Log in

View Full Version : A couple of IFR firsts (long)


Jack Allison[_1_]
December 16th 06, 07:24 AM
I had a trip planned to Hayward (in the SF Bay area) to get an eddy
current inspection done on our prop hub (another story...another chance
to dump some AMUs into the plane should we opt for a new hub).

I'd planned to file IFR no matter what the weather conditions turned out
to be since I'd never done so in that end of the SF bay. Being just
under the SFO bravo airspace, things can get pretty busy so I thought
I'd do it IFR this time. As it turned out, the weather conditions
required filing IFR but the forecasts were decent in terms of freezing
levels and generally nasty weather conditions.

The trip down was more IMC than VMC. Some in/out of the clouds but
mostly just brief glimpses of the ground, no horizon though. When I
pickup the weather at Hayward, they're calling it 1700 overcast and 2
mile visibility in mist. Approx. 25 miles from Hayward we pop out of
the clouds and start getting vectored all over the place as they fit our
spam can into the arrival flow (which includes Oakland, spitting
distance to the North of Hayward). We do a bizarre sequence of 180 and
90 degree turns for 20 minutes in and out of the white puffies before
getting vectored to the final approach course and a descent. Back in
the goo, it's getting bumpier and this approach turns out to be one of
the more challenging ones I've done. It's a localizer approach with a
440 ft MDA and 1 mile vis. I get the approach clearance somewhere
around 9-10 miles out and it's bumpy enough that keeping the localizer
centered and a 500 fpm descent rate is pretty tough. The missed
approach point is .9 DME from the localizer and as I watch the DME count
down, we're still in a big white cotton ball (ok, where did they hide
the airport?). I start thinking seriously about executing the missed
approach as we hit 1.5 miles and we're at approx. 1200 ft (a bit higher
than I should have been). The As the DME clicks down to 1.1 with
absolutely no hint of ground/airport/etc. (anything but cloud) in sight,
it's everything on the throttle quadrant full forward, positive rate
of climb, gear up, flaps up, "Hayward tower, zero four tango going
missed"...followed by "Arrow zero four tango, turn left heading two four
zero, climb and maintain 2000". At this point, I'm thinking all I want
to do is get into VMC conditions and sort things out. I get handed back
to Norcal approach and hear the expected "Arrow zero four tango, say
intentions" after I check in with them. I ask for a minute to sort
things out and they comply with a vector out over the SF bay (not that I
could have seen anything that resembled water below us). By this time,
I'm ready to go land somewhere, eat, and reschedule the prop shop
appointment...so...I request vectors to our alternate, Livermore (which
we managed to see through some holes in the clouds as we were being
vectored all over the place prior to the approach).

As we're headed to Livermore, the controller informs another guy trying
to get to Hayward that the conditions are now 200 ft. overcast. Gee, no
wonder we couldn't see anything...the weather had gone in the toilet in
the 30-40 minute time frame from the ATIS observation to when we were on
the approach. Not uncommon this time of year in that part of the bay.
Still, a good reminder of how quickly things can (and do) change.

The trip back home from Livermore was much less eventful. Maybe 0.1 IMC
on the departure but it was great being able to file/fly IFR as the
visibility was less than wonderful. Back home, the AWOS was calling it
7 miles but it was maybe 4 from 3000 ft.

Firsts, since getting my instrument rating:
- The most IMC time I've logged in one day (3.3 hours of flying, 1.6 IMC)
- First missed approach because I couldn't see the airport (and wasn't
under the hood!)
- First time I've flown two instrument approaches in actual conditions
in a day
- First time I've ever been given a speed restriction. I was #2 for the
approach at Livermore...and must have been behind a C-150 or something.

While the first approach was probably the most challenging one I've
flown post instrument ticket, it also reinforced to me that I had
learned from a good CFII. Looking back on it now, it seemed that, in
the moment, things were happening more from reaction based on training
than thinking "Ok, what should I do?". Quite an amazing thing to look
back on and one that I didn't realize until talking to a non-pilot
friend about the experience and answering his questions.

