Weather Flying - Buck

[[email protected]]

I'm recently received my IFR ticket and flew in actual a couple weeks
ago for only the 2nd time. I picked up some rime ice at 9000' in a calm
stratus layer. Scared the &#&((*@# out of me! I promptly turned back
for home.

I just didn't feel like I got any real training for this in the IFR
work. Yes, I know the ground school stuff and I scored high on the
written, but that's wholly different.

I received Weather Flying by Buck from Amazon yesterday. And although
I'm only through chapter 2, it seems to be an outstanding book. I
highly recommend it.

[Mitty]

On 11/2/2005 10:44 AM, wrote the following:
> I'm recently received my IFR ticket and flew in actual a couple weeks
> ago for only the 2nd time. I picked up some rime ice at 9000' in a calm
> stratus layer. Scared the &#&((*@# out of me! I promptly turned back
> for home.
>
The hood is not actual. Fly actual whenever you can. Get a CFII or a good
instrument pilot to go with you and fly approaches whenever ceilings get low.
Or go alone if you are not in a TRACON environment as we are in Minneapolis. My
target range is 700-900 because my home airport doesn't have an ILS. My goal is
to stay current on a 3 month basis (not 6) strictly by flying actual, though I
can't always achieve this.

> I just didn't feel like I got any real training for this in the IFR
> work. Yes, I know the ground school stuff and I scored high on the
> written, but that's wholly different.

Yes. Re ice, my CFII and I flew in ice a couple of times during training (very
benign, above freezing below the clouds, good ceilings, and the layer only 2000
feet thick) and I have always been grateful to have gotten the experience,
regardless of what the FARs might say about it.

>
> I received Weather Flying by Buck from Amazon yesterday. And although
> I'm only through chapter 2, it seems to be an outstanding book. I
> highly recommend it.
>

One of the three books that are permanent on my bookshelf. The others being
Langewiesche's "Stick and Rudder" and Taylor's "Instrument Flying." Buck's
other books are fun, too.

[A Lieberman]

On Wed, 02 Nov 2005 11:25:57 -0600, Mitty wrote:

> The hood is not actual. Fly actual whenever you can. Get a CFII or a good
> instrument pilot to go with you and fly approaches whenever ceilings get low.
> Or go alone if you are not in a TRACON environment as we are in Minneapolis. My
> target range is 700-900 because my home airport doesn't have an ILS. My goal is
> to stay current on a 3 month basis (not 6) strictly by flying actual, though I
> can't always achieve this.

I strongly agree with Mitty above. Like Mitty, I long for those low
ceiling days, and like Mitty, because my home airport only has a VOR
approach, I cannot leave unless I am assured ceilings are 900 or higher for
my return home.

I had a great instructor who lived and breathed hard IFR and I took several
days off so I could get as much actual in. There was one lesson where we
ended up doing three missed approaches for the real reasons it was designed
for and diverting to another airport nearby that had an ILS. We went right
down to the ILS minimums. This was the absolute best thing that happened
to me as when I did my first solo in IMC, I did an ILS broke out at 1000
feet and felt like I had tons of time.

I fly at minimum once a month instrument approaches. I'd like to do it
twice a month. Even on a severe clear day when I do not log it as an
approach, I still want to fly approaches so that I can maintain that
precise feeling needed on approaches.

> Yes. Re ice, my CFII and I flew in ice a couple of times during training (very
> benign, above freezing below the clouds, good ceilings, and the layer only 2000
> feet thick) and I have always been grateful to have gotten the experience,
> regardless of what the FARs might say about it.

Never had icing, however, one lesson my CFI and I were in clouds right at
32 degrees. Water was beading up the windscreen, so as long as that was
happening, we were reasonably safe.

Allen

[[email protected]]

A Lieberman wrote:

> Never had icing, however, one lesson my CFI and I were in clouds right at
> 32 degrees. Water was beading up the windscreen, so as long as that was
> happening, we were reasonably safe.

I wouldn't trust that at all. The collection efficiency for ice
increases as the surface gets narrower (towards the wind), so you can
have ice on your antennas when there's still water on your tail; ice on
your tail when there's still water on your wings; and ice on your wings
when there's still water on your windshield.

