Personal Weather Minimums

[FryGuy]

I just wanted to open a discussion regarding other's personal weather
minimums for VFR flights. I recently received my PPL ASEL certificate in
July and most of the days that I have flown have been very nice days.
Yesterday though I got caught a bit off guard and it prompted me to set a
few minimums for myself.

The sky was perfectly clear, the temperature was mid 50's but it was windy
and gusty. In my training I was fairly proficient with cross-winds and my
home airport has two strips so usually I'd be landing with a 45 degree
component or less. Yesterday however winds were sustained around 15 knots
and gusts to 20+. I took off from Wilmington, NC (KILM) in a Cessna 172
and flew a couple of friends to lunch in North Myrtle Beach (KCRE). One of
my friends I found out gets air/sea/car sick very easily and he didn't take
anything before hand. It was a fairly rough ride and a rough day for him.
When we landed in Myrtle the winds of course were roughly 90 degrees but
only around 10 knots so it wasn't that bad. I did well with the landing
but I was a bit nervous. On the return the wind in Wilmington was much
stronger but only about a 60 degree component. The landing wasn't great
but it was safe. When I kicked the rudder to line up the plane I didn't
lower the left wing enough and moved towards the right side of the runway.

I realize that everyone is going to be different based on experience level
but I'm trying to get others thoughts for inexperienced pilots like myself.
Please comment on ceilings, winds, and visibility.

[G.R. Patterson III]

FryGuy wrote:
>
> I just wanted to open a discussion regarding other's personal weather
> minimums for VFR flights.

First off, there are several aspects of weather to consider, but I'll throw my
hat in the ring. I have between 850 and 900 hours, fly a taildragger Maule, and
have a bit over 500 hours in the plane. About 1/3 of my time is cross-country.

As far as wind goes, I will not go if the crosswind component at one of my
destinations is over 20 knots, unless I have an alternate for that destination.
Crosswinds over 15 knots will have me asking the old WWII question "Is this trip
really necessary?". This is especially true if conditions are getting worse;
weather has been known to move faster than forecast.

I will not fly into potential icing conditions. I cancelled one trip because the
freezing level was 0' AGL at my planned overnight stop and rain was forecast for
sometime that afternoon or evening.

If conditions are stable, I will fly in ceilings as low as 1,500', especially
if conditions are expected to improve along my route.

If conditions are stable, I will fly in visibility of 3 miles in haze. If the
ceiling is low, I want better visibility.

The worst I've been in was a lowering ceiling of about 1,000' in rain. I could
see out of the left side of the windshield about as far as you can normally see
things at 600' AGL. I put down at the first airport I came to. If there had not
been one fairly close, I would have returned to the one I had just left (which
was in better weather).

I'm also very leery of fog. I will set down if the dew point/temperature spread
is getting close.

Another "soft" rule I have is to not fly long distances when the weather turns
out different from yesterday's forecast. If it was supposed to be lousy weather
and turns out to be CAVU, I stay close to home. The weather people obviously
don't have clue today.

George Patterson
Some people think they hear a call to the priesthood when what they really
hear is a tiny voice whispering "It's indoor work with no heavy lifting".

[Roy Smith]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote:
> Another "soft" rule I have is to not fly long distances when the
> weather turns out different from yesterday's forecast. If it was
> supposed to be lousy weather and turns out to be CAVU, I stay close
> to home. The weather people obviously don't have clue today.

If the forecast is a bust, it's good to think about *why* it was wrong.

Weather changes for two basic reasons -- either the qualities of the
airmass where your at has changed, or a different airmass has moved in.
Let's say yesterday they were forecasting today to be rainshowers,
thunderstorms, and strong gusty winds, but it turns out it's really
CAVU. It could just be that an approaching cold front got here faster
than expected and the frontal mess is already past. One quick look at
the weather map might show you that there's a high over the midwest and
perfect weather clear out to colorado. Surely that's no reason to
cancel a trip?

