Personal Minimums

[201er]

How is IFR at night any more risky than IFR in day? I think it's safer.

[Gone]

How is IFR at night any more risky than IFR in day? I think it's safer.

 

For me it is because the loss of the big cooling fan at night in IMC may not allow me to pick (see) any place to put it down when I break out of the clag. At least that is my worry.

[aviatoreb]

One of my rare minimums is active constraint this morning.  It is -26F out there this morning, and my minimum is -10F. 

[mulro767]

This is a great subject and worthy of more in depth discussion.  I watch many single engine airplanes depart my airport and disappear into the 300' ceiling. They obviously have lots of confidence in their engine, airplane, and superior flying skills.  Sure at 8,000' an engine failure looks survivable.  You're probably flying very proactively with the nearest airport and approach chart readily available.  And you probably have a plan. But what about down lower around 2,000' getting vectored to the IAF that is 8 miles from the field?  Over dense population?  What's your plan there?  Or lets say you're very close to the FAF when the engine quits?  You're a space shuttle.  What altitude and airspeed should you be at crossing the FAF to successfully glide to the field?

 

I have a fair amount of flying experience.  16,000 hours, 20 years airline, trained to land down to 300' RVR, CFII.  My minimums in my WAAS equipped and instrument redundant Mooney are basic circling minimums.  It gives me a fighting chance at survival when that engine quits.  And it will quit someday.  Plan on it.

[BorealOne]

Interesting posts, with comments ranging from the sublime to the ridiculous. For me, minimums at departure and destination are highly variable depending on a whole range of factors - I particularly like the 3C concept expressed above, as it captures what I've been doing intuitively for years. I'm a 300-500h/year pilot. About 40% of my flights involve IMC departures or landings, often at night. I consider myself proficient and have been tempered on occasion, but won't hesitate to cancel a flight if I don't like the odds.

 

It's noteworthy that the more experienced, more qualified pilots on this board are encouraging a more cautious approach. Others should take heed.

 

Fate is the hunter. 

[AndyFromCB]

When I obtained my IFR rating in the early 90s, I set personal minimums that were 2X the approach mins. I also wanted the alternate to be 2X mins (above the 2000' and 3 mile vis) and enroute to be 1000' feet AGL. After a year of flying this way, I moved the mins down to destination, alternate to be 1/2/3 and I didn't care about enroute.

 

Well... A couple of years later I had a mechanical problem that scared out all of the vinegar I was pissing. I was over a heavily wooded area (for miles) and the area had high terrain obscured and really low ceilings. I was fortunate the problem allowed me to be able to fly to an airport that I could get into.

 

For me today, no night IFR. I want the destination to be above mins, good alternate and the enroute with at least a 1000' ceiling. No more "by the grace of God go I" for me. I don't have exact "above mins" numbers because it depends on where I am flying. If I am coming back into my flat piece of real estate here, I will fly a lot closer to mins. If I am headed to unfamiliar or rough terrain airport, they go up. Weather flying also changes for me if we are talking winter or summer IFR as well.

 

Dead on. Right before my windshield got covered with oil spring this year, I chose to cancel a flight due to weather and just drive to fargo. It was severe clear here in KCBF and KFAR, but in between it was zero/zero. I drove. Guess what. Next flight my engine started dumping oil overboard. I would most likely have been dead. No hard IFR, no night flight for me in a single. To me,  that's a job for a King Air at minimum.

[Joe Zuffoletto]

Everybody is always talking about minimums. Just staying current should qualify you to fly any approach to minimums.

 

What concerns me is severe weather. Thunderstorms, Icing, severe turbulence. These are the things that scare the bejesus out of me.

 

I think flying a nite approach to minimums is cool! There is nothing better then seeing the runway lights suddenly appear in front of you....

 

+1, although I don't fly at night any more. I enjoy it but just don't have the need.

 

I flew a couple approaches down to minimums in Minnesota earlier this year. Thick clouds, but smooth air with no precip or turbulence. I'll fly approaches like that all day.

[Mooneymite]

Everybody is always talking about minimums. Just staying current should qualify you to fly any approach to minimums.

 

Actually flying the approach is a function of currency and proficiency. When I started this thread, I was asking about filing minimums. Hopefully everyone who files IFR can successfully fly an approach.

.

[201er]

I wouldn't file at actual precision approach minimums cause that leaves no margin for it being slightly worse than forecast. Perhaps if the alternate is easy spotless VFR and the destination is just really socked in and it's a matter of trying for convenience... But if things are bad enough to be at minimums for an entire region, it's probably not a good day to be flying.

 

But most of the airports I fly to have VOR or LNAV minimums so if there is a nearby alternate with ILS, filing close to minimums for those is less of a big deal.

[rbridges]

I wouldn't file at actual precision approach minimums cause that leaves no margin for it being slightly worse than forecast. Perhaps if the alternate is easy spotless VFR and the destination is just really socked in and it's a matter of trying for convenience... But if things are bad enough to be at minimums for an entire region, it's probably not a good day to be flying.

