Planning a Trip Over The Rockies

[NW_PILOT]

Hello, everyone I am wanting to take a flight from "COE" Coeur D'Alene, ID
to "GTF" Great Falls, MT I was wanting to do this in my Cessna 150 Any
advice or helpful hints from some one thats done the trip over the Rockies
in a 150 I know I will have to be at really high altitudes just wondering on
how well the 150 will perform.

[Greg Copeland]

On Fri, 09 Jul 2004 00:24:41 -0700, NW_PILOT wrote:

> Hello, everyone I am wanting to take a flight from "COE" Coeur D'Alene, ID
> to "GTF" Great Falls, MT I was wanting to do this in my Cessna 150 Any
> advice or helpful hints from some one thats done the trip over the Rockies
> in a 150 I know I will have to be at really high altitudes just wondering on
> how well the 150 will perform.

The advice that I've heard most often is, get some classes in mountain
flying. They should be able to teach you about things ranging from what
gear to carry to the types of planes & equipment to fly, to safely fit
your mission.


Greg

[Happy Dog]

"NW_PILOT" > wrote in message
...
> Hello, everyone I am wanting to take a flight from "COE" Coeur D'Alene, ID
> to "GTF" Great Falls, MT I was wanting to do this in my Cessna 150 Any
> advice or helpful hints from some one thats done the trip over the Rockies
> in a 150 I know I will have to be at really high altitudes just wondering
on
> how well the 150 will perform.

Get a briefing from an instructor on mountain flying. A 150 will do just
fine. (Watch the takeoff performance tables though.) A bit of wind can
make for a very rough ride if you don't know how to avoid it.

moo

[Newps]

Don't worry about it, just go. The valleys are big and wide. Fly early or
fly late but avoid the middle of the day.




"NW_PILOT" > wrote in message
...
> Hello, everyone I am wanting to take a flight from "COE" Coeur D'Alene, ID
> to "GTF" Great Falls, MT I was wanting to do this in my Cessna 150 Any
> advice or helpful hints from some one thats done the trip over the Rockies
> in a 150 I know I will have to be at really high altitudes just wondering
on
> how well the 150 will perform.
>
>
>

[Blanche]

>On Fri, 09 Jul 2004 00:24:41 -0700, NW_PILOT wrote:
>
>> Hello, everyone I am wanting to take a flight from "COE" Coeur D'Alene, ID
>> to "GTF" Great Falls, MT I was wanting to do this in my Cessna 150 Any
>> advice or helpful hints from some one thats done the trip over the Rockies
>> in a 150 I know I will have to be at really high altitudes just wondering on
>> how well the 150 will perform.

The direct route is never more than 30 nm from an airport and highest
terrain is about 9200 ft and you could probably find a route
that you never need to fly above 85-9500 ft (I don't have the
sectional handy, just my IFR charts).

I agree with the other posters -- a mountain flying course or at
the very least, a mountain flying checkout with an experienced
CFI.

[vincent p. norris]

>> Hello, everyone I am wanting to take a flight from "COE" Coeur D'Alene, ID
>> to "GTF" Great Falls, MT I was wanting to do this in my Cessna 150......
>
>The advice that I've heard most often is, get some classes in mountain
>flying. They should be able to teach you about things ranging from what
>gear to carry to the types of planes & equipment to fly, to safely fit
>your mission.

That's good advice, but you can follow I-90 almost all the way, if I
recall correctly. And that's the prudent way to do it. You won't
have to get very high, you'll have the world's longest runway under
you if you have to land, and there will be civilization nearby if you
need help.

Very easy trip in a Cherokee, so it shouldn't be too difficult in a
150.

vince norris

[Snowbird]

vincent p. norris > wrote in message >...
> >> Hello, everyone I am wanting to take a flight from "COE" Coeur D'Alene, ID
> >> to "GTF" Great Falls, MT I was wanting to do this in my Cessna 150......