And, as usual, this turned out to be a great learning experience.
Now...if only the weather cooperates next week so we can try take-2 on
visiting the prop shop.

--
Jack Allison
PP-ASEL-Instrument Airplane

"To become a Jedi knight, you must master a single force. To become
a private pilot you must strive to master four of them"
- Rod Machado

(Remove the obvious from address to reply via e-mail)

Montblack
December 16th 06, 07:58 AM
("Jack Allison" wrote)
>I had a trip planned to Hayward (in the SF Bay area) to get an eddy current
>inspection done on our prop hub (another story...another chance to dump
>some AMUs into the plane should we opt for a new hub).


And what can Santa bring you this year?

"More partners!"


Montblack
(nice write up)

Jay Beckman
December 16th 06, 09:11 AM
"Jack Allison" > wrote in message
. ..
>I had a trip planned to Hayward (in the SF Bay area) to get an eddy current
>inspection done on our prop hub (another story...another chance to dump
>some AMUs into the plane should we opt for a new hub).

<Snip Writeup>

Nice job Jack...

Sounds like you took advantage of all the resources that were available to
you, including ATC.

Jay B

kontiki
December 16th 06, 01:10 PM
Jack Allison wrote:
> I had a trip planned to Hayward (in the SF Bay area) to get an eddy
> current inspection done on our prop hub (another story...another chance
> to dump some AMUs into the plane should we opt for a new hub).

Tell me about the hub/prop situation. Is it a Hartzell?

Jim Burns[_1_]
December 16th 06, 01:55 PM
Great decision making under pressure!! You can be proud of that one. Too
many people go back and try the same approach a second time only to find
worse conditions. Some of those people do not survive.
Good job!
Jim

john smith
December 16th 06, 03:00 PM
I would add one suggestion...
Think about your alternate 50 miles out.
I make my plan for an alternate at that time so there is no "what do we
do now" decision to make during a missed.
This enables you mentally configure to navigate to the alternate before
you begin the approach and have all the charts and approaches for the
alternate ready and waiting before you need them. If the alternate is in
the local area, you can check their weater at this time, also.
I then do a final check of the ATIS for my primary destination by the
time I am 25-30 miles out.


Jim Burns wrote:

>Great decision making under pressure!! You can be proud of that one. Too
>many people go back and try the same approach a second time only to find
>worse conditions. Some of those people do not survive.
>Good job!
>Jim
>
>
>
>

Jack Allison[_1_]
December 16th 06, 03:40 PM
Montblack wrote:
> And what can Santa bring you this year?
>
> "More partners!"

Nah...operating costs are reasonable and availability is *great* given
our setup. A new prop hub would be nice though :-)


--
Jack Allison
PP-ASEL-Instrument Airplane

"To become a Jedi knight, you must master a single force. To become
a private pilot you must strive to master four of them"
- Rod Machado

(Remove the obvious from address to reply via e-mail)

Jack Allison[_1_]
December 16th 06, 03:50 PM
kontiki wrote:

> Tell me about the hub/prop situation. Is it a Hartzell?

Yep, Hartzell props, AD 2006-18-15. Requires an initial eddy current
inspection within 50 hours time in service then every 100 hours
thereafter. Cost for the inspection where I'm having it done is $300.
Figure another $100 for fuel and engine time and we're up to $400 every
100 hours. At the rate we fly (approx 300 hrs/yr), a replacement hub
(available at a discount, IIRC, just south of 2 AMUs) is the likely
option for permanent compliance.

If you're concerned about it, you need to verify your prop serial number
against the AD. If your hub serial number matches the format of the AD
and is a "non-suffix" hub (as in no -A or -B) at the end of the hub
serial number, guess what, you're affected.

--
Jack Allison
PP-ASEL-Instrument Airplane

"To become a Jedi knight, you must master a single force. To become
a private pilot you must strive to master four of them"
- Rod Machado

(Remove the obvious from address to reply via e-mail)

Doug[_1_]
December 16th 06, 04:01 PM
I've always thought going missed is the hardest IFR manuever.
Everything in you is saying "make it" but you have to call it off, full
power and climb.