[vincent p. norris]

> I'm trying to get others thoughts for inexperienced pilots like myself.
>Please comment on ceilings, winds, and visibility.

I live in central PA, where the airports are usually in the valleys
and the ridges are typically a thousand feet higher, so I won't set
out on a VFR cross-country unless the ceiling at the airport is at
least 2000. If it's less than that, I file IFR.

I'll also file IFR if the viz is less than six miles; it may be less a
few miles from here.

The ridges are aligned 060-240. A NW wind at 20k or more can produce
serious turbulence (but also produce excellent soaring conditions). A
SW wind of the same velocity is not as turbulent.

vince norris

[Matthew P. Cummings]

On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 17:49:41 +0000, FryGuy wrote:

> I realize that everyone is going to be different based on experience level
> but I'm trying to get others thoughts for inexperienced pilots like myself.
> Please comment on ceilings, winds, and visibility.

I like to fly at least 1,000 AGL, so the ceiling would be that which gives
me the clearance to legally fly, it varies depending on where I fly
however, i.e. rough terrain it goes up.

Winds, depends on if I'm flying by myself or passengers. I'll accept a
very rough ride by myself, less so with passengers. As a general rule I
don't fly passengers when the wind gets above 25 knots on the ground.
I'll fly up to 30 knots as long as I know I can takeoff and land within
the limitations of my plane, I like a 5 knot margin on it, so if my plane
will handle 15 knots crosswind, then I won't fly away from the pattern if
the winds exceed 10 knots crosswind either where I'm going or coming back
to. Too much risk of not being able to land where I take off from.

Visibility depends on the direction I fly and what I'm doing. 3 miles is
no fun on a cross country, yet I would do 5. What you have to realize is
that if you have 3 miles visibility when you are flying away from the sun,
you won't have that flying into the sun, so that's why the direction is
important, i.e. AWOS may claim 5 miles, but you try flying with that 5
miles into the sun and you'll quickly find it's less, at least with the
AWOS at our field it works that way. So you'll notice my minimums vary
according to the type of flying I'll be doing. Even though you can
legally fly with 1 mile vis in G you'll be taking a big risk in doing so
because it can quickly go less, same goes with 3 miles vis.

I think you'll find there is no single figure that will work for a
minimum, it's how they all fit together and how you feel that day that
determines if I fly.

[Snowbird]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message >...

> Another "soft" rule I have is to not fly long distances when the weather turns
> out different from yesterday's forecast. If it was supposed to be lousy weather
> and turns out to be CAVU, I stay close to home. The weather people obviously
> don't have clue today.

George,

I would say the "devil is in the details" here.

ie, if it was supposed to be lousy wx but is CAVU, why? Is there
a frontal system approaching which has slowed down, leaving its
bad wx parked somewhere else? Or is there a frontal system which
blew through faster than forecast leaving everything clear and
blue for miles in its wake?

I guess I don't see the point of staying home categorically if
the wx is different than forecast. The question is "why"?

Cheers,
Sydney

[C J Campbell]

We require 3000' and five miles visibility for all student solo flights,
with maximum crosswinds of six knots. I recommend that new private pilots
maintain those minimums for some time, preferably until they start their
instrument training.

[G.R. Patterson III]

Snowbird wrote:
>
> I guess I don't see the point of staying home categorically if
> the wx is different than forecast. The question is "why"?

You and Roy are correct. That's why it's a "soft" rule.

George Patterson
Some people think they hear a call to the priesthood when what they really
hear is a tiny voice whispering "It's indoor work with no heavy lifting".

[Michael]

"C J Campbell" > wrote
> We require 3000' and five miles visibility for all student solo flights,
> with maximum crosswinds of six knots. I recommend that new private pilots
> maintain those minimums for some time, preferably until they start their
> instrument training.

