The "go / no go" decision

[skier]

If you have to think about it more than 3 minutes, don't go.

I'm with Shepherd. If you have to think about it, don't go. It's easy and prevents making bad calls. Sure there are some days that you will end up sitting on the ground when you could have completed your flight, but, to quote an overused saying, "it's better to be on the ground wishing you were in the air than in the air wishing you were on the ground".

Set your own personal minimums and stick to them.

 

[N659HB]

I'm with Shepherd. If you have to think about it, don't go. It's easy and prevents making bad calls. Sure there are some days that you will end up sitting on the ground when you could have completed your flight, but, to quote an overused saying, "it's better to be on the ground wishing you were in the air than in the air wishing you were on the ground".

Set your own personal minimums and stick to them.

Minimums are a good thing, but should be expanded, or we stagnate. The OP is completing his IFR, which will expose him to flying in marginal weather, if he plans to use it, which will certainly expand his personal minimums.

My flying is purely recreational, and my personal minimums reflect that, but I am gradually expanding those minimums.

I also use the "three strikes" strategy.

 

[Velocity173]

Even if you've committed to a "go," have the flexibility to change it in the air to a "no go" if conditions deteriorate...return to home base, or land and wait it out. It sounds obvious, but there is sometimes great difficulty in overriding that get-there-itis after you've made the initial commitment and are airborne. Eyeball Version 3.0 sometimes trumps the most detailed weather forecast.

And that's the biggest thing to take away from this thread. The go / no go on the ground is important but equally important is being able to modify the original plan in flight.

Years ago I launched out of SGJ for EDN, right into a advancing squall line. My decision to go was a bit shaky and was based on beating the storm to my destination. I didn't beat it and ended up diverting into TLH and getting a rental car. It sucked, especially since the place was a mad house because of a FSU vs UF football game but you do what ya gotta do. Came back the next day for the plane and a Bo was parked right next to me. As I walked by, two guys were on the wing loading up and I heard one say "we'll go back in and check the weather one more time before we leave." I was thinking, their go / no go should be a no brainer if they're heading north. Unfortunately they were heading to the Tampa area and the previous days line of storms was still blocking their route. They departed 15 minutes after me, flew into the line just offshore of TPA and crashed, killing both pilots. Ironically an old friend who flys HH-60s in the CG was launched for the rescue effort. They found nothing but a few pieces of debris.

Two go / no go decisions where we both should have not departed in the first place. Two completely different outcomes because I was able to "tap out" and call it a day while they chose to press on.

 

[RV10flyer]

One time I changed my route around some mvfr conditions/hilly terrain and took the flat low lands. Another husband and wife tried to fly straight through, destroyed their aircraft into a hillside, but survived.

Another time, I remained on the ground and another family ended up on the evening news. All perished.

You feel good about your decision making and bad for the other people. When setting minimums, go slowly, but then you may want to bring them back up a little. It does not take much to exceed minimums and I like a little extra margin and a more relaxed flight.

 

[Everskyward]

I'm with Shepherd. If you have to think about it, don't go. It's easy and prevents making bad calls. Sure there are some days that you will end up sitting on the ground when you could have completed your flight, but, to quote an overused saying, "it's better to be on the ground wishing you were in the air than in the air wishing you were on the ground".

OK, but I think this can be overdone. After all, there are not going to be any perfect days or perfect airplanes. As @SoCal RV Flyer mentioned, there is nothing wrong with "going" then changing it to a divert or "no-go". Just be ready to do that.

 

[Mistake Not...]

So I was wondering about proactively -being- a "POA friend"....

Y'all think if PIREPs were a lot more frequent, that would help with any of this? I realize it won't help with a forecast hours in the future, but if I've been tracking a forecast for a while and saw actual in-the-air reports of conditions not matching it, I think I'd have more confidence in the "go" part.

I have pireps turned on as a map overlay, and never really see any at my altitudes.

 

[paflyer]

Whenever there is any doubt, there is no doubt. That's the first thing they teach you.

 

[mscard88]

OK, but I think this can be overdone. After all, there are not going to be any perfect days or perfect airplanes. As @SoCal RV Flyer mentioned, there is nothing wrong with "going" then changing it to a divert or "no-go". Just be ready to do that.

Like I mentioned earlier, this thread or another .

FSS has a tendency to make forecasts appear worse than they actually are, IMO and from my experience, and I'm sure liability plays a part in that. Nothing wrong with filing and going as long, as Mari says, have a way out. If you're a VFR pilot, perhaps plot your course so that divert airports are close enough to be useful.

 

[MAKG1]

Like I mentioned earlier, this thread or another .

FSS has a tendency to make forecasts appear worse than they actually are, IMO and from my experience, and I'm sure liability plays a part in that. Nothing wrong with filing and going as long, as Mari says, have a way out. If you're a VFR pilot, perhaps plot your course so that divert airports are close enough to be useful.

Not always. I've found a number of examples where ATIS or AWOS was reporting ceilings 500 feet higher than they really were. OVC017 is a whole lot better than OVC012. And FSS never has a clue about what the weather is like in the passes or crossing mountain ridges, which are the critical locations. There usually aren't airports there, and only seldom are there AWOS stations (In California, there is just one at Sandberg, which is actually a private airport but is labeled as an AWOS station, but Colorado has a bunch).

 

[N659HB]

Like I mentioned earlier, this thread or another .

... Nothing wrong with filing and going as long, as Mari says, have a way out. If you're a VFR pilot, perhaps plot your course so that divert airports are close enough to be useful.

This is valuable advice for any cross country trip, but especially when the weather is in flux. I've had the habit of planning direct-to routes for my adventures, but I now see the benefit of flying within range of airports, in case of weather or mechanical diversion. So what if it adds 10 or 15 more minutes to the flight?

 

[mscard88]

Not always. I've found a number of examples where ATIS or AWOS was reporting ceilings 500 feet higher than they really were. OVC017 is a whole lot better than OVC012. And FSS never has a clue about what the weather is like in the passes or crossing mountain ridges, which are the critical locations. There usually aren't airports there.

Well I didn't say "always".

 

[Clark1961]

Which is my take on it.

I also use a three strike rule. I had a PnP flight once where 1) lower predicted very cold clouds happened, 2) a non-working master switch in the plane, and 3) a big case of get-ther-itis got me rethinking about it being safe to fly.

Made the decision to load up all the pups in the car and drove to meet the Frankenkota in Graham, TX so Clark could get the pups to Colorado.

Any time I feel a self created pressure of "gotta get there and take risks", I start evaluating safety in a big way.

And the Frankenkota was in Graham because Clark wouldn't fly an approach into Denton when he wasn't current.

It's not just go/nogo, it's a continuous decision until a destination is reached...and weather is just part of the decision. Fuel, mechanical, pax, personal status, etc. all figure into the decision. At least that's my approach. Some trips are easy peasey others are a real pain. I've had to set all day because of freezing fog. I've had to set for an hour at an airport 30 minutes from my destination because of microbursts. A couple times I've set for a couple or a few hours at unattended airports while waiting for an overcast to lift from the mountains. I had to spend a few hours in Mexia TX because of a bad coil. I've called people at the destination for their take on the weather.

No matter where you go there you are. Stay out of convective storms and ice. I'm sure other people have better stories and better explanations for their decision making processes.