Jack Allison[_1_]
December 16th 06, 04:06 PM
Yeah, good point...especially if the weather at your destination is on
the edge of minimums and/or likely to change quickly.

I firmly believe in always filing an alternate. For this trip, mine was
Livermore (which we flew over on the way there). Had the plates already
out and had read through them the night before the trip. My alternate
this time is located where weather tends to be better than in the bay
area and it was fairly close. Still, thinking "What do I need to do to
get to the alternate if I need to "while still headed to your primary
destination is a much better way to do it than "Rats, I went missed,
where is that approach plate for the alternate?...How do I get
there?...Where is the terrain?"

I could have just bailed and gone back home as we had plenty of fuel.
However, the need to eat soon as well as just get on the ground and
decompress was pretty much the deciding factor in heading to the alternate.

Another thing that factored into not trying a second approach was that
we'd likely be a tad late for the appointment which might have pushed me
into some night IMC conditions on the way home. At this point in my
relatively young flying career, I'd rather not do night IMC without a
CFII in the right seat.


--
Jack Allison
PP-ASEL-Instrument Airplane

"To become a Jedi knight, you must master a single force. To become
a private pilot you must strive to master four of them"
- Rod Machado

(Remove the obvious from address to reply via e-mail)

Jack Allison[_1_]
December 16th 06, 04:13 PM
Jim Burns wrote:
> Great decision making under pressure!! You can be proud of that one. Too
> many people go back and try the same approach a second time only to find
> worse conditions. Some of those people do not survive.
> Good job!
> Jim
>
>
Thanks Jim. See my reply to Mr. Smith for some additional things that
went through my head prior to saying to ATC "Can I buy a vector to
Livermore?". :-)

Had we seen a hint of the ground somewhere inside the FAF, I might have
tried a second time as I was high on the approach. Still, I also
realized that a second approach likely meant another 20 minutes of
vectors as they sequenced us into the flow and another bumpy ride as I
tried not to chase the localizer. I was pretty much at the "stick a
fork in me, I'm done" phase so deciding to punt and go for the alternate
was pretty easy.

--
Jack Allison
PP-ASEL-Instrument Airplane

"To become a Jedi knight, you must master a single force. To become
a private pilot you must strive to master four of them"
- Rod Machado

(Remove the obvious from address to reply via e-mail)

Jack Allison[_1_]
December 16th 06, 04:16 PM
Doug wrote:
> I've always thought going missed is the hardest IFR manuever.
> Everything in you is saying "make it" but you have to call it off, full
> power and climb.
>
Yeah, the whole mission oriented mindset we pilots tend to have. I'm
not immune to it but have seen more than a couple of times where
unexpectedly staying the night somewhere definitely was the better
option. I hate the "get there-itis" mentality.


--
Jack Allison
PP-ASEL-Instrument Airplane

"To become a Jedi knight, you must master a single force. To become
a private pilot you must strive to master four of them"
- Rod Machado

(Remove the obvious from address to reply via e-mail)

kontiki
December 16th 06, 06:59 PM
Jack Allison wrote:
> Yep, Hartzell props, AD 2006-18-15. Requires an initial eddy current
> inspection within 50 hours time in service then every 100 hours
> thereafter. Cost for the inspection where I'm having it done is $300.
> Figure another $100 for fuel and engine time and we're up to $400 every
> 100 hours. At the rate we fly (approx 300 hrs/yr), a replacement hub
> (available at a discount, IIRC, just south of 2 AMUs) is the likely
> option for permanent compliance.

Ouch. Well that's Harzell for you.
>
> If you're concerned about it, you need to verify your prop serial number
> against the AD. If your hub serial number matches the format of the AD
> and is a "non-suffix" hub (as in no -A or -B) at the end of the hub
> serial number, guess what, you're affected.
>

No, doesn't affect me now, I put a 3 blade McCauley on my Comanche.
But used to have a 2 blade Hartzell on it that had a 5year/500 hour
AD. I was just curious about the one on your Arrow, seems like Hartzell
comes up with a new AD once every couple of years.

john smith
December 16th 06, 07:21 PM
I think of the missed approach as like flying VFR into AirVenture.
You do not know if this is the first time for the guy ahead of you, so
you are spring-loaded to go-around.

