Dumb IFR questions...

[PTK]

Although I don't know his situation, it seems reasonable that he could've requested an ASR or a PAR. Had he asked they would've accommodated him.

He was flying around for over an hour after his first missed before he ran out of fuel.

If not DOV he could've hopped over to ACY and requested a PAR there.

[Marauder]

The truly sad thing is this accident could have been prevented by preparation. The day it occurred, I had a flight planned but cancelled because of the widespread IMC conditions. The entire mid Atlantic area was socked in and the conditions existed the whole time he was coming up from the South.

[carusoam]

opinions?

how realistic is Plan C:

The plane is above or in IMC...

The pilot's precision nav equipment has failed. paper chart and compass still working....

He is trained to fly out over the ocean and descend through the clag.

land at any airport, field or beach...

Sounds too simple, more like rolling the dice?

Better than trees?

I get the feeling with clouds at 300', fog goes all the way down to the water..?

Best regards,

-a-

[Hank]

I get that feeling, too, Anthony. Sad.

[Marauder]

opinions?

how realistic is Plan C:

The plane is above or in IMC...

The pilot's precision nav equipment has failed. paper chart and compass still working....

He is trained to fly out over the ocean and descend through the clag.

land at any airport, field or beach...

Sounds too simple, more like rolling the dice?

Better than trees?

I get the feeling with clouds at 300', fog goes all the way down to the water..?

Best regards,

-a-

Nope. Land in Virginia. On the day of this flight, I remember noting the extent of the widespread low IMC conditions and how long they were there. It was one of those weather phenoms that was weird for this area.

From Virginia south, the weather improved dramatically. Since this thread is about selecting a destination without an approach, how about selecting an airport with an approach that you have some degree of making it in? Considering the conditions, the prudent thing (always a hindsight) would have been to land further south, refuel and reassess the situation.

Unfortunately, it usually requires one event to make you wise up to the risks we take flying single engine, single pilot IFR. Fortunately for me, I had that event early on and it formed a more conservative approach to taking on crappy weather.

[HRM]

From Virginia south, the weather improved dramatically. Since this thread is about selecting a destination without an approach, how about selecting an airport with an approach that you have some degree of making it in? Considering the conditions, the prudent thing (always a hindsight) would have been to land further south, refuel and reassess the situation.

 

Since I am the student here ( ), I'll share my take-away from the scenario and the total discussion. I will add that Collins is whispering in one ear and Taylor in the other.

 

Weather, at the end of the day, is the most critical random variable in IFR flight followed closely by equipment. Some might argue that IFR skill is an rv, but I will counter that the pilot should have a good handle on that and if he doesn't then mother nature may have something nasty planned for him. With equipment, there are partial panel skills and redundancy, not to mention aggressive PM. My E has a manifold vacuum secondary (Precise Flight) and a coax loop on my panel that I can disconnect and plug the external antenna of my Vertex into so that my HH radio can access the antenna on the roof. Additionally, the radio has a VOR built into it! Between my iPhone, my iPad and my GPSMAP 295 I think I would have fairly good "situational awareness" across all events.

 

So now we are back at weather. This pilot did not know where VFR was, did not have a workable alternate (and that probably should have been his clue to delay the flight), and for what I will chalk up to physician arrogance, failed to declare an emergency. The consequences of a severe ego bruise and possible FAA trifling should never outweigh the alternative.

 

 

So: know the weather, know the approaches, know the personal minimums. 

[midlifeflyer]

Ofcourse you can file to any destination. In the op's hypothetical I should've said "shouldn't."

No reason to file to a destination knowing it's IFR and has no approach for your equipment.

We all know what's legal isn't always prudent.

 

I'm not entirely convinced that filing to the destination even knowing you likely can't get in and making the final decision while en route is any less "prudent" than the three other options I mentioned in another post 

 

 

I think one has a number of legitimate choices on how to handle the situation and, from a practical standpoint I'm not sure why someone would want file to an airport they are 95% sure they will not be able to land at.  But I don't see how  calling ATC 30 miles from the destination with  "Approach, 1234X. The weather at Podunk looks like we won't be able to get in. Change our destination to Big City." is a huge problem. Or, for that matter, "How far down can you bring us to see if we've got visual?" Are they somehow worse than filing to Big City and then, if the weather looks right, changing the destination to Podunk. Or using the approach into Big City as a way to get down to VFR and then break it off to fly over to Podunk.

[midlifeflyer]

And I suppose that Dover tower would have denied a clearance to land unless an emergency was declared. 

Declare an emergency. It is one after all.