> >The advice that I've heard most often is, get some classes in mountain
> >flying. They should be able to teach you about things ranging from what
> >gear to carry to the types of planes & equipment to fly, to safely fit
> >your mission.

I think mountain flying classes are a great thing, but I think there's
a difference between "mountain flying" and "flying from point A to
point B near mountains".

> That's good advice, but you can follow I-90 almost all the way, if I
> recall correctly. And that's the prudent way to do it. You won't
> have to get very high, you'll have the world's longest runway under
> you if you have to land, and there will be civilization nearby if you
> need help.

It's I-90 through Missoula to Helena I think, then I-15N, but that's
a nit. Yes, basically if one does this, you're "flying from point A
to point B along a valley near mountains" and the things one needs
to know decrease a bit. Get out the POH and do some careful study
of the rate of climb vs. altitude tables and takeoff/landing
distances.

As for the C150, the real question is what can THIS C150 do, and the
way to find out is take it out and see how high it will climb with
proper leaning
and attention to how Vy changes with altitude. Pay attention to the
roc you get at various altitudes and compare with book, compare the
service ceiling, and get a "feel" fo how it handles at higher
altitudes.

Avoid flying with winds aloft above 25-30 kts or so unless you're a
glider pilot or get mountain flying training, and try to fly
early in the am or late in the afternoon. Don't expect to get flight
following, file a VFR flight plan, and if you land to fuel somewhere
surrounded by mountains don't count on being able to open it in the
air.

If you plan to make side trips to this and that point of interest
or smaller airports tucked back in the mountains, then the "get
mountain
flying training" advice comes back to the fore, but we and other flat
land pilots who paid attention to DA and performance have managed to
do the "fly from A to B surrounded by mountains" thing without being
bitten.

Good luck and have fun,
Sydney

[John T Lowry]

"NW_PILOT" > wrote in message
...
> Hello, everyone I am wanting to take a flight from "COE" Coeur
D'Alene, ID
> to "GTF" Great Falls, MT I was wanting to do this in my Cessna 150 Any
> advice or helpful hints from some one thats done the trip over the
Rockies
> in a 150 I know I will have to be at really high altitudes just
wondering on
> how well the 150 will perform.
>
>
>

I believe your C150 is only marginal for that part of the world. You can
certainly do it, but be sure to take precautions about wind, to NOT be
at max gross weight, to circle for altitude BEFORE coming to a high
ridge, and to lean/enrichen properly on climbs/descents. Good luck.

[Cub Driver]

>It's I-90 through Missoula to Helena I think, then I-15N, but that's
>a nit.

Thanks for the nit!

What are the high altitudes on this route, and how narrow are the
passes? If I ever bring a Top Cub home, this will be my route.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
Viva Bush! weblog www.vivabush.org

[Blanche]

Cub Driver > wrote:
>
>>It's I-90 through Missoula to Helena I think, then I-15N, but that's
>>a nit.
>
>Thanks for the nit!
>
>What are the high altitudes on this route, and how narrow are the
>passes? If I ever bring a Top Cub home, this will be my route.
>
>all the best -- Dan Ford

Do you have sectionals for your route? The interstates are clearly
marked (altho at times you may need a magnifying glass to find the
"I-90" lettering) as are many (but not all) the passes.

Another source of info are the specific states' Dept. Of Transportation
Aviation Divisions. Many states offer "not-for-navigation" aviation-type
maps identifying best routes.

[Snowbird]

Cub Driver > wrote in message >...
> >It's I-90 through Missoula to Helena I think, then I-15N, but that's
> >a nit.

> Thanks for the nit!

> What are the high altitudes on this route, and how narrow are the
> passes? If I ever bring a Top Cub home, this will be my route.

IIRC the highest pass is less than 6k, and if you can fly at
8 or 9k you'll be above most of the terrain flanking the valleys
so it's comfy for a flatlander.

