, you can see it as a long, not very large, linear cloud, parallel to the range (so, roughly north/south where you are). Usually, there will be lenticular clouds at higher altitude. If it's dry, it can be invisible.

Rotors out here usually aren't linear. They usually look like little stationary clear weather cumulus clouds with torn-up edges. I have seen the linear rotors north and south of La Veta pass (and I was over the pass) but they seem to be rare in these parts. Perhaps our Front Range mountains are too irregular for classic rotors to form?

 

[Jaybird180]

I smell a rat.....

This guy is exibiting way too much maturity to be just a student. I would say that he's been around aviation a lot longer than he's letting on....

C'Mon GauzeGuy tell the truth.

Then I've seen him play lawyer....

But with a handle like 'GauzeGuy'....hmmmmmm

Something's not quite right in Denmark.

 

[GauzeGuy]

I smell a rat.....

This guy is exibiting way too much maturity to be just a student. I would say that he's been around aviation a lot longer than he's letting on....

C'Mon GauzeGuy tell the truth.

Then I've seen him play lawyer....

But with a handle like 'GauzeGuy'....hmmmmmm

Something's not quite right in Denmark.

Nope. Just been wanting to do this flying thing for years. Now that I have that chance I just don't want to screw it up...

GauzeGuy = I am a nurse (not practicing currently) and teach CPR and first aid classes.

Then I've seen him play lawyer....

 

[GauzeGuy]

Ya know...you're showing a really good attitude towards the feedback offered here. On top of the reasonable choices you demonstrated on the X-C it seems to me that you're a good, albeit inexperienced pilot. Stick with it and that "inexperienced" part goes away.

Getting additional training on a bouncy/windy day is good. I was in the pattern (with an instructor) at BJC when a front moved through - rather eye opening to say the least.

I plan on doing that at KBJC when possible.

I met with the other CFI (who has been flying for 40 years and has 20000 hours in -- in other words, he's probably forgotten more than I'll ever know). We went over ADM, determining mountain effects on winds aloft, using pressures to determine how likely winds are to exist, structural limits of aircraft, maneuvering speeds, climbing to obtain better conditions, etc. I wish I would have had all of this information in mind the other day. I think it would have gone ten times better for me... In any event, he says we can do some dual and "go get beat up" as he put it.

Also, got to sit in his TBM as well. Very cool aircraft!

 

[MAKG1]

Rotors out here usually aren't linear. They usually look like little stationary clear weather cumulus clouds with torn-up edges. I have seen the linear rotors north and south of La Veta pass (and I was over the pass) but they seem to be rare in these parts. Perhaps our Front Range mountains are too irregular for classic rotors to form?

Last time I was up in your neck of the woods, I saw a really obvious rotor at about 1500 AGL, close up to the Front Range, extending from Monument up to the southern Denver suburbs. This was right around Christmas last year.

 

[Jim Logajan]

Yup. You should have consulted your instructor and obtained a new endorsement before launching again. What you did is a violation of 61.93, and could have serious consequences.

Are you claiming that he was not endorsed to fly to his home airfield??
Or something else? 61.93 is rather lengthy so it helps to be more specific.

 

[GauzeGuy]

Are you claiming that he was not endorsed to fly to his home airfield?? Or something else? 61.93 is rather lengthy so it helps to be more specific.

The insinuation is that while the diversion is technically a no-go, there are mitigating factors behind it. On the other hand, departing from the diversion airport when my CFI had not reviewed the flight planning back, was a bigger issue.

For example, a TFR for the Bronco's game popped up south of where I flew back from. What if I had overflown Mile High again? The idea is to make sure the student had reviewed all the factors involved.

 

[denverpilot]

Rotors out here usually aren't linear. They usually look like little stationary clear weather cumulus clouds with torn-up edges. I have seen the linear rotors north and south of La Veta pass (and I was over the pass) but they seem to be rare in these parts. Perhaps our Front Range mountains are too irregular for classic rotors to form?

We usually just don't have enough water vapor in the air to see them very well. They're there.

La Veta is a damned death trap in certain conditions. It looks big and wide and flat and it's really quite a long while that you're over inhospitable terrain at high altitude without a lower place to go.

I really prefer Mosca Pass just north of La Veta to La Veta unless its just dead calm. Too many airplanes wrecked in La Veta. Plus it's cool to pop out on the West side over the Great Sand Dunes National Monument. Sand sand everywhere... Puurrty.

 

[denverpilot]

P.S. Gauze... You're doing fine. Like Clark said, your attitude seems good (willing to learn, willing to admit mistakes, took your own safety seriously enough to divert when you got uncomfortable instead of pushing on in conditions you didn't like and trying to be a hero pilot, etc.).

Good on ya talking with the old CFI. (Another good sign... Seeking out additional knowledge from more experienced pilots and instructors.)

I'm curious who it was, there's only a handful with that much experience around here. They're all pretty good at explaining it all, too.

You'll enjoy your week off and then enjoy that long X-C.

And I'm sure any of us would happily meet up with ya somewhere and let ya fly right seat on a longish lunch trip anytime...

Clark's bird will get you there the fastest... Haha... Murphy and I usually get there about the same time... Teller and Everskyward (Mari) would whip all our butts in their work airplanes, but since they usually can't bring those along...

Sometimes it's fun to ride along with other pilots, we can put ya to "work" helping spot traffic, and you get to see how other pilots handle the radios, the airspace, the charts, yadda yadda. Might even see a bad habit or two and say, "Hey, how come you don't do X?" and we learn something too. It goes both ways.

My airplane is wandering out of town for the weekend with a co-owner again, but you're more than welcome to grab a ride anytime. I'll even come pick ya up somewhere if KAPA isn't convenient. It's an excuse to go burn some AvGas.

I chuckled at your CFI's comment about "getting beat up"... There are definitely some days like that out here. If you fly enough, you'll eventually hit one by accident. Turbulence will be forecast high aloft, and you'll think you can go somewhere underneath it, and it'll be a butt kicker all afternoon... It happens from time to time. The old instructor probably went over Va with ya?

 

[Jaybird180]

Are you claiming that he was not endorsed to fly to his home airfield??
Or something else? 61.93 is rather lengthy so it helps to be more specific.

 

[ChrisK]

Are you claiming that he was not endorsed to fly to his home airfield??
Or something else? 61.93 is rather lengthy so it helps to be more specific.

I read 61.93 over too and frankly I find it particularly nonspecific as to this issue. It says that the CFI must review and endorse based on the student's flight planning (which I assume is part of the reason the specific airports defining the cross country flight are listed). What I can't find are examples of cases involving 61.93(c)(2) violations when a student pilot executed a landing near the route of flight at an airport for which that student pilot was not previously endorsed.

This must happen all the time. I figured I'd find a ream of cases.