 

But most of the airports I fly to have VOR or LNAV minimums so if there is a nearby alternate with ILS, filing close to minimums for those is less of a big deal.

 

I had that problem right before Thanksgiving.  The destination airport and everything was at minimums.  No alternate airports to choose.

[201er]

Since I typically carry enough fuel to get to Florida or Texas if I have to, I don't worry about that as much from a safety perspective as a practical matter. Let's see, this airport is at minimums and so are all the others 300 miles around... if things get one bit worse, I'm gonna end up somewhere 500 miles away. With that kind of risk, how will this trip even be worth it?

[rbridges]

Since I typically carry enough fuel to get to Florida or Texas if I have to, I don't worry about that as much from a safety perspective as a practical matter. Let's see, this airport is at minimums and so are all the others 300 miles around... if things get one bit worse, I'm gonna end up somewhere 500 miles away. With that kind of risk, how will this trip even be worth it?

 

exactly.  that's why I drove.  I just kept telling my self the old saying, "it's better to be driving and wish you were flying...."

[Earl]

How is IFR at night any more risky than IFR in day? I think it's safer.

Not sure why but look at flight statistics and you will see the the accident rate for SPIFR at night is much higher than daytime (last report I saw it was over 35 accidents per 100,000 approaches at night versus about 5 per 100,000 approaches in the daytime).  I suspect at night for some reason it is easier to become spatially disoriented and lose control although it frankly should not.  But the accident record for night IFR is pretty compelling to me.

 

But as I said in my post lots of pilots do it safely but my personal minimums say no SPIFR at night because the margin of safety is too thin for my tastes.  Its never been a problem with my business travel and my wife is more than happy to have me safe and sound in a hotel room rather than flying night IFR, and she flies with me IFR on a regular basis.

[aviatoreb]

I follow the conservative perspective in single engine operations that if the engine goes out I want a fighting chance to make an off-field landing.

 

-I want marginal VFR enroute - that's at least 1000' ceilings - so needless to say I also like 1000' ceilings at destination.

-If not then I fly very high, esp over hostile terrain - so I can usually keep in gliding distance to some runway.  Such as crossing the adirondacks is a common scenario which is nice at 15k.

-Yes conditions can drop - so I am saying 1000' predicted.  If you launch and its at minimums and conditions drop from there...

-Obviously avoid tstorms and ice.

-You saw me say earlier that my personal mins is -10F no matter how severe clear it might be - for similar reasons for surviving an off field landing - eventually it can be so cold that even a nice and safe off field landing can be life threatening due to exposure.  And anyway uncomfortable.  0F is my usual why bother temp since it is pretty cold and uncomfortable for the ground part of moving the airplane around and refueling and so forth.  During the entire winter and shoulder months I carry survival gear, I always dress for the weather, and I carry sleeping bags too...this morning was -26F...no flying didn't cross my mind but it was a beautiful day once it warmed up.

[201er]

Sorry, what's SPIFR?

[rbridges]

I believe single pilot IFR

[AlanA]

Just a word about fuel minimums since I don't think it has been mentioned yet.  Unless I am approaching weight capacity I ALWAYS add more fuel than I need.  Most of my flights are XC from Utah to California.  When there is weather you have to go around or strong head winds it is so nice to know that you are still going to get there. Makes for a much more enjoyable flight than watching and worrying about how fast your fuel gauge is going down, or what you are going to do if the destination airport is fogged in. The cost to carry the extra fuel is negligble and well worth it.

[Hank]

Single Pilot IFR. Putting me right-seat in your J will somehow reduce the risk of IFR flight at night. Must be the superior vision through the right side of the windshield. Like the poor fellow who wants a King Air to fly at night, despite both the many (required) hours of safe night flight conducted by student pilots all over the country, and the appalling accident and fatality rates in twin-engine aircraft operating on one engine. The night accident rate in Mooneys is not significantly different from the day rate, although for GA as a whole it skyrockets.

It all boils down to risk management, and THAT starts with accurate risk estimations. Based on the half of this thread that I've read, there are huge differences in perceived risk that give rise to wildly different mitigation strategies. We each fly our airplanes our own way, as we see fit, and I don't see this thread significantly changing anyone's practices.

[Dave Marten]

The title of the post says it all - personal mins.

 

Bottom line is fly within your comfort zone and capabilities. Understanding that the DRIVING factor is the PILOT not the machine. The key is developing your own decision making process to balance the particular risks associated with the current flight.

 

I will fly night IFR, I will fly IMC over mountainous terrain, I will fly to mins.....but all three at once (most likely no). Always look at the multiple factors (wx,fatigue,proficiency,etc)  piling up against you. When that happens its time to step back and re-assess- how can I reduce/eliminate the risk. Even if it means a night on the couch in an airport lobby in the middle of nowhere.