I'm not the right person to ask about "narrow" because, being a
flatlander, I think it's "narrow" any time I'm flying along
with terrain on either side *g*. People who do mountain flying
tell me there's plenty of room.

At the recent AYA convention there was a chap who had flown a
Tripacer all over South America, including through a 12,000 ft
pass in the Andes. Service ceiling on his plane was 10k, they
circled for an hour and a half in a thermal until they got
the altitude they needed. Amazing story, wish I'd gotten to
hear more of it.

Cheers,
Sydney

[Newps]

"Snowbird" > wrote in message
om...
>
> I'm not the right person to ask about "narrow" because, being a
> flatlander, I think it's "narrow" any time I'm flying along
> with terrain on either side *g*. People who do mountain flying
> tell me there's plenty of room.

Montana does not have narrow valleys. Idaho is the king of narrow, deep
valleys. Here in Montana the valleys can be 10-15 miles wide at the bottom.
Real mountain flying is when you are below the tops just puttin' along
looking at the scenery.


>
> At the recent AYA convention there was a chap who had flown a
> Tripacer all over South America, including through a 12,000 ft
> pass in the Andes. Service ceiling on his plane was 10k, they
> circled for an hour and a half in a thermal until they got
> the altitude they needed. Amazing story, wish I'd gotten to
> hear more of it.
>

Service ceiling is a gross weight number. Get under gross and many things
are possible.

[vincent p. norris]

>What are the high altitudes on this route,....

The terrain across southern Wyoming is about 7000 msl, but it is
relatively flat.

> and how narrow are the passes?

Miles wide.

>If I ever bring a Top Cub home, this will be my route.

Follow the Interstates in the high country and you'll have no problem,
Dan.






>
>all the best -- Dan Ford
>email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)
>
>The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
>The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
>Viva Bush! weblog www.vivabush.org

[Ben Haas]

"John T Lowry" > wrote in message >...
> "NW_PILOT" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Hello, everyone I am wanting to take a flight from "COE" Coeur
> D'Alene, ID
> > to "GTF" Great Falls, MT I was wanting to do this in my Cessna 150 Any
> > advice or helpful hints from some one thats done the trip over the
> Rockies
> > in a 150 I know I will have to be at really high altitudes just
> wondering on
> > how well the 150 will perform.
> >
> >
> >
>
> I believe your C150 is only marginal for that part of the world. You can
> certainly do it, but be sure to take precautions about wind, to NOT be
> at max gross weight, to circle for altitude BEFORE coming to a high
> ridge, and to lean/enrichen properly on climbs/descents. Good luck.

All the comments are very good advice. I fly into and out of the
"Hole" every day and early morning is the best time to fly for sure.
It takes 11,000 msl just to leave the Jackson area altho in N801BH
with that oversized V-8 Ford it is not a problem. Mountian flying is a
beautiful way to see the scenery and the one comment about winds
aloft is the most pertinant. Now, if you observe lenticular clouds
then tie that sucker down, get an adult beverage, and plan for another
day to fly.

Ben Haas N801BH Jackson Hole WY

[[email protected]]

Learn how to quickly get best power during the takeoff roll, using
your mixture control for any higher altitude takeoffs. Expect the
engine smoothness range to get narrower in response to mixture
adjustments at very high altitudes. Do not run full rich on the
ground, or even on takeoff. Some use a full power runup to adjust for
max RPM before starting the roll but I always hesitated to do that to
an engine just before takeoff.

Is this your personal airplane? You want to know its flight and
engine operating characteristics pretty well to minimize the pucker
factor.

Having an EGT gage really helps. I think it should be mandatory on
any carburated engine but that is just the engineer in me showing I
guess....

I flew a 125 HP Tripacer with two of us in it thru that region amost
35 years ago. No problem

Now we go in comparative regal splendor in a 150 HP 172M!

