When to say.. Unable

[Alexb2000]

This last weekend I was coming back to Dallas from Florida just a couple of days after the recent Pilatus crash. Anyway for whatever reason that particular crash is just tragic in my mind and worse yet unexplained. So it put me in a little more conservative flying mood than usual.

So leaving FPR there is a low scattered layer with quite a few buildups along the East coast. Because of all the storms that day over the gulf I am headed to Atlanta to try and avoid the worst of it. East of Orlando there is nothing on XM but I can see some really good sized buildups all around me. I'm in an out of IMC at this point. I am also seeing a lot of dry lightning on my stormscope, kind of randomly scattered in all directions. Orlando asks me to turn into one of the larger buildups...

Background: Normally I would just do this and ride it out. I don't know if it comes from taking orders in the service, not wanting to **** off ATC, I don't know, it's just my personality. I am also pretty used to getting put in the buildups around Dallas and having a rough ride so I felt like I knew what to expect.

Anyway that day I just said "Unable". Orlando was not pleased and asked me twice more to go into it saying they had no radar returns. I offered them a little course change, but wouldn't cross it directly. They really didn't have a choice so they let me clear it before turning back on course. Would it have destroyed my airplane? I doubt it, but it would have smacked everyones head on the ceiling a few times for sure.

When we have an emergency or we're staring at a strong storm saying, "unable" is pretty easy. I don't usually say it otherwise. That day made me wonder about certain aspects in each of our personalities. I mean isn't that really the thing that gets us into trouble when the answers are not obvious? Further, perhaps as part of all of this high dollar training and currency; we should find someone that can shoot it straight with us about our personalities and what we need to check ourselves on when flying?

Now getting any pilot to really listen to that advise... pretty long odds, but maybe.

 

[flyingron]

Nope. I'd not have flown into something with extensive vertical development let alone with the strikefinder showing stuff. I made that mistake early on in my IFR career. Even the airliners don't like to do that, my little plane isn't going to do it. I had 2000' altitude variations that I wouldn't do anything about....they're probably happier to have me go around...

 

[Henning]

Never listen to ATC telling you to turn into a big cell. They've tried to do that to me before, luckily I stay visual and saw the big azzed black that was painting on XM in front of me, but was actually now off to the right, directly where he was trying to turn me. The guy in the right seat watching the 496 told me to make the turn as well, I told him "You may want to look out the window." "Oh, crap!" Their stuff is delayed as well, and the worse the weather, the more the delay usually is.

 

[Alexb2000]

Nope. I'd not have flown into something with extensive vertical development let alone with the strikefinder showing stuff. I made that mistake early on in my IFR career. Even the airliners don't like to do that, my little plane isn't going to do it. I had 2000' altitude variations that I wouldn't do anything about....they're probably happier to have me go around...

Remember though this is dry lightning without enough moisture in the buildups for a return. If there was any obvious convection, that would have fallen into the "obvious" call. I would call this about 10-15K total height, rough for sure, but not deadly. At least for me that makes it ambiguous, but I've got an open mind to hear otherwise.

 

[Henning]

Nope. I'd not have flown into something with extensive vertical development let alone with the strikefinder showing stuff. I made that mistake early on in my IFR career. Even the airliners don't like to do that, my little plane isn't going to do it. I had 2000' altitude variations that I wouldn't do anything about....they're probably happier to have me go around...

Yep, that line that sits across FL a lot has serious stuff inside. When the airliners won't penetrate, I'm not about to. Thing is the convection usually ends at the beach and just a short ways offshore there is much better weather.

 

[steingar]

ATC are just little men in a booth. You are PIC. Always do what needs to be done.

 

[Clark1961]

Remember though this is dry lightning

Is lightning the definition of t-storm? It certainly indicates strong air movement...

 

[Alexb2000]

ATC are just little men in a booth. You are PIC. Always do what needs to be done.

Perhaps you're missing my point. We all want to look at flying as black and white decisions, perhaps that's just another aspect of pilot personalities. I have no issue with PIC calls when my mind is made up. My question is, what do you do to help make the ambiguous ones?

