Weather Related

[robert7467]

[jetdriven]

Two A36 Bonanzas broke up in flight due to weather in MS alone this year.  Both had XM weather onboard as well.

 

[robert7467]

Its easy to call people stupid, or idiots, but I am sure thats not the case in these situations. I am sure a pilot would not knowingly fly into a thunderstorm, and at least 2 of these planes had weather tools in the cockpit. So I guess how, or why?

[rob]

People do knowingly fly into Thunderstorms. There was a Bonanza that crashed two years ago in NE Miss, enroute from OLV to Atlanta. The pilot had already had an instance of a bent plane due to severe turbulence encounter. He was briefed on the weather and warned about it by ATC. He had onboard weather. And he flew right into the heart of a Thunderstorm. He was the subject of an article in the AOPA mag in June. Speculation is that the Pilatus pilot in Florida, who was new to his Pilatus from a Bo, may have thought the plane was impervious to a little storm. We obviously have no idea if that's really how he felt, but I can see how one might thing that. 

These pilots are no longer with us because they made mistakes. XM WX is on a delay and not a viable source for picking through a storm system. Some people don't completely understand that and get complacent. Others may have the "it cant happen to me" attitude. Or maybe they got away with it once in the past and now have a false sense of security.

On a flight of any distance, a substantial deviation can sometimes only cause a slight delay. It's well worth it to me to stay very clear of convective activities. This past Sunday, when the Piper went down in MS, I had a friend flying in the area and on frequency. The cell that alledgedly caused the accident was less than 20 miles wide. A quick and easy deviation. It's really a shame.

[danb35]

Quote: rob

People do knowingly fly into Thunderstorms. There was a Bonanza that crashed two years ago in NE Miss, enroute from OLV to Atlanta. The pilot had already had an instance of a bent plane due to severe turbulence encounter.

[rbridges]

maybe newer planes/weather detection gives false sense of security. 

[FlyDave]

Quote: danb35

Actually, two instances.  And not just bent, totalled.

[bd32322]

Robert: one excellent book you can read about weather flying in general is "Weather Flying" by Robert N Buck. It has sections for VFR pilots also but its mostly for IFR pilots.

 

No one knowingly flies into thunderstorms (altho there are a few that do). Here is how I almost "knowingly" flew into a thunderstorm. I was flying from West Virginia to Massachusetts. I was on an IFR plan. There were supposed to be isolated thunderstorm activity - I had ADSB weather on-board and I had planned a course around the entire area of isolated thunderstorms. Its faster to avoid the entire area believe it or not - and doesnt add much distance if you are doing a long cross country in a Mooney (3-4 hour flight).

My destination was forecast to be clear. Enroute it was all clear and I could clearly see the thunderheads off in the distance (the area that I had avoided). However, as I came in close to my destination around evening time, the ceiling started dropping. Visibility was bad in the layers of clouds and I couldnt clearly see what kind of clouds lay ahead of me. Instead of forecasted clear it was now 3000 feet - which is no problem for IFR. However, something should have rung a bell at this point. Although the weather was clear on ADSB and on the controllers precip radar (think its called ASR radar) - I had a little bumpy ride and landed. As I was taxi-ing I saw lightning from the direction I just made the approach from and then foreflight showed me the thunderstorm and associated lightning and rain (it was now connected via 3G on the ground). And as I was pushing the plane into the hangar - the rain came down.

 

This taught me a big lesson. Always be aware of changes in weather and deviations in forecast. . I had known that thunderstorms can develop in less than 10 minutes from Mr Buck's book and that my ADSB could lags the real weather by 10 minutes or so but had failed to put 2 and 2 together. During thunderstorm season I normally fly early morning and arrive mid-day at most - but not on this day - altho thats no guarantee of thunderstorm avoidance. ADSB and XM weather are also delayed by many minutes during which a cumulus cloud can easily develop into a plane wrecker. In this case I should have landed earlier given the deteriorating forecast and checked the weather or let the thunderstorm cloud pass.

 

Anyway it was a good lesson

[Jeff_S]

Quote: FlyDave

Actually, two instances.  And not just bent, totalled.

[John Pleisse]

Quote: bd32322

Robert: one excellent book you can read about weather flying in general is "Weather Flying" by Robert N Buck. It has sections for VFR pilots also but its mostly for IFR pilots.

[wiguy]

 One should err on the conservative side. Lots of talk about XM weather lately, that aside I still feel it is a valuable safety feature.

[GaryP1007]

Good example of how it can change fast John.  Good insight by all.

[Piloto]

In my younger days as a radar engineer I flew thru real bad weather (Convair 580) including windshear for in-situ measurements of the radar performance. One important rule I always keep in mind is that it takes airspeed to break a plane, either on the ground or in the air. Whenever in the proximity of thunderstorm or during descent it is advisable to slow down. Some pilots try to get quickly out of the turbulent conditions by diving at high speed which with turbulence imposes overstress on the airframe. My rule in a Mooney: slow down to 110 kts IAS, ride the up/down drafts. Better to be tossed than broken. If equipped with XM look for the lowest cloud tops if there is no radar painting. Turbulence is not always associated with radar returns but with cumulus build up which has no precipitation so onboard radar will not help. Satellite view with temp gradients (shades) will help you in assesing cloud tops. Lowest tops (gray shade) less turbulence. Highest tops (white shade) more turbulence.

