What kind of clouds do you refuse to enter? Poll

[201er]

ATC is being very demanding. Traffic everywhere. Not much alternatives. Some planes are going around, others are going through. ATC says other planes just went through and due to traffic they need you to stay on the airway. Very insistent. What amount of vertically developing cumulus clouds will you downright refuse to go through? 
 

Sure there are lesser amounts it would be nice to go around, but what vertical height of clouds will you simply refuse no matter where they send you or what you have to do?

Think saying unable and if they continue demanding, declare an emergency not to go through those clouds.

Edited April 14 by 201er

[N201MKTurbo]

Back in ‘01 I was about the first GA plane to fly. I needed to fly from Phoenix to Boulder CO. Only IFR was allowed. 
 

When I got to the Denver area there was the biggest baddest blackest super cell you will ever see. ATC kept trying to vector me right through it. I kept saying “unable”. They finally asked “what do you want to do”? And I said “I want to cancel IFR and poke around VFR” they said they would like nothing better. I ended up going back to COS until the storm passed. 
 

On another note. I have been in the middle of a level 5 cell. The Mooney stayed together and I obviously kept it right side up. Been there, done that, don’t ever need to do it again. Terrifying on an epic level.

[Hank]

I worry more about color and anvil heads. Besides, as I'm cruising along at say 9K, it's difficult to judge a cloud's base and top.

• White and puffy, fine.
• White, visibly growing, large anvil head, no thanks.
• Short, wide, dark gray to black, nope!

[201er]

For sure I won’t go through anything that tops above 20,000MSL. I can imagine reluctantly going through something with bases 3,000 and tops 15,000 which would be a 12k tall cloud. It will be quite a ride but I know I’ll come out the other side ok. So, I voted 15k is my “no way” limit.

There’s also a qualitative side which is a bit trickier to quantify. No red on radar, dark clouds, or extremely rapid growing clouds. Stormscope can also help differentiate the undesirable from the unable types based on the amount of strikes.

There are times when the best way through (or least bad) is to go through those smaller towering cumulus than the actual thunderstorms in other directions. 

[EricJ]

On-board weather helps, too.    I try to stay away from purple stuff, at least.   We don't get a lot of experience with that stuff here in the southwest, though, so it's not very often that it's even been an issue for me.

[0TreeLemur]

Cloud height is hard to judge when you are up close to them.  Stormscope for the win.   I won't go into any cloud that has lightning or known icing.   I've penetrated baby CB's before they started producing enough precip to show on radar or lightning.  Bumpy, but doable.   Once approaching the IFR alley across mid-Mississippi a big, fat growing CB sat right at the entrance.    I asked for deviations.   Was told "nope, MOAs on both sides are hot."   The FIS-B weather on the iPad showed nothing.  I asked Memphis center if they had any precip on the scope.   Nope.   Told my co-pilot to cinch up, slowed to 120,  and in we went.   Wheeee!  5 minutes of tilt-a-whirl.

[Immelman]

I don't fly through much cumulus cloud in my Mooney, no interest to. Go around.

Airliners, it depends. Its not just height. As such I won't give you an answer to your poll. Are they building or dissipating? What's around, what's behind? How high are we? Is everyone strapped in or not? Look at them enough and you can learn to tell the difference. Hard vs soft edges, for example. But for the most part there is little reason to ever fly through a building cumulus cloud of any significant height. The tricky part is where you're IMC and can't tell.. only have radar imagery to work with.

By the way, I don't request deviations. I tell them what I need. If there is some negotiation so be it, but if denied and I don't want to fly through it, I still won't fly through it. But it has not come to that with ATC, yet. They are good folks.

Edited April 14 by Immelman

[donkaye, MCFI]

For me I'll fly through stratus clouds if the temperature is above freezing and the lifted index is positive with low K Factors.  For the most part I'm not interested in flying through cumulous clouds and will ask for deviations.  I've never been denied.  If I were denied, I'd ask ATC if they would rather I declare an emergency and ask them to save the tapes.  Depending on nexrad and cloud cover and movement in my vicinity, for negative lifted indices and K factors above 20 I'm staying on the ground.

[hubcap]

I prefer to avoid cumulus altogether if possible. I don’t like the ride. I have never been denied a deviation.

[midlifeflyer]

I know it when I see it. 

[Bartman]

I chose 5,000 but that’s just a general guide and if it’s just fair weather cumulus I’m in. If it’s building I’m asking for deviation. 

[Paul Thomas]

I fly in FL; heights is one of many factors.

I've never been denied the ability to deviate around clouds, ATC is very accommodating when it comes to that. When it comes to picking my way around cells, there comes a point where I don't rely on anything but a Mark II eyeball. By the time you see certain cells on radar or storm scope, it's too late and you don't want to be there.

I don't remember using unable. While ATC has not given me the routing or altitude I wanted, safety was not a factor so I've sucked it up when I haven't been able to negotiate. If I did have to use the words unable to go around a dangerous cell, I'd also tell them what my new heading is till I can rejoin the appropriate routing. Traffic is rarely everywhere, especially en-routes. In terminal areas, I've found that ATC is cautious and typically has a good grasp on the weather from others. My experience is that the controllers really step it up when weather is an issue. I firmly believe that you should enter the terminal area without a plan as to how you will land; for me, that involves making it VFR when thunderstorms are an issue.