 

[Dave Theisen]

Perhaps you're missing my point. We all want to look at flying as black and white decisions, perhaps that's just another aspect of pilot personalities. I have no issue with PIC calls when my mind is made up. My question is, what do you do to help make the ambiguous ones?

if you have to ask yourself, "Is this going to be OK.", then you already know the answer....."Unable"

 

[Alexb2000]

Is lightning the definition of t-storm? It certainly indicates strong air movement...

I'm no weatherman, but I've seen a lot of what I call dry lightning. Clouds without enough moisture to even return green, some, but not a lot of vertical, yet lightning that seems to come from no where. I see this a lot in West Texas and I saw similar over the Atlantic and FL this trip.

 

[flyingron]

I won't even go through the green parts of a buildout. I'll fly through heavier precip in the clear or in a stratus layer. I've found that NEXRAD coloring is pessimistic in those cases and optimistic in the case of towering clouds.

 

[Henning]

Perhaps you're missing my point. We all want to look at flying as black and white decisions, perhaps that's just another aspect of pilot personalities. I have no issue with PIC calls when my mind is made up. My question is, what do you do to help make the ambiguous ones?

I look out the window and go with that. I don't believe NEXRAD type data around active systems, I just find it too slow for tactical info.

 

[Jaybird180]

 

[Alexb2000]

I didn't get any pictures of the clouds that day, but here is a close example (with much less vertical height but otherwise close) taken near Wichita Falls, Texas a couple of months ago. Very ordinary and benign looking, I know. NO radar return of any kind.

So who would fly through it or even under it?

 

[Henning]

I didn't get any pictures of the clouds that day, but here is a close example (with much less vertical height but otherwise close) taken near Wichita Falls, Texas a couple of months ago. Very ordinary and benign looking, I know. NO radar return of any kind.

So who would fly through it or even under it?

That? I'd fly under that all day, in fact I have, in that very area. There's no real convection there.

 

[Clark1961]

I didn't get any pictures of the clouds that day, but here is a close example (with much less vertical height but otherwise close) taken near Wichita Falls, Texas a couple of months ago. Very ordinary and benign looking, I know. NO radar return of any kind.

So who would fly through it or even under it?

I went through a lot of that stuff on my Houston trip. It wasn't much fun. If there was much more vertical I'd stay out of it in my little plane.

(I'm typing 'bout the far cloud, not the near one)

 

[Threefingeredjack]

I didn't get any pictures of the clouds that day, but here is a close example (with much less vertical height but otherwise close) taken near Wichita Falls, Texas a couple of months ago. Very ordinary and benign looking, I know. NO radar return of any kind.

So who would fly through it or even under it?

Even the far layer has little verticality. Might be a little bouncy, and in an hour it could be much worse. No biggie.

 

[Alexb2000]

That? I'd fly under that all day, in fact I have, in that very area. There's no real convection there.

I hoped you'd bite. I decided to fly under it also, I am a visual guy first, like you.

I can tell you I got absolutely hammered. I felt we were close to going inverted a couple of times, rolled 60+ many times, VSI went to 2000+/-, my ass caught some good suspended air time, etc. I felt like I was in a kick boxing match trying to just hold a pitch. Stormscope was showing all kinds of strikes, but because of the radar and those super benign looking clouds I went for it.

Coming back I went over the top at 16K, smooth as glass.

Back to FL. I flew under stratus with random strikes around me coming all the way back from Eleuthera. However, the ride was good, no issues. Leaving Ft. Pierce I just felt conservative as I said.

Good discussion it's making me think a lot about my decisions, thanks for all the comments.

 

[Ted]

"Unable" is a phrase not used often enough.

Never let ATC bully you into doing something you aren't comfortable with. If you aren't comfortable with it, then don't do it. They won't be happy, and that's just fine - it's not your job to please them. Keep in mind that their options may require them to make you go out of your way in order to clear other traffic, but that shouldn't be a deterrent.

ATC radar only has precipitation. Lightning doesn't show up on their radar. If you're seeing buildups, those can potentially have lightning in them. If the stormscope is showing lightning scattered around, then that's probably an indication that those cells are building up.