As a contrasting opinion, I consider those limitations appropriate to
a newly soloed student who is still having problems with crosswind
landings and navigation by pilotage, and that's about all. They are
both overly restrictive for most normal conditions and overly
simplistic. I would consider sending someone to the checkride who
actually needed such limitations for safety to be a gross abdication
of instructor responsibility. Such minimums are absolutely not
appropriate for a certificated pilot. I wouldn't even accept an
instrument student who needed (or felt he needed) such weather
minimums.

Personal minimums are a lot more complex than a simple statement of
ceiling, vis, and crosswind component. What constitutes an acceptable
ceiling greatly depends on terrain, obstructions, and visibility under
the ceiling. It also depends a lot on WHY the ceiling is what it is,
and what it can reasonably be expected to do as the flight progresses.
Over flatlands in good vis and stable weather, 3000 is clearly
excessive. In the mountains in poor vis, it may not be nearly enough.

Adequate visibility is another can of worms. Five miles (or even
three) is plenty in daylight, well above terrain, over land, if
navigation can be assured (either by following a road or
electronically). Try that trick over water or desolate terrain at
night, and your instrument attittude flying skills better be in good
shape.

Crosswinds are similarly complicated. A competent pilot really
shouldn't need ANY crosswind minimum. Obviously this does not mean
that he should be able to handle unlimited crosswinds - nobody can do
that. However, it DOES mean he should be able to reliably asess the
approach and landing he is making, and make the decision to go around
in a timely manner. With experience, most pilots develop a feel for
what they can and can't handle, depending on the airplane, runway, and
other variables.

Michael

[Richard Russell]

On Mon, 1 Dec 2003 08:15:36 -0800, "C J Campbell"
> wrote:

>We require 3000' and five miles visibility for all student solo flights,
>with maximum crosswinds of six knots. I recommend that new private pilots
>maintain those minimums for some time, preferably until they start their
>instrument training.
>

That would effectively ground me for most of the summer. Things just
don't get that good visibility wise in the PHL area in the hot months.
Rich Russell

[G.R. Patterson III]

C J Campbell wrote:
>
> We require 3000' and five miles visibility for all student solo flights,
> with maximum crosswinds of six knots. I recommend that new private pilots
> maintain those minimums for some time, preferably until they start their
> instrument training.

If all you're going to be doing is day trips, I suppose this is OK, but you
will never be able to handle anything worse if you don't go up in adverse
conditions. I have no argument with those who have a minimum of 3000' and five
(though you won't fly much around here unless you drop that to 2000' and five),
but a pilot needs to learn to handle strong winds, IMO.

Now, if you're used to six knots max, don't pick a day when it's 15 gusting to
20 to get more experience, but within a year of getting your ticket, you should
be able to handle 15 gusting to 20.

George Patterson
Some people think they hear a call to the priesthood when what they really
hear is a tiny voice whispering "It's indoor work with no heavy lifting".

[Paul Sengupta]

Hmm, 3k feet. You'd be pushed to find a clutch of weekends
here in the UK where you'd get 3k consistently. And where I
learned in Florida, we seldom had less than a 6kt crosswind.

Paul

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
> We require 3000' and five miles visibility for all student solo flights,
> with maximum crosswinds of six knots.

[DanH]

FryGuy wrote:
>
> I just wanted to open a discussion regarding other's personal weather
> minimums for VFR flights. I recently received my PPL ASEL certificate in
> July and most of the days that I have flown have been very nice days.
> Yesterday though I got caught a bit off guard and it prompted me to set a
> few minimums for myself.
[snip]

During training, I had to skip landing at a destination during a solo
cross-country trip because of winds. The wind was 20kts, gusts to
29kts, but it was almost straight down the runway so the cross-wind
component was probably within my limits. But the reason I passed on the
landing was that I was not comfortable with taxiing in that kind of
wind.

Here's a question I haven't found an answer to yet:
If you're using proper cross-wind correction during taxiing, how much of
a cross-wind can a 152 take? What personal limits do you have?