[Danb]

I’ve been turned into a thunderstorm about five years ago by Richmond, I’d been avoiding them since I left Texas and my own fault I assume tiredness I was vectored into the one I was avoiding, all hell broke loose, my compass broke off the center pole my wife’s iPhone ended in the luggage area, the plane felt like I hit a wall driving 100 miles a hour afterward I said unkindly words and I turned out quickly I was going to land at Richmond and weather Turned from 10 miles down the runway to 30 g 50 the controller after I berated him smugly asked intentions I asked for immediate descent then cancelled flew at 500 feet ago along the shore landed at Salisbury and spent the night. Totally pilots fault getting tired and flying don’t mix. I voted 20,000 but it depends on factors like what equipment is reading. Icing rain etc..lately been avoiding almost all getting vectors never been denied 

[M20F]

On 4/14/2025 at 7:11 AM, midlifeflyer said:

I know it when I see it. 

I echo this, way too many variables.  

[DXB]

I circumnavigate clouds that might harbor poorly conceived Mooneyspace surveys.  

[Pinecone]

I answered before I started reading, but not a hard answer.

Generally, like others, I avoid cumulus due to bumps.   But the ones I can see visibly growing are ones I REALLY want to stay out of.  Also those that show up on radar or a dark colored.

One nice thing about being turbo and flying in the teens is you are normally above most things, so you can see the build ups.  And, there is little traffic, so no problems with clearance to avoid them.

When I was in USAF UPT, I was headed out for a solo flight in a T-38.  Little thunderstorms started popping up, so everyone wanted to get back to base.  I was on the departure, so a lower priority.  There was one building right on the departure radial.  So I asked to deviate.  Got a Stand Bye, as approach was swamped.  No problem.  But getting closer.  I ask again, get a "Remain on course."   Hmm, ask again, saying I have a thunderstorm on my nose.  Got a "Remain on Course, cleared unrestricted climb."  Now this thing is growing faster than I am climbing in a plane that once held the time to climb records.  So I light the afterburners.  Hmm, this thing is growing faster than I am climbing in middle range burner.  And I am getting close.  My next call is, "XXX deviating left 30 degrees for weather."  Controller replies, "Approved."  Good call, as my next radio transmission would have been to declare an emergency.

After the flight two of our instructors called me over and said they heard the exchange and asked what happened.  So I told them.  They looked at each other and then said they have only one question.  Why did I wait to long to do what I needed to so and tell the controller.  I told them, because I didn't NEED to do anything at that point.  When I did need to do something, I did it.  They smiled and said that it worked for them.

[redbaron1982]

On 4/14/2025 at 2:09 AM, donkaye said:

For me I'll fly through stratus clouds if the temperature is above freezing and the lifted index is positive with low K Factors.  For the most part I'm not interested in flying through cumulous clouds and will ask for deviations.  I've never been denied.  If I were denied, I'd ask ATC if they would rather I declare an emergency and ask them to save the tapes.  Depending on nexrad and cloud cover and movement in my vicinity, for negative lifted indices and K factors above 20 I'm staying on the ground.

Where can I find weather products showing LI and K factors? I googled a round a bit and couldn't find anything.

[midlifeflyer]

1 hour ago, redbaron1982 said:

Where can I find weather products showing LI and K factors? I googled a round a bit and couldn't find anything.

It's part of the data derived from the Skew-T soundings. Since the NOAA site closed, my go to is https://www.flytheweather.com/ but any Skew-T source should provide it. 

 

[redbaron1982]

1 hour ago, midlifeflyer said:

It's part of the data derived from the Skew-T soundings. Since the NOAA site closed, my go to is https://www.flytheweather.com/ but any Skew-T source should provide it. 

 

Nice, I was looking at the skew-t in Windy, but you don't get the KI and LI there.

[Ibra]

It depends at what hight one penetrates? and from which side? 

For vertical clouds, I am only flying lateral around and as long as as it’s upwind and low part, I am happy to taste it until I am not happy with “colour” or “age”, aka it gets too dark/bumpy  I love it as it reminds me of interesting days when gliding !

Entering at 10k altitude in 20k tall cloud that is wet and mature is an awful experience, however, in northern Europe they rarely get that severe: it’s usually TCU rather than CB as dew point stays under 20C, I won’t compare it to the same 20k cloud in Southern Europe, Florida or Namibia when dew point hits 45C 

When flying with passengers I am likely using Avgas to fly in smooth air anyway (some will never fly light aircraft again) 

Edited April 15 by Ibra

[donkaye, MCFI]

12 hours ago, redbaron1982 said:

Where can I find weather products showing LI and K factors? I googled a round a bit and couldn't find anything.

1800wxbrief.com > Wx Charts  > Lifted / K index

[Hector]

iClouds.

Seriously, I fly in FL a lot during the summer. Have taken a couple of wild rides on clouds that did not look that bad, or so I thought. Typically pretty easy to tell when there is significant vertical development and I just ask for deviations. I just don’t need wild rides as I fly mainly for pleasure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bcg]

For me, there are 2 kinds of clouds.  Clouds and NOPE clouds.  You know NOPE clouds when you see them and I stay far, far away from those and sometimes that means leaving the airplane in the hangar.

[Marcopolo]

Granite Clouds!

[bencpeters]

On 4/15/2025 at 11:32 AM, midlifeflyer said:

It's part of the data derived from the Skew-T soundings. Since the NOAA site closed, my go to is https://www.flytheweather.com/ but any Skew-T source should provide it. 

 

I hadn't seen that site before, looks like a great resource, thanks for sharing!