Fortunately, my Warrior (like most or all Piper PA-28 models) has an
outside air temperature gauge with a long metal probe sticking straight
out into the airstream from the middle of the windshield. Because the
probe is so narrow, ice will form on it before just about anything else
(except maybe the antennas, which I cannot see). I use it as my
early-warning device, and divert to warmer and/or dryer conditions as
soon as the first tiny piece of ice forms on the end of the probe.


All the best,


David

[Mitty]

On 11/2/2005 6:18 PM, A Lieberman wrote the following:

> Never had icing, however, one lesson my CFI and I were in clouds right at
> 32 degrees. Water was beading up the windscreen, so as long as that was
> happening, we were reasonably safe.

Not if you have the defroster turned on. The windshield will be the warmest
surface on the airplane. Happened to me on Monday this week, water beading and
running on the windshield, ice beginning to form on the OAT probe and the
leading edges. Nothing dangerous, but you can bet I requested an altitude change.

[skym]

FWIW, I agree with all of Mitty's three books as very good; I have all
three. However, I have found that Machado's two books -on basic pilot
training (I forget the title) and "The Instrument Pilot's Survival
Handbook"- to be right up there with them.

[Jose]

> Fortunately, my Warrior (like most or all Piper PA-28 models) has an
> outside air temperature gauge with a long metal probe sticking straight
> out into the airstream from the middle of the windshield. Because the
> probe is so narrow, ice will form on it before just about anything else
> (except maybe the antennas, which I cannot see). I use it as my
> early-warning device, and divert to warmer and/or dryer conditions as
> soon as the first tiny piece of ice forms on the end of the probe.

Don't count on it. I flew into ice in the Blue Ridge mountains; I was
keeping a good eye on that temperature probe and other things sticking
out, but the wings got what I now in retrospect realize was a nice
coating of clear ice while the probe stayed clean as a whistle. Then
all of a sudden the windshield iced up - bang.

I declared an emergency and got vectors to warmer air and an ILS. It
took a while for the ice to come off, but it did before I landed.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Matt Whiting]

wrote:
> A Lieberman wrote:
>
>
>>Never had icing, however, one lesson my CFI and I were in clouds right at
>>32 degrees. Water was beading up the windscreen, so as long as that was
>>happening, we were reasonably safe.
>
>
> I wouldn't trust that at all. The collection efficiency for ice
> increases as the surface gets narrower (towards the wind), so you can
> have ice on your antennas when there's still water on your tail; ice on
> your tail when there's still water on your wings; and ice on your wings
> when there's still water on your windshield.

Do you have a freezer in your antennas that freezes the water on them
when it is still above freezing elsewhere (i.e., water on the tail)?


> Fortunately, my Warrior (like most or all Piper PA-28 models) has an
> outside air temperature gauge with a long metal probe sticking straight
> out into the airstream from the middle of the windshield. Because the
> probe is so narrow, ice will form on it before just about anything else
> (except maybe the antennas, which I cannot see). I use it as my
> early-warning device, and divert to warmer and/or dryer conditions as
> soon as the first tiny piece of ice forms on the end of the probe.

Yes, ice will form first on small radius surfaces, but not until at or
below freezing temperatures. If you still have water on your wings or
tail, then you won't have ice on your OAT probe.


Matt

[[email protected]]

Matt Whiting wrote:

> Yes, ice will form first on small radius surfaces, but not until at or
> below freezing temperatures. If you still have water on your wings or
> tail, then you won't have ice on your OAT probe.

>From what I've observed so far, there's a zone of ambiguity between
about 1 degC and -5 degC where supercooled droplets may or may not
stick to the airframe as ice. I've seen ice form on the tip of my OAT
probe while there were still drops of water running down its sides, as
well as over the rest of the airframe. Freezing is not an
all-or-nothing proposition.


All the best,


David

[Greg Farris]

Have not yet read Buck's Weather Flying, but I've heard so many glowing
recommendations - this one being just the most recent - that I now know
what to ask for for Christmas.