José

 

 

[WardHolbrook]

People buy their all-weather, FIKI certified travel pods thinking that somehow that's all they need, as if just having the equipment will keep them safe. What they don't realize is that having the equipment available to them is only 20% of the safety equasion. What they fail to understand is that they must also have the other 80% - the skill, judgement, and experience that is necessary. You know, all of the other stuff that you need that money can't buy. To paraphrase the most interesting man in the world, "Stay safe my friends."   

[jlunseth]

I have XM on the panel and I consider it a lifesaver, or at least a trip saver.  But as good as it is, my personal rule is to use it only in conjunction with the Mk I eyeball.  I won't follow the XM into a "hole" in the weather unless I can see the hole, and that means, for me, no night flights through convective weather.

[Gilt]

I have XM also, it's a good advisory. But don't forget about asking ATC for Wx info. They saved my a$$ many times back in the day flying checks...

[jlunseth]

Curious what ATC has that is better than what I have.  The only thing I can think of are current Pireps from the last guy that did what you are about to try, but I have eyes on the weather and they do not.  

 

[201er]

Quote: jlunseth

Curious what ATC has that is better than what I have.  The only thing I can think of are current Pireps from the last guy that did what you are about to try, but I have eyes on the weather and they do not.  

[jlunseth]

Well, I am turbo so maybe my perspective is a little different.  I can't think of a time when I was buried in IMC for a long time, I am normally above it and looking for a route around the convective activity on top, where I can see.  But ATC does not have significantly better radar than the NEXRAD I have on the panel.  I can't think of many reasons to delegate weather decisions to ATC.  Pre-NEXRAD yes, but not anymore.

[garytex]

Robert

jlunseth has it right.  Use all the tools, but seeing is primary.  My personal rule: If I cant see, I don't go. It's not just thunderstorms, vfr into imc is a perennial killer.  Hell, ifr into imc is a perennial killer.  I bought my current plane from a 20,000 hr airline captain that started with Eastern in DC-3s, and ended in 777s on Pacific routes. He did not consider single pilot single engine piston hard ifr safe enough to do in his own plane.  I think he's on to something there.  I travel for business, fly a couple of days almost every week, vfr only.  But I have some flex in my schedule, and set my schedule for forecast vfr days, and then if it isn't vfr, jump in the car or go commercial.  I find The Weekly Planner on the weather channel website particularly handy.  

Piloto also has it right about slowing down, also a good tool in lowered viz.  Your observation about the wx related fatalities is right on.  Take weather out, by using good weather sense, going in the car when the weather is bad, landing short to sort out weather that doesn't seem right, and the numbers get safer than driving.  Use and expand your weather knowledge, get some kind of cockpit radar, watch the weather forecasts every day, notice when the weather is better or worse than forecast, learn from your experiences, use your good judgement, and set some inviolable personal limits.  We all like flying, but it's not worth dying for.

Gary   

[garytex]

Robert

jlunseth has it right.  Use all the tools, but seeing is primary.  My personal rule: If I cant see, I don't go. It's not just thunderstorms, vfr into imc is a perennial killer.  Hell, ifr into imc is a perennial killer.  I bought my current plane from a 20,000 hr airline captain that started with Eastern in DC-3s, and ended in 777s on Pacific routes. He did not consider single pilot single engine piston hard ifr safe enough to do in his own plane.  I think he's on to something there.  I travel for business, fly a couple of days almost every week, vfr only.  But I have some flex in my schedule, and set my schedule for forecast vfr days, and then if it isn't vfr, jump in the car or go commercial.  I find The Weekly Planner on the weather channel website particularly handy.  

Piloto also has it right about slowing down, also a good tool in lowered viz.  Your observation about the wx related fatalities is right on.  Take weather out, by using good weather sense, going in the car when the weather is bad, landing short to sort out weather that doesn't seem right, and the numbers get safer than driving.  Use and expand your weather knowledge, get some kind of cockpit radar, watch the weather forecasts every day, notice when the weather is better or worse than forecast, learn from your experiences, use your good judgement, and set some inviolable personal limits.  We all like flying, but it's not worth dying for.

Gary   

[jlunseth]

I am not quite that conservative.  I am not allergic to IMC.  I fly long cross countries often, and there is nearly always some kind of weather issue to deal with on trips of that length.  I just know the limits of my NEXRAD, it is a great tool, but not real time weather. 

One advantage of a turbo is that there are very few circumstances where you are unable to get above an overcast deck.  Above the deck your view of any convective activity is way better.  It is often possible, using NEXRAD, to fly around a front rather than trying to penetrate frontal activity.  In the few cases where I have penetrated a front rather than flying around or just landing and waiting, it has been circumstances where I could verify by sight that the route through the front that NEXRAD was painting, actually was that - a route through and not a box.

NEXRAD is great stuff, as are some of the other things now available in "glass." I use them.  It is important not to be stupid about how you use them.

[M20F]

Quote: jetdriven

Both had XM weather onboard as well.

 

[FloridaMan]

Those of you with stormscopes: can you pick your way through using a combination of the scope and XM? 

[fantom]

Quote: Antares

Those of you with stormscopes: can you pick your way through using a combination of the scope and XM?