Since I wasn't there, I don't know how big those cells had built up. At this point, I can usually tell by looking at a cell whether or not I want to fly through it. The buildups that I see many people fly around really aren't bad at all - it's the really big guys that you typically want to be concerned about.

If you feel you need more weather instruction, go up with someone who's used to flying in and around bad weather on a bad weather day. That's the best instruction you can get - I have a good number of students on my standby list for bad weather days.

 

[Henning]

I hoped you'd bite. I decided to fly under it also, I am a visual guy first, like you.

I can tell you I got absolutely hammered. I felt we were close to going inverted a couple of times, rolled 60+ many times, VSI went to 2000+/-, my ass caught some good suspended air time, etc. I felt like I was in a kick boxing match trying to just hold a pitch. Stormscope was showing all kinds of strikes, but because of the radar and those super benign looking clouds I went for it.

Coming back I went over the top at 16K, smooth as glass.

Back to FL. I flew under stratus with random strikes around me coming all the way back from Eleuthera. However, the ride was good, no issues. Leaving Ft. Pierce I just felt conservative as I said.

Good discussion it's making me think a lot about my decisions, thanks for all the comments.

Sure, you're gonna take a smacking in Florida if you stay over land, that's why I go out over water up the coast. However, in the picture you showed in TX, I would not expect a severe beating, those were the nicest days to fly pipeline on. The worst beatings I've had were in clear air west of Abilene.

 

[Jaybird180]

"Unable" is a phrase not used often enough.

Never let ATC bully you into doing something you aren't comfortable with. If you aren't comfortable with it, then don't do it. They won't be happy, and that's just fine - it's not your job to please them. Keep in mind that their options may require them to make you go out of your way in order to clear other traffic, but that shouldn't be a deterrent.

ATC radar only has precipitation. Lightning doesn't show up on their radar. If you're seeing buildups, those can potentially have lightning in them. If the stormscope is showing lightning scattered around, then that's probably an indication that those cells are building up.

Since I wasn't there, I don't know how big those cells had built up. At this point, I can usually tell by looking at a cell whether or not I want to fly through it. The buildups that I see many people fly around really aren't bad at all - it's the really big guys that you typically want to be concerned about.

If you feel you need more weather instruction, go up with someone who's used to flying in and around bad weather on a bad weather day. That's the best instruction you can get - I have a good number of students on my standby list for bad weather days.

I recently read somewhere that information may be outdated, that ATC can see lightning as well as other weather artifacts now.

Sorry, I don't have a reference I saw it in passing so it didn't stick, I'd assumed it was standard knowledge.

 

[Alexb2000]

Sure, you're gonna take a smacking in Florida if you stay over land, that's why I go out over water up the coast. However, in the picture you showed in TX, I would not expect a severe beating, those were the nicest days to fly pipeline on. The worst beatings I've had were in clear air west of Abilene.

Next time I will try the water route. The weather did look much better over the water. Good tip.

If you flew in W. Texas I'm sure you already know about the dry line storms then.

 

[Ted]

I recently read somewhere that information may be outdated, that ATC can see lightning as well as other weather artifacts now.

Sorry, I don't have a reference I saw it in passing so it didn't stick, I'd assumed it was standard knowledge.

My experiences are to the contrary. There is a huge variety in the weather that various ATC facilities have from sector to sector. But I've never come across one that had lightning strikes, or that told me as such. In fact, when they've specified, they've always said "[level] precipitation, my weather information shows precipitation only - no storm information."

And yes, the information is going to be outdated - how outdated is another question. It's also often just wrong. I had Omaha and Lincoln approach telling me I was about to fly into extreme precipitation. Extreme? It didn't even show up on my on-board radar, and it barely got the windshield wet.

 

[Jaybird180]

My experiences are to the contrary. There is a huge variety in the weather that various ATC facilities have from sector to sector. But I've never come across one that had lightning strikes, or that told me as such. In fact, when they've specified, they've always said "[level] precipitation, my weather information shows precipitation only - no storm information."

And yes, the information is going to be outdated - how outdated is another question. It's also often just wrong. I had Omaha and Lincoln approach telling me I was about to fly into extreme precipitation. Extreme? It didn't even show up on my on-board radar, and it barely got the windshield wet.