[midlifeflyer]

So true... We had an accident here in Delaware in 2013 that took the life of a physician. Read through the accident report and pay attention to the last paragraph. He did everything but declare an emergency.

 

Here's the one I mentioned and recently saw a discussion on.

http://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/brief.aspx?ev_id=20121216X70057&key=1 

 

Note the "inadequate assistance provided by FAA ATC personnel, and the inadequate recurrent training of FAA ATC personnel in recognizing and responding to in-flight emergency situations" as a significant contributing factor. The full narrative is long by with a lot of good lessons.

[HRM]

So here's an exercise appropriate to this thread and where it has gone.

 

I want to fly (IFR) from KBPT to KEDC.

KEDC has only RNAV(GPS) approaches and my E does not have approach certified GPS.

KAUS has any approach you can imagine (Charlie) and my E has ILS so I can get down to 692/18.

 

Should I file KEDC regardless of weather, with KAUS as my alternate as long as KAUS has the minimums I need?

 

The reasoning is that if KEDC is not VFR on arrival, then KAUS will accommodate a fairly low approach.

[Andy95W]

KAUS is noted as "Alternate N/A". Not that anyone really checks that, though.

[chrisk]

KAUS is noted as "Alternate N/A". Not that anyone really checks that, though.

Where do you see KAUS listed at "Alternate N/A".  I see it for T74, but not KAUS.

[chrisk]

So here's an exercise appropriate to this thread and where it has gone.

 

I want to fly (IFR) from KBPT to KEDC.

KEDC has only RNAV(GPS) approaches and my E does not have approach certified GPS.

KAUS has any approach you can imagine (Charlie) and my E has ILS so I can get down to 692/18.

 

Should I file KEDC regardless of weather, with KAUS as my alternate as long as KAUS has the minimums I need?

 

The reasoning is that if KEDC is not VFR on arrival, then KAUS will accommodate a fairly low approach.

If the ceiling is below 3100 MSL, which is the MSA, I would probably file for T74, assuming you have a VOR and DME.  This will get you down to 1180, and is only about 5 miles away.  I'd stick with KAUS as an alternate.

[Andy95W]

Where do you see KAUS listed at "Alternate N/A".  I see it for T74, but not KAUS.

Sorry, looking at the wrong airport/chart. Measure twice, post once...

[midlifeflyer]

If the ceiling is below 3100 MSL, which is the MSA, I would probably file for T74, assuming you have a VOR and DME.  This will get you down to 1180, and is only about 5 miles away.  I'd stick with KAUS as an alternate.

I like that option a lot. It can work. So can HRM's proposed option to file to KEDC.

Here's there's thing. There are multiple options for this flight. And as someone else pointed out, the "filed" alternate is a preflight planning requirement not an "in flight" consideration. And what one thinks would be the best "real" alternate might not be the best (or legal) "filed" alternate. So, for another possibly, one can file for KEDC, list KAUS as the alternate, and plan, if the visual is not available into KEDC but the weather is right, to ask for the approach into T34 and plan to land or break it off to go to KEDC.

Which of the available planing choices makes the most sense depends on a number of things, some of which may have nothing to do with flying but all of which have to do with the pilot. Is my experience such that I don't want to play "multiple choice" in the phase of flight when the workload tends to be highest? If someone is picking me up, what is convenient for them? If I ultimately need a car or overnight lodging, which airport has the best available services? Those are just examples.

The real difference between VFR and IFR flight is that IFR gives us more options. That's the best part of IFR flight but it's also what sometimes makes sorting the choices and selecting the best one more difficult.

[HRM]

I like that option a lot. It can work. So can HRM's proposed option to file to KEDC.

Here's there's thing. There are multiple options for this flight. And as someone else pointed out, the "filed" alternate is a preflight planning requirement not an "in flight" consideration. And what one thinks would be the best "real" alternate might not be the best (or legal) "filed" alternate. So, for another possibly, one can file for KEDC, list KAUS as the alternate, and plan, if the visual is not available into KEDC but the weather is right, to ask for the approach into T34 and plan to land or break it off to go to KEDC.

Which of the available planing choices makes the most sense depends on a number of things, some of which may have nothing to do with flying but all of which have to do with the pilot. Is my experience such that I don't want to play "multiple choice" in the phase of flight when the workload tends to be highest? If someone is picking me up, what is convenient for them? If I ultimately need a car or overnight lodging, which airport has the best available services? Those are just examples.

The real difference between VFR and IFR flight is that IFR gives us more options. That's the best part of IFR flight but it's also what sometimes makes sorting the choices and selecting the best one more difficult.

