IMC Mooney Flying - what's safe?

[DrBill]

On 6/23/2016 at 9:44 AM, Brian Scranton said:

Guys, I am interested to know what your own take off minimums are. Personally, what kind of ceiling do YOU need to depart? 

I've taken off with 100 ft ceiling and 500 ft visibility. Climb to 2000 ft and am in severe clear. I set the a/p to the initial heading from atc clearance,   and activate it as soon as gear up and sufficient altitude (c400 ft agl). Then I just manage throttle and prop.

Bill

 

[Bob_Belville]

I got night current in order to depart before dawn to arrive Sun N Fun mid morning in 2013. If I had some good reason to be flying at night I would do it again but it is seldom necessary flying for personal.   

[N9453V]

My theory on personal minimums is they are printed on the bottom of the approach plate. If I'm not comfortable flying an approach to minimums, I shouldn't be flying IFR.
Otherwise, for the Mooney, no forecast icing at my MEA, surface winds at 40 knots or less (gusts to 50), max crosswind component of 30 knots, ability to stay at least 20nm from thunderstorms. When flying over the mountains below FL180, max winds aloft of 30 knots, and no mountain wave activity.

-Andrew

[Jerry 5TJ]

54 minutes ago, N9453V said:

My theory on personal minimums is they are printed on the bottom of the approach plate. If I'm not comfortable flying an approach to minimums, I shouldn't be flying IFR.

Makes sense to me -- if I can't fly the ILS to 200' DH then how am I going to fly it to a 400' or 600' "personal minimum?"  

I get the concept of risk mitigation and understand that difficulties are additive, so a night IMC flight with embedded Cb to max range in icing conditions after a full work day and a big dinner is far beyond my comfort level.   Raising the DH is not going to affect the safety of such a flight.  Waiting until the next morning will improve the probability a lot.  

My buddy the plastics engineer says he can make plastic molded parts that are strong, light and cheap--pick any two.  

 

 

 

[Hank]

24 minutes ago, Jerry 5TJ said:

Makes sense to me -- if I can't fly the ILS to 200' DH then how am I going to fly it to a 400' or 600' "personal minimum?"  

I get the concept of risk mitigation and understand that difficulties are additive, so a night IMC flight with embedded Cb to max range in icing conditions after a full work day and a big dinner is far beyond my comfort level.   Raising the DH is not going to affect the safety of such a flight.  Waiting until the next morning will improve the probability a lot.  

My buddy the plastics engineer says he can make plastic molded parts that are strong, light and cheap--pick any two.  

 

I mitigate risk by waiting for higher ceilings to depart, flying wide around ice or not at all, and avoiding CB. Haven't had to fly any approach to minimums other than in training or with safety pilot. StormScope gives me real time updates to avoid the nasties.

As a plastics engineer myself, I agree with your buddy. My A&P says he can fix my plane fast, right or cheap--pick any two.

[bradp]

I think there is some dangerous creep in training to "personal mins".   If I can barely get to 600 AGL with needles centered, and am counting on an ability to transition to visual approach to land that would require some sort of close-to-ground ground maneuvering with a low ceiling. Add in some wind, shear, turbulence, etc.  That seems like a recipe for disaster.  If I train to needles centered to the threshold, I know that st 600 AGL I will be set up for a safe transtion to a normal landing.  

 

The other thing I'm wary of is hearing people completing instrument ratings with no actual time.   I understand if you live in Phoenix, SoCal, or FL, but for the rest of the country, there are usually a few IMC days without convection or icing during which training can be conducted in IMC.  Maybe Brian S can chime in as he's recently completed his instrument rating, but there is no substitution for actual time and more importantly the weather that it brings.  Instrument ratings are much more about on the ground decision making than the rote skills involved in controlling an aircraft in IMC, but both can get you in trouble.   It's hard to ask a new instrument pilot to go out into actual without having thought much about weather decision making during training.  Some of this is instructor driven.  If I were to encounter an instructor wary of training in actual conditions, I'd probably find a new instructor.   

[midlifeflyer]

1 hour ago, bradp said:

I think there is some dangerous creep in training to "personal mins".   If I can barely get to 600 AGL with needles centered, and am counting on an ability to transition to visual approach to land that would require some sort of close-to-ground ground maneuvering with a low ceiling. Add in some wind, shear, turbulence, etc.  That seems like a recipe for disaster.  If I train to needles centered to the threshold, I know that st 600 AGL I will be set up for a safe transtion to a normal landing.    

That is something I haven't seen - training to personal minimums - rather than training to approach minimums. That would be shocking.

[bradp]

Just now, midlifeflyer said:

That is something I haven't seen - training to personal minimums - rather than training to approach minimums. That would be shocking.

You won't find a CFII that would do that but there are likely many IR pilots who don't train to approach mins.  

[Hank]

I train to minimums, but will not plan to fly somewhere where weather is at minimums. Weather forecasting is far too I exact for me to trust that much. "Forecasts are wrong too often to trust, but right too often to ignore."