What's the value of information when it is often wrong or outdated?

 

[Henning]

Next time I will try the water route. The weather did look much better over the water. Good tip.

If you flew in W. Texas I'm sure you already know about the dry line storms then.

The sun heats the land and sucks in the moisture from both sides of FL You can often fly up the beach in clear skies with towering black clouds not a mile inland.

As for TX, you bet, that's why I said with that picture I've spent many days flying pipeline under that very picture.

 

[airguy]

That? I'd fly under that all day, in fact I have, in that very area. There's no real convection there.

Agreed - in West Texas avoiding something like that would significantly impact my flying time. I'll stay away from stuff with sharp edges or significant vertical development.

I hoped you'd bite. I decided to fly under it also, I am a visual guy first, like you.

I can tell you I got absolutely hammered.

There are exceptions to every rule. Yes, I would fly under/near that type of activity - and yes, if it turned out to be nastier than I wanted, I would get back out of it. But if you start staying away from EVERY cloud because it MIGHT be something you are scared of, you might as well sell the airplane because you won't be using it much.

 

[Lance F]

I too would recommend keeping "Unable" at the top of ones bag of tricks. I've used it plenty lately, and ATC always manages. This can be true for altitudes, speeds, climb and descent rates, and runway changes at the last minute as well as headings that may put you in bad weather. Sometimes it helps to suggest an alternative along with the unable. Both you and the controller always should have that good, old Plan B at the ready.

 

[Ted]

What's the value of information when it is often wrong or outdated?

You're understanding why we spent a good chunk of change to put an on-board radar on the 310 earlier this year, and are adding a stormscope before long.

As I said, there is a lot of variation. Part of it will come down to the interpretation of the radar by the controller, and so two different controllers might have two different interpretations. Then you have some facilities with old, outdated radar, and others that have newer, more modern equipment.

You're best off having your own equipment. That way you can interpret it, and will likely have better equipment than what ATC has.

 

[Ted]

They don't receive real-time information just like you don't with uplink weather. The only way to receive real-time information is with onboard radar or stormscope. Their radar is for traffic, not weather. That said, ATC is much, much better at "seeing" the weather now than they were in the past.

All true, although there are a number of facilities that still are using old equipment. Some of them have outright refused to give me information they have on precip because they say it's very bad.

Up at FL400, they're probably a bit better.

 

[Dave Theisen]

Another good time to say "Unable" is when ATC asks you to manuever in a way that exceeds your or your airplanes capability. I know of two such fatal accidents.

1st was when tower asked pilot to make a 360 on final at night. Never made it around. Stalled a spun half way through the turn. He was a customer of the FBO I worked the line at.

2nd one a (different) tower asked for "one good s-turn" on final. He stalled and spun as well. I knew him as well and witnessed the crash.

A simple "Unable" would have prevented both of these. Sure, the controler would be frustrated, and the pilot waiting to take off would have to wait, but everyone would have gotten to go home to there families.

ATC usually does a great job, but never forget you are the one in control.

 

[Ted]

Another good time to say "Unable" is when ATC asks you to manuever in a way that exceeds your or your airplanes capability. I know of two such fatal accidents.

1st was when tower asked pilot to make a 360 on final at night. Never made it around. Stalled a spun half way through the turn. He was a customer of the FBO I worked the line at.

2nd one a (different) tower asked for "one good s-turn" on final. He stalled and spun as well. I knew him as well and witnessed the crash.

A simple "Unable" would have prevented both of these. Sure, the controler would be frustrated, and the pilot waiting to take off would have to wait, but everyone would have gotten to go home to there families.

ATC usually does a great job, but never forget you are the one in control.

Jack Roush's crashing of his Beech Jet was similar.