 

Sure I'll shoot an approach to mins in the Mooney, but only when the deck is stacked in my favor considering all other risk areas of the flight. There is a huge difference between punching through the SoCal marine layer for an ILS to mins at Santa Barbara vs shooting the RNAV to mins non-radar, in the mountains, at night, with IMC conditions at nearby alternates. First scenario is cake, second is putting yourself in a corner.

 

If you're going to set a number (circling mins or 800/2, etc) the important part is your decision process as to why to picked that number (currency, experience level, unfamiliar field, new equipment, etc).

 

Fly within YOUR limits. Consider your 3 C's (great technique, thanks).

 

Pre-think your go/no-go criteria while your sitting on the couch drinking cocoa this winter rather than on-the-fly when you're suffering from get-home-itis!

 

Remember - no matter how fancy your new glass cockpit or how capable your machine the weak link in the chain will ALWAYS be the PILOT. GIve yourself the gift of some IFR proficiency training this Christmas.

[Mooneymite]

The title of the post says it all - personal mins.

 

Pre-think your go/no-go criteria while your sitting on the couch drinking cocoa this winter rather than on-the-fly when you're suffering from get-home-itis!

 

Amen, Brother! Amen.

[Earl]

Single Pilot IFR. Putting me right-seat in your J will somehow reduce the risk of IFR flight at night. Must be the superior vision through the right side of the windshield. Like the poor fellow who wants a King Air to fly at night, despite both the many (required) hours of safe night flight conducted by student pilots all over the country, and the appalling accident and fatality rates in twin-engine aircraft operating on one engine. The night accident rate in Mooneys is not significantly different from the day rate, although for GA as a whole it skyrockets.

It all boils down to risk management, and THAT starts with accurate risk estimations. Based on the half of this thread that I've read, there are huge differences in perceived risk that give rise to wildly different mitigation strategies. We each fly our airplanes our own way, as we see fit, and I don't see this thread significantly changing anyone's practices.

I actually think it does reduce the risk having another pilot.  Its not about another set of eyes outside because most, if not all accidents happen because of what is going on inside the airplane.  There is a reason airlines have two pilots on every flight and its not just in case one becomes incapacitated, its to avoid task saturation and help avoid mistakes.  Not a perfect system but much better than with a single pilot.  If in an emergency situation it seems pretty obvious having one person focused on flying the airplane while the other troubleshoots, communicates, etc. is better than the entire load being on a single pilot and the accident stats seem to bear that out.

 

I am curious about the source of stats about Mooneys.  Where can I find them?  Do they compare the Mooney to other aircraft or are they just Mooney-specific stats?  Thanks in advance for the info!

[AndyFromCB]

Single Pilot IFR. Putting me right-seat in your J will somehow reduce the risk of IFR flight at night. Must be the superior vision through the right side of the windshield. Like the poor fellow who wants a King Air to fly at night, despite both the many (required) hours of safe night flight conducted by student pilots all over the country, and the appalling accident and fatality rates in twin-engine aircraft operating on one engine. The night accident rate in Mooneys is not significantly different from the day rate, although for GA as a whole it skyrockets.

It all boils down to risk management, and THAT starts with accurate risk estimations. Based on the half of this thread that I've read, there are huge differences in perceived risk that give rise to wildly different mitigation strategies. We each fly our airplanes our own way, as we see fit, and I don't see this thread significantly changing anyone's practices.

 

One, a second pilot makes all the difference in the world, especially IFR. As to twin engine safety on one engine, I said king air not a piston twin. Underpowered piston twins are a handful. A king air on a single engine, with the auto feather and ruder boost is a non-event. And yes, it keeps on climbing even at high density altitudes. But to each their own. How many engine failures have you experienced and walked away from?

 

Corporate flights on twin engine turbo props and jets flown by two pilots fall out of the sky at a rate that's about as low as airlines. Since I've started on this board, we've had more members bite the dust in their mooneys than all netjet crashes combined since the start of the company. Yes, better equipment and better crews do increase the level of safety considerably. We fly toys meant for fair weather and yes, daytime. An acquaintance of mine has a Cessna Mustang and still keeps his Marquis card loaded up for when he feels the flight would be unsafe in a Mustang.

[Joe Zuffoletto]

There is a huge difference between punching through the SoCal marine layer for an ILS to mins at Santa Barbara vs shooting the RNAV to mins non-radar, in the mountains, at night, with IMC conditions at nearby alternates. First scenario is cake, second is putting yourself in a corner.

 

Bingo! I flew approaches IMC all the time when I was based in NorCal. Here in CO I almost never do. Apples and oranges!

[phecksel]

I used to LOVE to go flying on the crappy days.  Would drool for 200-1/2   My IFR instructor loved to take me down to 100'  He beat stabilized into my head.  Went for a 50 mile breakfast one day, my closest alt was something like 200 miles away