[Mitty]

On 11/2/2005 9:39 PM, skym wrote the following:
> FWIW, I agree with all of Mitty's three books as very good; I have all
> three. However, I have found that Machado's two books -on basic pilot
> training (I forget the title) and "The Instrument Pilot's Survival
> Handbook"- to be right up there with them.
>

There is class of good books that require some tolerance on the part of the
reader. Machado's, for example. I find his "humor" to be very tedious. He
just wears me out, in print and in person. YMMV. I have sold off the Machado
books that I had although I will agree that the content is good.

Another good book in this "tolerance" class is "Everything Explained for the
Professional Pilot." It's a good thing that we are no longer using hand set
type, as the author of this book would have run the type case out of bold and
out of exclamation points by the middle of his second chapter. It is a
graphical train wreck but really does live up to its title. Everything is
there. This one, I will continue to own.

[Mitty]

His "North Star Over My Shoulder" was being remaindered a while back. I think I
paid three or four dollars for mine, brand new. It is his autobiography and is
really great reading. Buy yourself a Thanksgiving present!

His "Flying Know-How" is also worth tracking down. I think it may be out of
print, though.

On 11/3/2005 5:59 AM, Greg Farris wrote the following:
> Have not yet read Buck's Weather Flying, but I've heard so many glowing
> recommendations - this one being just the most recent - that I now know
> what to ask for for Christmas.
>

[Bob Gardner]

I don't know if Captain Buck has updated his book recently, but my copy says
nothing about super-cooled large droplets. The Roselawn, Illinois accident
was attributed to ice accretion of droplets far larger than those
contemplated by the Part 25 certification standards, and led to 25 or so
Airworthiness Directives revising the Flight Manuals of a bunch of
turboprops. IOW, Buck is good, but he is not the last word on icing.

Sporty's sells "In-Flight Icing," a book by a couple of icing experts
copyrighted in 1999. Every serious instrument pilot should read it.

Bob Gardner

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> I'm recently received my IFR ticket and flew in actual a couple weeks
> ago for only the 2nd time. I picked up some rime ice at 9000' in a calm
> stratus layer. Scared the &#&((*@# out of me! I promptly turned back
> for home.
>
> I just didn't feel like I got any real training for this in the IFR
> work. Yes, I know the ground school stuff and I scored high on the
> written, but that's wholly different.
>
> I received Weather Flying by Buck from Amazon yesterday. And although
> I'm only through chapter 2, it seems to be an outstanding book. I
> highly recommend it.
>

[Jim Burns]

I highly recommend http://aircrafticing.grc.nasa.gov/courses.html# NASA's
online aircraft icing course as a supplement to every pilots weather
library.
Jim

"Bob Gardner" > wrote in message
...
> I don't know if Captain Buck has updated his book recently, but my copy
says
> nothing about super-cooled large droplets. The Roselawn, Illinois accident
> was attributed to ice accretion of droplets far larger than those
> contemplated by the Part 25 certification standards, and led to 25 or so
> Airworthiness Directives revising the Flight Manuals of a bunch of
> turboprops. IOW, Buck is good, but he is not the last word on icing.
>
> Sporty's sells "In-Flight Icing," a book by a couple of icing experts
> copyrighted in 1999. Every serious instrument pilot should read it.
>
> Bob Gardner
>
> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> > I'm recently received my IFR ticket and flew in actual a couple weeks
> > ago for only the 2nd time. I picked up some rime ice at 9000' in a calm
> > stratus layer. Scared the &#&((*@# out of me! I promptly turned back
> > for home.
> >
> > I just didn't feel like I got any real training for this in the IFR
> > work. Yes, I know the ground school stuff and I scored high on the
> > written, but that's wholly different.
> >
> > I received Weather Flying by Buck from Amazon yesterday. And although
> > I'm only through chapter 2, it seems to be an outstanding book. I
> > highly recommend it.
> >
>
>

[Mike Rapoport]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>A Lieberman wrote:
>
>> Never had icing, however, one lesson my CFI and I were in clouds right at
>> 32 degrees. Water was beading up the windscreen, so as long as that was
>> happening, we were reasonably safe.
>
> I wouldn't trust that at all. The collection efficiency for ice
> increases as the surface gets narrower (towards the wind), so you can
> have ice on your antennas when there's still water on your tail; ice on
> your tail when there's still water on your wings; and ice on your wings
> when there's still water on your windshield.
>
> Fortunately, my Warrior (like most or all Piper PA-28 models) has an
> outside air temperature gauge with a long metal probe sticking straight
> out into the airstream from the middle of the windshield. Because the
> probe is so narrow, ice will form on it before just about anything else
> (except maybe the antennas, which I cannot see). I use it as my
> early-warning device, and divert to warmer and/or dryer conditions as
> soon as the first tiny piece of ice forms on the end of the probe.
>
>
> All the best,
>
>
> David