 

[Dr. O]

ATC are good guys 99 and 44/100% of the time... But you are the one whose jewels are in the fire... In over a half century of flying it comes to mind that I have said unable just three times... Two of those times ATC wanted to turn me into a purple wall that went all the way to the ground (over Lake Erie at night)

And one time ATC ordered me to climb 4000 feet above my filed altitude (into known icing) where upon I was immediately icing fast and hard and ATC refused to descend me back into warmer air... This required me to do more than object to an ATC direction, it required me to flat out tell her she was going to do it my way because she did not have a choice... I turned 90 degrees and moved off the airway by 4 miles and then began a rapid descent... She wound up being replaced by a supervisor who solved the situation in 3 seconds flat - "Just tell me what you need."

 

[Jaybird180]

You're understanding why we spent a good chunk of change to put an on-board radar on the 310 earlier this year, and are adding a stormscope before long.

As I said, there is a lot of variation. Part of it will come down to the interpretation of the radar by the controller, and so two different controllers might have two different interpretations. Then you have some facilities with old, outdated radar, and others that have newer, more modern equipment.

You're best off having your own equipment. That way you can interpret it, and will likely have better equipment than what ATC has.

What value does the stormscope add over the radar?

 

[Alexb2000]

What value does the stormscope add over the radar?

That picture didn't show up on radar. There were ~50 active strikes in it at any given time.

I am surprised how often I see strikes with no radar returns surrounding it.

BTW- Yet to be determined, but what I have heard so far is that the radar was clear where the Pilatus went down last week. Still could be weather related though.

I am a fan of having both.

 

[Dave Theisen]

I will also add that any time I have used "Unable", I have added what I need to do, if its a safety issue, or what I can do do, if its a convenience issue.

 

[j1b3h0]

My 2 cents: No Air Traffic Controller has ever died from pilot error. The reverse is not so. I have the good fortune of routinely working with some of the best controllers in the world. But they can only clear me to land, I have to actually land the plane...they've got no skin in the game. If they clear me to land on an icy runway, with a gusting 25kt crosswind, I will lobby strenuously for a more practical runway, and, if not offered one may divert to greener pastures. I will tolerate a few bumps, and don't mind if I have to fly in weather that makes earn my money - but I don't wish to fly in weather that might prevent me from spending it. Got some complicated taxi instructions - while slowing through 100kts on the landing roll, and then scolded because I didn't get off the runway soon enough. I replied "You cleared me to land, when I'm finished landing, I'll clear the runway". The controller wasn't done...I finally told him to focus on flying his tower cab, and I'll fly my airliner. Then I gave him a number to call...

 

[Everskyward]

That day made me wonder about certain aspects in each of our personalities. I mean isn't that really the thing that gets us into trouble when the answers are not obvious?

I see what you are getting at and I think you are right. Some people have been programmed to follow orders. Some are very mission driven. Sometimes it's hard on your ego to say that you can't do something. There is CRM training which addresses these things but realistically it's very difficult to change your own personality let alone someone else's. I think the best we can do is make people aware of these tendencies.

 

[Skip Miller]

Is lightning the definition of t-storm? It certainly indicates strong air movement...

I'm not sure exactly what the definition of "thunderstorm" is, but I do know that there cannot be thunder without lightning. A TCU becomes a thunderstorm when it throws the first bolt, IMO.

-Skip

 

[Alexb2000]

I see what you are getting at and I think you are right. Some people have been programmed to follow orders. Some are very mission driven. Sometimes it's hard on your ego to say that you can't do something. There is CRM training which addresses these things but realistically it's very difficult to change your own personality let alone someone else's. I think the best we can do is make people aware of these tendencies.

Yes, exactly, Thank You. My retired airline friend says I'll fly through all kinds of weather he wouldn't, my freight hauler friend says I'm a P****, I just want to do everything I can to make good decisions with minimum ego.

 

[Ted]

What value does the stormscope add over the radar?

A stormscope detects the presence of lightning. Radar gives you the presence of rain.

One can exist without the other, and both represent areas that you frequently do not want to fly through. If I see a bunch of concentrated lightning strikes in an area on a stormscope that coincides with a big red blob on the radar, that tells me to keep my airplane away from that cloud.

Conversely, I might not see anything on the radar, but I will see the lightning on the stormscope. That will tell me about an area I don't want to go through, because it's probably very bumpy, unstable air.

And I might see a big red blob on the radar that indicates an area I want to stay away from.

More tools = more better.