 

T74   that threw me off for a bit.

 

As the cobwebs clear I am seeing IFR flight less like a puzzle to be solved and more, as you put it, sorting choices, which sounds like the same thing but really isn't. Again, it is the random elements that drive these choices and whenever randomness is involved, the more data you have the better. Also, the earlier you clear out what isn't possible the better. For example, @chrisk said "as long as you have a VOR and DME." I don't have a DME and one of my takeaways from all of this has been that you do not play with the alternate, accident discussions notwithstanding. You can file for the main knowing that the only conditions that would allow you to land are VMC and just hope for the best, but you have to be certain of the alternate. The latter would be a personal minimum and I am betting that many of the accidents in the NTSB DB lead to a less than certain alternate plan.

 

KEDC, KAUS, and T74 are all within the BITER6 STAR constellation, with KAUS being the best choice for a guaranteed approach but also the worst for traffic and cost efficiency.

[midlifeflyer]

 I don't have a DME and one of my takeaways from all of this

 

I think one of the other takeaways is something someone else alluded to earlier. VOR with no DME and no GPS can be fine for training for the rating since it forces you to be able to rely on very bare bones navigation. But I think you are going to find that for practical IFR use, you will need more. I flew a set-up like yours for a few years when I lived in Colorado and flew VFR 95+% of the time. One day, for jollies, I decided to see where I could actually go IFR and, in additon to the obvious situational awareness benefit, there were few places that did not require DME (or GPS in substitution). And that was before the FAA started de-commissioning compass locators instead of fixing them, increasing the number of "DME Required" chart notes.

[Marauder]

I always look an an IFR flight in IMC as a balance between what I want to do and what I can do. And the "sorting choices" comment plays right into that. If I am planning a flight of some distance, I am beginning to look at the weather products days before the trip. If I'm on a tight time budget and the weather is iffy, I will make other plans like flying commercially or driving.

A perspective I put in my head is that I am a recreational pilot. Although I train a lot more than many, I am not a pilot by profession. I don't have the benefit of a second pilot, I don't fly a FIKI plane and I am not turbocharged, so I need to weigh all that into the decision making -- before I make the flight, not when I am in IMC dealing with it real time. The success of the flight rests on me. One thing that helps a lot is becoming a student of weather. Last year I learned skew-Ts. They added a new dynamic to my understanding of weather conditions. A far cry from the listening for PIREPs of icing conditions I did in the 90s and looking at area forecasts.

Just a comment on your last paragraph; please get the traffic and cost efficiency thoughts out of your head. If you are thinking that way before you begin this flight example, what will you be thinking when you are not able to get into your primary and KAUS is the option at that point? Are you thinking, I'm going to try again at the primary airport because I am going to have to pay to land at KAUS and figure out how to get home?

I can't help but to think what was going through the accident pilot's head above when he missed a number of times and bypassed an opportunity to land a military airport that had 9,000'+ and 12,000'+ runways literally a few miles from where he ran out of fuel and crashed.

[HRM]

Just a comment on your last paragraph; please get the traffic and cost efficiency thoughts out of your head. If you are thinking that way before you begin this flight example, what will you be thinking when you are not able to get into your primary and KAUS is the option at that point? Are you thinking, I'm going to try again at the primary airport because I am going to have to pay to land at KAUS and figure out how to get home?

 

I look at everything, the important point being the weights that are applied to the choices in the decision making process. This is not a binary exercise. Given the choices in the BITER6 constellation, KAUS, depending on the weather, which is the operative rv in this process, may not be the optimal alternate. Also keep in mind that when things get hairy, there can be a third alternate. What's nice about this scenario is that KAUS is there if needed.

 

I am convinced that the pilot that passed up the military landing did so out of ego. Number one on your personal minimums checklist should be: zero out ego. I frankly don't give a FF what people think when it comes to the safety of my PAX, myself and my aircraft. 

[kmyfm20s]

I don't get why the pilot was so reluctant to use any of the ILS options. I have to think his GS was INOP to pass up the lower minimum approaches. If I ever have to do a crash landing it will be at a Military airport. They not only have the best emergency crew and equipment but I just learned recently they have an extraction team as well.

[chrisk]

I am convinced that the pilot that passed up the military landing did so out of ego. Number one on your personal minimums checklist should be: zero out ego. 

 

I have not followed this situation closely, but it may not have been ego.  Often times we get used to something not being an option (like landing at a military base).  When the pressure is on, we have already discounted that option.  It doesn't even enter into the thought process. 