DanH

[G.R. Patterson III]

DanH wrote:
>
> Here's a question I haven't found an answer to yet:
> If you're using proper cross-wind correction during taxiing, how much of
> a cross-wind can a 152 take? What personal limits do you have?

The first limit you're likely to hit is the ability of the rudder & steering to
allow you to turn away from the wind. I have maneuvered a Cessna 150 in a 25
knot wind with no problems on the ground. Since it was straight across the
runway, getting the plane down in the first place was an experience I would not
care to repeat often, but she did well after slowing to taxi speed.

With the Maule, I have had to turn 270 degrees into the wind to make a 90 degree
turn to downwind. Wind was something over 15 knots at the time. The highest wind
I've taxied that plane in was gusting at 28.

Wind can be fun, though. Last Sunday, it was 11 knots, pretty much down the
runway. The tailwheel was up by the time I reached the numbers, and I rotated
just after the displaced threshhold. You could hear the jaws dropping in the
Mooney waiting behind me. Almost as good as if I had the big engine.

George Patterson
Some people think they hear a call to the priesthood when what they really
hear is a tiny voice whispering "It's indoor work with no heavy lifting".

[Paul Sengupta]

I did my GFT (General Flight Test) for my PPL in 25G35. Almost
straight down the runway though. The short-field landing was, well,
short! :-)

Paul

"DanH" > wrote in message
...
> During training, I had to skip landing at a destination during a solo
> cross-country trip because of winds. The wind was 20kts, gusts to
> 29kts, but it was almost straight down the runway

[Matthew P. Cummings]

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 10:03:54 -0800, DanH wrote:

> Here's a question I haven't found an answer to yet:
> If you're using proper cross-wind correction during taxiing, how much of
> a cross-wind can a 152 take? What personal limits do you have?

I've heard of them flipped with 45 knot winds. For my limits on taxi
cross-winds, if I'll fly in it I'll taxi in it. 30 knots bounces a 150
around a lot on the ground, but it's never felt like it was going to go
over on me.

[Gene Seibel]

A Tri-Pacer certainly can be. http://pad39a.com/gene/flypix0.html
--
Gene Seibel


>
> I've heard of them flipped with 45 knot winds. For my limits on taxi
> cross-winds, if I'll fly in it I'll taxi in it. 30 knots bounces a 150
> around a lot on the ground, but it's never felt like it was going to go
> over on me.

[Snowbird]

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message >...
> We require 3000' and five miles visibility for all student solo flights,
> with maximum crosswinds of six knots. I recommend that new private pilots
> maintain those minimums for some time, preferably until they start their
> instrument training.

Just out of curiousity, what do you recommend with regard
to runway length?

Cheers,
Sydney

[Andrew Gideon]

C J Campbell wrote:

> We require 3000' and five miles visibility for all student solo flights,
> with maximum crosswinds of six knots. I recommend that new private pilots
> maintain those minimums for some time, preferably until they start their
> instrument training.

I think that a little strict. However, it does raise a problem I noticed
towards the end of my PPL training.

Where I flew too had a limit on soloing students with respect to weather.
It was probably something of the sort you're describing, or perhaps even a
little more strict (I seem to recall 5 kts xwind).

But, after taking the checkride, I was immediately permitted to fly in MVFR.
That seems silly to me. I think that there should be a progression to
"lower" weather, with much attention given - as others here have posted -
to *why* and *what comes next* (ie. are clouds dropping or rising).

Of course, I expect that most of us have followed that progression. But why
no "program" to support this? It could be a part of the PPL, or even a
post-PPL course. It doesn't even need to be regulatory, but just a
recommended set of milestones combining weather flying and weather
knowledge.

In a way, the instrument rating covers some of this. But that doesn't help
someone that, for one reason or another, isn't interested in that rating
(at least at that time).

Actually, this would probably make a good book...except it might be useful
to have local knowledge embedded within such a program.