Doug wrote:

>I've always thought going missed is the hardest IFR manuever.
>Everything in you is saying "make it" but you have to call it off, full
>power and climb.
>
>

December 16th 06, 07:55 PM
Jim Burns wrote:
> Great decision making under pressure!! You can be proud of that one. Too
> many people go back and try the same approach a second time only to find
> worse conditions. Some of those people do not survive.
> Good job!
> Jim

I'd have to respectfully disagree with the above assessment. What can
be worse then minimums?

See
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.aviation.student/browse_frm/thread/2c32bf9ce82a7c17/e396220b5e5bedec?lnk=st&q=missed+approach+mbo+lieberman+imc&rnum=1#e396220b5e5bedec

for my own experiences of encountering minimums and executing a missed
for the real deal.

Re-trying an approach as far as I am concern is fine, but pressing the
minimums lower then published is what most people don't survive.

Allen

Jack Allison[_1_]
December 16th 06, 08:20 PM
wrote:
> Jim Burns wrote:
>> Great decision making under pressure!! You can be proud of that one. Too
>> many people go back and try the same approach a second time only to find
>> worse conditions. Some of those people do not survive.
>> Good job!
>> Jim
>
> I'd have to respectfully disagree with the above assessment. What can
> be worse then minimums?
>

>
> Re-trying an approach as far as I am concern is fine, but pressing the
> minimums lower then published is what most people don't survive.
>
> Allen
>
IMHO, sure, trying a 2nd approach is fine, depending on several factors.
For me, if I'd seen anything in terms of ground reference or the
airport *and* it had been a smoother approach in terms of turbulence
*and* I knew I wouldn't get another 20 minutes of vectors in/out of IMC.
It's going to be different for each approach as to my comfort level
trying a second one. In this case, I feel like I did the right thing.
Sure, as my experience increases, I may opt for a second approach in a
similar situation.

As for pressing to lower minimums, I couldn't agree more. Being at MDA
or DH without the required visibility is absolutely no time to go lower
and eat into the safety margins built into the approach.

--
Jack Allison
PP-ASEL-Instrument Airplane

"To become a Jedi knight, you must master a single force. To become
a private pilot you must strive to master four of them"
- Rod Machado

(Remove the obvious from address to reply via e-mail)

Jose[_1_]
December 16th 06, 08:25 PM
> ...and eat into the safety margins built into the approach.

.... which are actually pretty slim, considering (say) an ILS with a DH
of 200 feet, an altimeter that is good to +/- 75 feet, and an approach
that is a few dots off.

Jose
--
"There are 3 secrets to the perfect landing. Unfortunately, nobody knows
what they are." - (mike).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Doug[_1_]
December 16th 06, 10:10 PM
Bad weather, ice, and/or turbulence can make things worse. Also, there
are weather conditions, like low visibility, that you don't really know
if you are within minimums or not. You can see something, but..

It's not just the clouds.

Jose[_1_]
December 16th 06, 10:16 PM
> You can see something, but..

.... you don't go down until you =know= what you're seeing.

(yes, I know you can be fooled)

Jose
--
"There are 3 secrets to the perfect landing. Unfortunately, nobody knows
what they are." - (mike).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jack Allison[_1_]
December 17th 06, 04:52 AM
Jose wrote:
>> ...and eat into the safety margins built into the approach.
>
> ... which are actually pretty slim, considering (say) an ILS with a DH
> of 200 feet, an altimeter that is good to +/- 75 feet, and an approach
> that is a few dots off.

Exactly! It's just not worth it to cheat on MDA or DH.


--
Jack Allison
PP-ASEL-Instrument Airplane

"To become a Jedi knight, you must master a single force. To become
a private pilot you must strive to master four of them"
- Rod Machado

(Remove the obvious from address to reply via e-mail)

Google