[ArtVandelay]

IIRC, insurance won't cover IFR students was the reason no real IMC during training. Also, it's apparently tough to find CFIIs, pilots who are just accumulating hours have no desire to get the rating.

[Danb]

18 minutes ago, Hank said:

I train to minimums, but will not plan to fly somewhere where weather is at minimums. Weather forecasting is far too I exact for me to trust that much. "Forecasts are wrong too often to trust, but right too often to ignore."

Hank agree, I train to minimums but my personal minimums on a given day may be higher after my pre fight evaluation, there have been to many instances where the wx was forecast to be say 800 ovc & vis 2 light rain. When shooting the approach the wx was at or near min. if we hadn't practiced at minimums we would have been quite rattled. Mother Nature is quite finicky.

[ArtVandelay]

For me, I like to fly the final approach a little faster than when visual, 15-20 mph, so if go to minimums and decide to land I need to slow it down fast, don't think I could slow it down enough if minimums were any lower than 200'

[midlifeflyer]

2 hours ago, bradp said:

You won't find a CFII that would do that but there are likely many IR pilots who don't train to approach mins.  

Maybe. Everyone I know who does practice  approaches does them to minimums. OTOH I get requests from pilots who rarely encounter IMC who ask to go up in benign conditions to get experience  because of the type of flying they ordinarily do. 

Thats the real personal minimums issue to me: not pilots who are afraid of it but who so rarely fly in it they are uncomfortable. 

I saw an excellent presentation in which the speaker said one of the differences between currency and proficiency is comfort.

[Hank]

3 hours ago, midlifeflyer said:

 

Thats the real personal minimums issue to me: not pilots who are afraid of it but who so rarely fly in it they are uncomfortable. 

I saw an excellent presentation in which the speaker said one of the differences between currency and proficiency is comfort.

If I don't have much actual recently, I'm a little tense when I finally hit some, but after 5-10 minutes I'm relaxed again. If I can tell it's just one cloud, it doesn't ever bother me. Having moved twice in the last 2-1/2 years, my challenge is finding a safety pilot to practice with . . . At least I'm still flying, and I've been comfortable in the system since I got my license at an uncontrolled field on the edge of Delta airspace and always used flight following; with IFR, there's just a few rules that are different, plus the approach procedures.

[glafaille]

No matter how much equipment you have on a single engine plane, you still only have one engine.  

Therefore the question is:  With your visibilty reduced to feet until breaking out, at what altitude and with what visibilty do you think you could pick a safe landing spot once clear of the clouds?

Personally, night IFR is very high risk unless the ceiling is very high and the terrain is flat with plenty of airports along the way.  Day IFR, generally 800-2 for me over flat generally unobstructed terrain and then only when improving conditions are expected.  From there it goes up depending on the conditions and terrain.

Then the question arises, why install a WAAS capable navigator?  Any LNAV, VOR, ADF approach will get down to those minimums, plus I do have ILS.

I fly for a living.  Why should I risk it with a single engine airplane?

 

 

[midlifeflyer]

13 hours ago, Hank said:

If I don't have much actual recently, I'm a little tense when I finally hit some, but after 5-10 minutes I'm relaxed again. If I can tell it's just one cloud, it doesn't ever bother me. Having moved twice in the last 2-1/2 years, my challenge is finding a safety pilot to practice with . . . At least I'm still flying, and I've been comfortable in the system since I got my license at an uncontrolled field on the edge of Delta airspace and always used flight following; with IFR, there's just a few rules that are different, plus the approach procedures.

I think we all go through that to some degree unless we live in a really awful climate. FWIW, here's my story. Some of it is a reapeat.

I did my instrument training in New England, mostly after work at night. 6 hours actual including a real missed off of an ILS. My first solo IFR flight was a week after I got my ticket. Mostly in the clouds; half of it at night, over water too.

Then I moved to Colorado. VFR almost every day and, except for a few weeks around June, no flyable clouds, so very few opportunities. Given the MEAs, not even much reason to file IFR unless heading east (there were exceptions)

20 years later, a move to North Carolina. Even though I was now a CFII and had far more knowledge of the system and procedures than I had before, it still required getting re-acquainted with instrument flight. I knew I could do it and my flying club requires an annual check that includes an IPC so I had feedback too. Fortunately, the weather cooperated with me, handing me flights with a little en route weather, then more, then some approaches to very comfortable ceilings. Then lower. 

My personal minimums at this point are based on what I feel most comfortable doing, with a bit of the conservatism that comes with age and experience.

Folks have wide ranging opinions on personal minimums. But generally, I think you'll find older, very experienced, pilots and instructors are generally more conservative about what they will accept.

 

[Brian Scranton]

21 hours ago, bradp said:

 Maybe Brian S can chime in as he's recently completed his instrument rating, but there is no substitution for actual time and more importantly the weather that it brings.  Instrument ratings are much more about on the ground decision making than the rote skills involved in controlling an aircraft in IMC, but both can get you in trouble.  