- Andrew

[C J Campbell]

"Snowbird" > wrote in message
om...
| "C J Campbell" > wrote in message
>...
| > We require 3000' and five miles visibility for all student solo flights,
| > with maximum crosswinds of six knots. I recommend that new private
pilots
| > maintain those minimums for some time, preferably until they start their
| > instrument training.
|
| Just out of curiousity, what do you recommend with regard
| to runway length?


Our school requires instructor permission for runways of less than 2000
feet. The FBO does not allow operation of any of its aircraft from unpaved
runways, although I can take my own airplane anywhere I want. We also
require that rented airplanes stay within Washington, Oregon, and Idaho,
although exceptions are made on a case by case basis.

I also will not sign off on a cross country that takes a student pilot over
the Cascades unless I am satisfied with his mountain flying abilities. The
Cascades are very dangerous for inexperienced pilots. You can find extreme
wind shear, turbulence, blind canyons with unforecast pockets of IFR, and
constant mountain obscuration. But the worst danger is the icing, which is
so bad that when the Concorde was being developed it was brought over here
for testing in severe icing conditions.

Among renter pilots at TIW, special VFR is routine. We get a lot of low
clouds that hang right over the field and you can see sunshine out over the
water just off the end of the runway.

[Teacherjh]

>>
But, after taking the checkride, I was immediately permitted to fly in MVFR.
That seems silly to me.
<<

Just because it's permitted doesn't make it smart. As pilots, we are expected
to excercise judgement, as student pilots that expectation is somewhat less
(that's why we're not signed off yet). I think it's best that we actually
=get= to excercise judgement, rather than have it excerciesd for us.

Jos

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[Andrew Gideon]

Teacherjh wrote:

> Just because it's permitted doesn't make it smart. As pilots, we are
> expected to excercise judgement, as student pilots that expectation is
> somewhat less
> (that's why we're not signed off yet). I think it's best that we actually
> =get= to excercise judgement, rather than have it excerciesd for us.

That is a reasonable point. But a course in weather flying, be it pre- or
post-PPL, would still be something useful, I think.

- Andrew

[Teacherjh]

>>
But a course in weather flying, be it pre- or
post-PPL, would still be something useful, I think.
<<

Yes, you should have gotten one along with your PPL training. That said, you
should never stop learning.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[Andrew Gideon]

Teacherjh wrote:

>>>
> But a course in weather flying, be it pre- or
> post-PPL, would still be something useful, I think.
> <<
>
> Yes, you should have gotten one along with your PPL training. That said,
> you should never stop learning.

More more more!

For whatever reason, I always want to learn more about weather. Even after
the additional education that came with my instrument rating, I still want
more.

There's just something about the dynamics of the atmosphere, and how these
impact us, that's very interesting to me. I like looking at the various
weather "products" available to us, and I'm grateful to have been taught to
use them. But they're like snapshots into a dynamic reality that I want to
understand.

For example, I was looking at the various charts on a day before a day when
wind was predicted. I even read the notes available at places like:

http://iwin.nws.noaa.gov/iwin/ny/discussion.html

but I still couldn't quite grasp how they knew wind was coming tomorrow.
They spoke of airmass movements and exit regions and such and it was
*almost* understandable to me.

I'm actually looking around for meteorology courses in this area, but I'd
still like something with an aviator's bias.

- Andrew

[John Galban]

(Teacherjh) wrote in message >...
> >>
> But a course in weather flying, be it pre- or
> post-PPL, would still be something useful, I think.
> <<
>
> Yes, you should have gotten one along with your PPL training. That said, you
> should never stop learning.

Training in actual weather hardly ever happens around here (Central
AZ). It's quite easy to go through the entire PPL course without
coming withing 200 miles of weather. The worst weather I recall
during my training was a light drizzle under a 5,000 ft. ceiling,
while doing solo pattern work. It sounds laughable now, but with my
level of weather flying experience (zero), I'll admit that I was
pretty nervous about it.