Whether the droplets are supercooled or not has nothing to do with
collection efficiency. Collection efficiency is simply the number of
droplets which impact a surface instead of going around it with the airflow.
Collection efficiency is a function of the mass of the droplets, airspeed
and the size and radius of the collecting surface. If the droplets hitting
the windscreen are not freezing (assuming the windscreen is not heated) then
the droplets hitting the tail are not freezing either.

Mike
MU-2

[Jose]

> If the droplets hitting the windscreen are not
> freezing (assuming the windscreen is not heated) then
> the droplets hitting the tail are not freezing either.

I don't think that's true at all. The airflow around the windscreen is
different from the airflow around the tail. The temperature of the
inside of the cockpit (which influences the outside of the windscreen)
is different from the temperature inside the tail. The heat capacity of
aluminum is different from the heat capacity of plexiglass. All these
impact collection efficiency.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Mike Rapoport]

collection efficiency is a measure of what percentage of droplets will hit
the surface...nothing more. It has nothing to do with *whether* ice will
form on a surface, only how much.

Mike
MU-2


"Jose" > wrote in message
...
>> If the droplets hitting the windscreen are not freezing (assuming the
>> windscreen is not heated) then the droplets hitting the tail are not
>> freezing either.
>
> I don't think that's true at all. The airflow around the windscreen is
> different from the airflow around the tail. The temperature of the inside
> of the cockpit (which influences the outside of the windscreen) is
> different from the temperature inside the tail. The heat capacity of
> aluminum is different from the heat capacity of plexiglass. All these
> impact collection efficiency.
>
> Jose
> --
> Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
> for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Jose]

> collection efficiency is a measure of what percentage of droplets will hit
> the surface...nothing more. It has nothing to do with *whether* ice will
> form on a surface, only how much.

Ok, then collection efficiency is not a good measure of what's
important. What I care about is how much of that water will be
=retained= ("collected") as ice.

So, I am concerned about retention efficiency.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Andrew Sarangan]

If you are below freezing in the clouds, don't be surprised if you get
ice. Instead, be pleasantly surprised if you don't get ice. In any
case, flying in icing conditions on your second actual IFR may not be
the best plan.

Did you check the temperature at 9000' before the flight? Were you
watching the temperature gauge? If conditons are right, you should be
expecting ice rather than be surprised by it.

You may also want to get the NASA Icing videos. It is an excellent
source of information, with real inflight footage, and it is
practically free. Sportys sells those videos.

[[email protected]]

Andrew Sarangan wrote:

> If you are below freezing in the clouds, don't be surprised if you get
> ice. Instead, be pleasantly surprised if you don't get ice.

.... unless it's a long way below zero, in which case the clouds
probably consist of ice crystals rather than supercooled water
droplets. I don't worry too much about flying in or through a cloud
layer when the OAT is -20 degC or lower -- the only time you'll get
iced up there there is if there's a lot of lifting action to carry
water droplets up from down low (i.e. the windward side of a mountain
ridge in a strong wind, or a towering cumulus cloud).


All the best,


David

[Mike Rapoport]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Andrew Sarangan wrote:
>
>> If you are below freezing in the clouds, don't be surprised if you get
>> ice. Instead, be pleasantly surprised if you don't get ice.
>
> ... unless it's a long way below zero, in which case the clouds
> probably consist of ice crystals rather than supercooled water
> droplets. I don't worry too much about flying in or through a cloud
> layer when the OAT is -20 degC or lower -- the only time you'll get
> iced up there there is if there's a lot of lifting action to carry
> water droplets up from down low (i.e. the windward side of a mountain
> ridge in a strong wind, or a towering cumulus cloud).
>

Actually you will sometimes find as much ice on the lee side of the mountain
ridge on the rising side of a mountain wave.

Mike
MU-2