[Peter Duniho]

> wrote in message
om...
> Learn how to quickly get best power during the takeoff roll, using
> your mixture control for any higher altitude takeoffs[...]
> Some use a full power runup to adjust for
> max RPM before starting the roll but I always hesitated to do that to
> an engine just before takeoff.

There's a good reason for doing it BEFORE starting your takeoff roll, and
frankly, adding "fiddling with the mixture" to the things a pilot has to
deal with DURING the takeoff roll seems unwise to me. Never mind the fact
that once the airplane is moving, you will have a much harder time
identifying the point at which the engine is developing maximum power, since
RPM will be increasing as the airplane accelerates.

I have no idea why you'd hesitate to do something proven to be safe, and
which is much less hazardous than your personal procedure, but I hope that
no one else applies your advice to their flights.

> [...]
> Having an EGT gage really helps. I think it should be mandatory on
> any carburated engine but that is just the engineer in me showing I
> guess....

The EGT gauge is not necessary, nor useful, for the purpose of obtaining
maximum power for takeoff. Your RPM gauge will give you a 100% reliable
indication of maximum power, since maximum power will result in maximum RPM
every time. Using the EGT gauge adds an additional layer of indirection,
and you may or may not wind up with the actual maximum power mixture setting
using it.

Pete

[[email protected]]

To each his own I guess.

I have gotten used to glancing at the EGT on my takeoff rolls just to
make sure things are feeding fuel and air, and also running right. I
look for something about 50 to 100 deg F on the rich side of peak.
EGT also tells me if I have loaded up the things with carb ice while
waiting for takeoff. It is the only cross-check that I have to figure
out if the air/fuel metering system is behaving right, and that the
engine is properly extracting energy from the combustion process.

Personally I feel that any new engine installation (such as in a
homebuilt) should have at least a temporary EGT until the
idiosyncracies (sp?) of the air intake system are proven out. I've
seen/heard of several aircraft that have been excessively lean
(especially in the winter) or rich to the point of stumbling when carb
heat is added. The technique of getting a badly iced engine back
requires aggressive leaning, but I don't see that taught anywhere.

How do you lean a constant speed prop aircraft without EGT? I agree
that leaning a fixed pitch prop on the run without an EGT is not good
practice unless you know the engine.

Maybe I am more into this because I am using autofuel.

[Peter Duniho]

> wrote in message
om...
> I have gotten used to glancing at the EGT on my takeoff rolls just to
> make sure things are feeding fuel and air, and also running right.

Monitoring engine gauges is fine. Trying to adjust mixture while rolling on
takeoff is not.

> I look for something about 50 to 100 deg F on the rich side of peak.

Like I said, the EGT (at any time) does not give you nearly as accurate an
indication of maximum power as RPM does during a static runup. Given that
you're happy with a range of 50 degrees, that's doubly true.

> EGT also tells me if I have loaded up the things with carb ice while
> waiting for takeoff. It is the only cross-check that I have to figure
> out if the air/fuel metering system is behaving right, and that the
> engine is properly extracting energy from the combustion process.

Firstly, you can easily do that cross-check during a static full-power
run-up just before takeoff. Secondly, huh? You could easily have carb ice
and still get a normal EGT reading, albeit at a different mixture setting
than normal.

> [...]
> How do you lean a constant speed prop aircraft without EGT?

Funny you should ask. First of all, this thread is about a 150, and you did
mention your TriPacer as well. Both fixed-pitched props.

Secondly, during a static run-up, even a constant speed prop is usually
going to be able to show you maximum power. Keep the prop control to
maximum RPM and for most installations, there won't be enough engine power
to bring the prop to the actual maximum RPM. This is true even at sea
level, but especially true if you're at high density altitude (the situation
we're talking about here), even for higher-powered engines.

> I agree
> that leaning a fixed pitch prop on the run without an EGT is not good
> practice unless you know the engine.