 

It sounds like the only ego aspect was not declaring a low fuel emergency, and that may have been more wishful thinking.  "I don't need to declare yet.  There's got to be more fuel"   It's not till the engine quits and reality hits home.  For me, the lesson to be learned is:  recognize you are in trouble early and fess up.  For me, missing twice, stuck in low IMC, and less than 30 min of fuel is enough.  I'd be asking for a precision radar (aka no gyro) approach to anywhere.  30 min of fuel, is about one more shot at it.  --But ask yourself.  Do you know your plane well enough to KNOW when you have 30 minutes of fuel left?  Not 25 minutes, and not 40 minutes, but 30?  For me, this is the importance of the low fuel light.  If it's on and I'm not down and in this sort of circumstance, then it's an emergency. No second guessing about how much fuel is left.

[midlifeflyer]

I don't get why the pilot was so reluctant to use any of the ILS options. I have to think his GS was INOP to pass up the lower minimum approaches. If I ever have to do a crash landing it will be at a Military airport. They not only have the best emergency crew and equipment but I just learned recently they have an extraction team as well.

 

I don't think that was the issue. The GPS/LPV approach to Runway 32 at SBY has the same minimums as the ILS, which would have made the GPS option just as realistic as the ILS option. In both cases the weather was above minimums. The pilot told ATC he was having "a problem" with his GPS, when he twice executed the missed well above minimums.There was nothing in the report to indicate whether there was in fact some problem with the GPS or the GS. So we don't really know whether it was a GPS issue, whether, if it was a GPS issue, that an ILS would have worked, or whether it was a pilot proficiency/stress/confidence/missionitis issue. The probable cause is listed only as the pilot's failure to land and to declare a "fuel emergency" sooner. No contributing causes mentioned.

 

A real sad read.

[HRM]

I have not followed this situation closely, but it may not have been ego.  Often times we get used to something not being an option (like landing at a military base).  When the pressure is on, we have already discounted that option.  It doesn't even enter into the thought process. 

 

It sounds like the only ego aspect was not declaring a low fuel emergency, and that may have been more wishful thinking.  "I don't need to declare yet.  There's got to be more fuel"   It's not till the engine quits and reality hits home.  For me, the lesson to be learned is:  recognize you are in trouble early and fess up.  For me, missing twice, stuck in low IMC, and less than 30 min of fuel is enough.  I'd be asking for a precision radar (aka no gyro) approach to anywhere.  30 min of fuel, is about one more shot at it.  --But ask yourself.  Do you know your plane well enough to KNOW when you have 30 minutes of fuel left?  Not 25 minutes, and not 40 minutes, but 30?  For me, this is the importance of the low fuel light.  If it's on and I'm not down and in this sort of circumstance, then it's an emergency. No second guessing about how much fuel is left.

 

I think that's a fair analysis and we all know that we will never know what was going on in the PICs head. We are thinking alike on this one and I like the phraseology: no gyro approach to anywhere. The ego here may have started with low fuel and the fear of being accused later of allowing the emergency to happen and consequently getting sanctioned. At some point the little voice inside your head that says better to fight it out on the ground and potentially fly another day rather than keep the stiff upper lip as you go down needs to be listened to.

 

All the CFII cognoscenti have implied in PilotWorshops.com audio conversations that when the outcome is a safe landing the FAA is happier and less punishing than if the outcome is because of failure to act. There is a mentality that declaring an emergency is a bad thing. Of course, there is a threshold, but I think it is clear that erring on the side of caution tends to win the day.

 

It is also useful to be knowledgeable about the NASA ASRS.

[carusoam]

If my life depends on one 20 year old ILS indicator in my old Mooney....

My alternate is going to have weather that is better than 1000’ ceilings.

Consider a few ways of looking at this problem.

1) the alternate that meets regulations... Important for the test.

2) the alternate that will get you to the meeting with your client... Could get expensive with the car rental.

3) the alternate that allows you to live... Very often, the best alternate can be the airport that you departed from. (an hour away and 5 driving hours later....)

This is the part of the IR training I found eye opening.

Knowing the weather challenges is critical to usable IFR flight.

The best part of being this knowledgable about weather...

You have the skill to call off your son's LL baseball game without having to wait another 15 minutes to see another lightning strike.

Tracking storm cells on you iPhone is pretty magical.

Works equally well if your daughter plays softball.

It helps to have the right tools...

Knowledge, practice and hardware.

Knowing how to avoid icing and thunderstorms is important even for the most skilled pilots and planes...

Best regards,

-a-

[HRM]

If my life depends on one 20 year old ILS indicator in my old Mooney....

 

My life depends on a 50 year-old Mooney...but it flies much better than I do.