"Maule Driver" wrote in message
. com...
Fascinating discussion. Someone versed in learning theory could probably
put what seems obvious here - reading about it only imparts some
unverified, unvalidated knowledge. Poking your nose in it completes the
package.

Re-reading the entire post suggests to me that the original poster was
asking for some insight to all the stuff he has read to date. Despite all
the various opinions and guidelines - there is still no definitive
procedure for when one may safely penetrate a Cu and when one should not.
In the end, you have to start poking your nose in a few and calibrate what
you've read. Or you can simply *never* fly in one (at least not
knowingly - see embedded)and limit your flying to visual reference or
stratus-only (is there a rating for that?)


Part of the issue is whether the pilot has been sufficiently trained in
weather to at least make some judgement calls on his own, as to whether THIS
situation is one in which it is probable the the TCU will rip his wings off,
or will have some mild turbulence and nothing more. In his preplanning,
does he simply read the forecast, (which maybe happened to say nothing about
TCU's or CBs), then when he actually encounters one, how can he judge?

Is it only: The forecaster's said nothing, so it can't be bad.... or does
he make some further mental preparation such as: They were forecasting
really serious CB with severe turbc to the south of here, maybe that area
has moved further north than expected and they are starting to pop and I
should be really careful? OR... This is the only one around and its pretty
small in horizontal dimension, so its probably not too severe in there and
I'll be through it in a hurry.... OR: It looks to be part of a line, so
maybe there is some kind of squall line with extra lift, or maybe that cold
front is moving faster than expected, and so probably its going to be more
severe.... etc.

"Poking your nose in" can be a dangerous thing to do, if you don't really
understand what is happening. "Weather knowledge" is NOT: its a TCU,
somebody told me those have turbulence, lets find out how bad... "Weather
knowledge" is making some educated guess as to the processes at work so that
you can make a reasonable judgement as to what severity to anticipate before
you go in.


Having said all that, if someone is looking for rules of thumb, my
preference would be always to avoid penetration of a cloud of vertical
development, and especially above the freezing level. Those that I would
try to be especially careful of a
.... Dark, and/or of broad horizontal extent. The darkness indicated a huge
water content, and hence something (updrafts) is holding it up... and its
getting ready to come down!
.... Part of a line. Could be a weak front or squall line. Extra lift.
.... built up quickly and/or appears to be building rapidly. Indicates very
strong vertical currents.
.... broad horizontally. Shows strong convective power exists, (and it takes
longer to traverse).
.... in an area where severe thunderstorms were forecast. Self explanatory.


Those that I would be more tempted to traverse:
White throughout, not dark. Not much water.
Narrow. Not in them for long.
Been around for a while and not building. Currents probably weak.
Isolated, in an area where none were forecast. Convective power probably
weak.
Embedded in generally stable cloud. If the whole area is relatively stable,
less likely that smaller embedded areas would be *severely* unstable.

Remember that there is an exception to every rule... of thumb. :-)


....