I don't think that adjusting the mixture during the takeoff roll is a good
practice under any circumstance. The takeoff roll is a time during which
you should be trying to minimize workload, not introducing new, optional
items to add to your workload.

On top of everything else, it's my personal practice to keep my hand on the
throttle throughout the takeoff. This is a common technique used by many
pilots and helps ensure that the throttle doesn't accidently vibrate off the
full-power setting, and of course in a twin, makes sure your hands are in
the right place in case of an engine failure below Vmc (in airplanes where
that's an issue). It would be hard to keep one's hand on the throttle at
the same time you're fiddling with the mixture.

> Maybe I am more into this because I am using autofuel.

I don't see what the type of fuel has to do with it.

Pete

[Dan Thomas]

Around here (Western Canada) most of the neophytes who get into
trouble in the mountains crash because of weather considerations or by
entering an upsloping valley that the airplane can't outclimb and the
pilot waits too long before turning around.
Mountain weather is treacherous and can change very rapidly. Pay
attention to the weather briefers. Mountain clouds usually have rocks
in them.
Mountain valleys can be confusing, especially if there's no
highway to follow, and it's easy to turn into a wrong canyon and get
lost real quick. The route should be marked on the map, with compass
headings penciled in on each leg. For anemic airplanes like the 150,
wind direction over the hills can make the difference between climbing
and sinking, as can lift or sink generated by solar heating or shade
on the slopes.

Dan

[Snowbird]

"Newps" > wrote in message >...

> > At the recent AYA convention there was a chap who had flown a
> > Tripacer all over South America, including through a 12,000 ft
> > pass in the Andes. Service ceiling on his plane was 10k, they
> > circled for an hour and a half in a thermal until they got
> > the altitude they needed. Amazing story, wish I'd gotten to
> > hear more of it.

> Service ceiling is a gross weight number. Get under gross and many things
> are possible.

Apparently they were at or close to max gross weight (what I assume you mean).
It was all lift.

I believe it -- two people, full fuel, sensible emergency supplies, tools,
some parts, etc for a several months trip sounds like max gross weight
in a Tripacer to me.

Cheers,
Sydney

[Journeyman]

In article >, NW_PILOT wrote:
> Hello, everyone I am wanting to take a flight from "COE" Coeur D'Alene, ID
> to "GTF" Great Falls, MT I was wanting to do this in my Cessna 150 Any
> advice or helpful hints from some one thats done the trip over the Rockies
> in a 150 I know I will have to be at really high altitudes just wondering on
> how well the 150 will perform.

Some good advice on this thread already.

By coincidence, you posted this the day I was making a similar trip
in the opposite direction in an Arrow. On Thursday, we overflew
Billings, MT and overnighted in Bozeman. Next day (Friday), our first
leg was BZN to COE (destination was Seattle, which we made on the
second leg).

We did it at 8500', well above the valley floor. Flew along the I-90,
you can't miss it. Occasionally cut corners since we were high enough.

Don't have performance charts handy, but I'm sure you can get up to
8.5 in a 150. Remember your D.A., the airplane may think it's at 9000
or 10,000. Climb rate may not be the best. It's better to climb while
circling (or shuttling back and forth) than to try to outclimb rising
terrain.

Once you get to that altitude, as Sydney points out, you're not really
flying in the mountains, you're flying over the mountains. Best to
do it in good VFR conditions. Weather can be iffy.

Do the trip. The scenery is awesome.


Morris

[Ron Lee]

) wrote:

>Learn how to quickly get best power during the takeoff roll, using
>your mixture control for any higher altitude takeoffs.

I start my engine with the mixture set near normal best setting. Then
lean another quarter inch or so to taxi. Push in the mixture a bit
rich to perform a mixture RPM test around 1700 RPM. Mixture is
adjusted to maximum RPM.

Airport altitude around 6880'. Density altitude during the summer can
approach 10,000'.

Ron Lee