Roy Smith wrote:
"Wyatt Emmerich" wrote:

Let's say you take off on a long cross country with no forecast of icing. By
the time you arrive at your destination, a 2,000-foot layer exist below you
with temps of 30 F. You are getting low on fuel. Is it legal to descend
through the thin layer even if you are in an airplane without known icing?


The basic thread of legality is that the FARs say you cannot do anything
with the POH says is prohibited, and modern POH's for planes which are
not approved for icing have a statement along the lines of "flight in
known icing conditions is not approved". There's nothing in there which
differentiates between conditions which were forecast to exist at the
time you did your pre-flight planning and conditions which unexpectedly
popped up during the flight.

That being said, section 91.3(b) allows you great leeway in dealing with
emergencies:

"In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in
command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to
meet that emergency."

Notice the "to the extent required", however. You can do anything you
HAVE to, not anything you WANT to.

So, is this an emergency? Yeah, stuck above a 2000 foot icing layer
while low on fuel in a no-ice airplane sounds like an emergency to me.
I assuse by "low on fuel" you mean you don't have enough to get to
someplace else.

Assuming that you got low on fuel through ATC delays, a fuel leak or
something else largely out of your control. To me, getting low on fuel
in deteriorating weather is preventable and doesn't thus constitute a
bona fide emergency. It constitutes stupidity. I wonder if the FAA
would really buy the emergency authorization argument for a pilot who
had flown past airports that had fuel. I have to admit, if I was the
FAA or an NTSB administrative judge, I don't think I'd buy it.


Matt