In cases like this, it is hoped that the newly-minted pilot will
have been taught enough about weather and decision-making to make
prudent judgements when the time comes. I immersed myself into
weather flying by baby steps. Like any other type of flying, the key
is to gain the experience gradually, so as not to kill yourself before
you can put that experience to work.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[Michael]

Andrew Gideon > wrote
> Where I flew too had a limit on soloing students with respect to weather.
> It was probably something of the sort you're describing, or perhaps even a
> little more strict (I seem to recall 5 kts xwind).
>
> But, after taking the checkride, I was immediately permitted to fly in MVFR.
> That seems silly to me.

Silly is an awfully mild word. I would say dangerous.

This happens for one of two reasons. First, some instructors are more
concerned with liability (either civil or FAA action) than proper
training. These instructors will have 'boilerplate' restrictions for
students, along the lines you've mentioned. The whole idea is wrong.

Properly used, restrictions are always tailored to the student's
skills and experience. If he hasn't really figured out crosswinds
yet, he soloes with a crosswind limit. Once he gets to the point
where he can handle normal conditions AND has learned to recognize
when he's in over his head and needs to do something else (go around
and try again or even go to a different runway, possibly at another
airport) the crosswind restriction goes away. That doesn't mean he
can handle any amount of crosswind - nobody can - but it means he is
competent to make his own decisions. The same applies to visibility -
if he hasn't been exposed to MVFR (or hasn't learned to figure out
where his limits are) he soloes with a visibility restriction. Once
he has shown the ability to handle MVFR, and to recognize when it's
just too marginal, the restriction goes away. Again, that doesn't
mean he can deal with a mile vis under all conditions - just that he's
now capable of making his own decisions. By the time he goes for the
checkride, the restrictions all need to go away - if he hasn't figured
out what he can handle, he's not ready to be taking passengers and
exposing them to the risk. And yes, this means dual AND solo training
in strong gusty crosswinds and MVFR.

Sometimes the restrictions are set by the flight school. This makes a
statement. The statement is "We don't trust our instructors'
judgment, but we are not going to fire them because it's more
important to keep the planes flying than it is to provide quality
training." Pretty sad, really. It ensures the student will be
shortchanged, and will have to figure this stuff out on his own.

> I think that there should be a progression to
> "lower" weather, with much attention given - as others here have posted -
> to *why* and *what comes next* (ie. are clouds dropping or rising).

I think you are absolutely 100% right, and that's how I teach. There
are a few flight schools where I am welcome to teach, but not many.
One of those flight schools is run by an airline pilot who fired his
only full-time instructor because he felt quality instruction was not
being provided. This was at a time when instructors were hard to come
by, and you can bet there were financial consequences.

> Of course, I expect that most of us have followed that progression. But why
> no "program" to support this?

Because half the instructors out there are not competent to teach in
that progression, and it's not required to get a PPL. PTS does not
stand for 'Perfect Training Syllabus' but that's how it's often used.

Michael

[tony roberts]

> I just wanted to open a discussion regarding other's personal weather
> minimums for VFR flights.

I own my own aircraft and my VERY expensive insurance company asks,
before they renew my insurance, if I have had any accidents.

As I love flying, and wish to continue to fly, this is always foremost
in my mind when I make weather decisions.

As far as visibility goes, I suggest that it depends on where you are
flying. If you are flying over very familiar terrain, with a GPS, 5
miles or even 3 miles viz is a bit of a challenge (compared to 15 miles
viz) but it is not an insurmountable problem.

If you are away from home, without a GPS it is a challenge.

Your question appears to be black or white - but there are many shades
of grey. Think of it along the lines that your insurer may not renew you
if you have an accident, and then make your go/no-go decision. All of
this, quite apart from your perceived risk of goiung down, which should
of course be your first consideratiuon.

For myself I don't want to be a hero, and the macho thing never did much
for me. I just want to fly safely, keep doing so, have fun and keep my
insurance company happy.
There is never a good enough reason to take off in weather that you are
less than comfortable with.




Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Almost Instrument :)
Cessna 172H C-GICE