I had some time in a Baron and a King Air, but honestly, only a few minutes until we clicked the AP on in both of those planes. I wanted to get IMC during my training but it's very difficult in Colorado. In the winter, it's icing. In the spring/summer it's icing and storms. I never found a day that didn't have any of those. So, I dove into the clouds the fist chance I had once I got my rating. A week later. It was awesome. 

[Andy95W]

2 hours ago, glafaille said:

No matter how much equipment you have on a single engine plane, you still only have one engine.  

Therefore the question is:  With your visibilty reduced to feet until breaking out, at what altitude and with what visibilty do you think you could pick a safe landing spot once clear of the clouds?

Personally, night IFR is very high risk unless the ceiling is very high and the terrain is flat with plenty of airports along the way.  Day IFR, generally 800-2 for me over flat generally unobstructed terrain and then only when improving conditions are expected.  From there it goes up depending on the conditions and terrain.

Then the question arises, why install a WAAS capable navigator?  Any LNAV, VOR, ADF approach will get down to those minimums, plus I do have ILS.

I fly for a living.  Why should I risk it with a single engine airplane?

+1. Couldn't have said it better myself, like you were reading my mind.

[midlifeflyer]

2 hours ago, glafaille said:

Then the question arises, why install a WAAS capable navigator?  Any LNAV, VOR, ADF approach will get down to those minimums, plus I do have ILS.

 

Having something more capable than what your baseline requires simply gives you more options. You may need them. Flights don't always end up being exactly as planned. Stuff happens and diversions can become the best option.

YMMV but I would prefer precision approach capability to a waide variety of airports and fly with a reliable glidepath to 600-800' minimums than have non-precision capability only that might require a dive and drive to those same minimums. 

[Hank]

3 minutes ago, midlifeflyer said:

Having something more capable than what your baseline requires simply gives you more options. You may need them. Flights don't always end up being exactly as planned. Stuff happens and diversions can become the best option.

YMMV but I would prefer precision approach capability to a waide variety of airports and fly with a reliable glidepath to 600-800' minimums than have non-precision capability only that might require a dive and drive to those same minimums. 

Especially as NDBs and VORs are going away. Never flew with an ADF, but I'm surprised by how quickly VIRs are shutting down. Over the route I used to fly from WV to NC, maybe half if the VIRs are gone, many if them way out in the mountains. WAAS is it now, and there ain't much backup left.

[Jerry 5TJ]

4 hours ago, midlifeflyer said:

....But generally, I think you'll find older, very experienced, pilots and instructors are generally more conservative about what they will accept.

When I was 16, riding a motorcycle at high speed at night on a gravel road was intensely FUN. 

I am glad I made some flights 30 years ago as I wouldn't enjoy them much today.

I am comfortable in IMC in my well-maintained Ovation.  Perhaps it is a false comfort, or one that will fade with yet more age & hours:  I suspect that my next plane, if any, will be a twin.  

 

[M20F]

6 hours ago, Jerry 5TJ said:

When I was 16, riding a motorcycle at high speed at night on a gravel road was intensely FUN.  

 

1988 FZR1000 purchased at 18, stolen at 18.5.  I thank the thief every so often for saving my life :-)

[chrisk]

On 6/25/2016 at 1:11 PM, bradp said:

Ihe other thing I'm wary of is hearing people completing instrument ratings with no actual time.   I understand if you live in Phoenix, SoCal, or FL, but for the rest of the country, there are usually a few IMC days without convection or icing during which training can be conducted in IMC.  Maybe Brian S can chime in as he's recently completed his instrument rating, but there is no substitution for actual time and more importantly the weather that it brings.  Instrument ratings are much more about on the ground decision making than the rote skills involved in controlling an aircraft in IMC, but both can get you in trouble.   It's hard to ask a new instrument pilot to go out into actual without having thought much about weather decision making during training.  Some of this is instructor driven.  If I were to encounter an instructor wary of training in actual conditions, I'd probably find a new instructor.   

From my instrument training in MI in December a few years ago.  A good example of IMC and how fast ice can accumulate.

[PMcClure]

11 hours ago, M20F said:

1988 FZR1000 purchased at 18, stolen at 18.5.  I thank the thief every so often for saving my life :-)

When I was 18, I tried to get a loan on a bike like this. To get a loan, I had to get insurance, which cost $50 more than the bike (annual rate). I was shocked and asked the insurance agent for more details. He said the statistics for that bike with my age and experience suggested a 6 month life of me or the bike. So the $50 was a processing fee. I opted for another, cheaper and slower bike. 

[gsxrpilot]

I was fortunate to have a CFII who got me into Actual every chance we got. During one such lesson in actual IMC to minimums I went missed and ATC told me to "climb in the Hold to 4000". As we were approaching 2000 we broke out on top and there just off my left wing were two huge antenna towers sticking up out of the cloud deck. The instructor had brought me to that hold just for that lesson. I immediately understood the importance of staying on the course and keeping the needles centered when IMC.

I bought my Mooney specifically as it was well equipped for IFR. I enjoy IMC and go up to fly in the clouds every chance I get. Personal minimums are printed on the plate. And I make sure I practice enough to be comfortable with them.