Garmin 396 Trip Report (long)

We made a 250NM trip from the Chicago area up to Eagle River, WI this
weekend and it was the first cross country with the new 396. The weather
reports were not stellar and normally we would have never tried a trip
under anything less than perfect conditions. But, the thought of having
quick access to weather information in flight made the decision to
launch much easier. On Friday, we had 4000' broken-overcast in the
Chicago area with a forecast of 2500' and light rain showers and good
visibility up North. I was more concerned about the temps not wanting to
get into ice. But, the temps aloft were looking to be 45+ degrees or so.
The 396 was showing light rain ahead and moving towards Dodge County
airport - our next stop.

In the pattern at Dodge County I had the first encounter with carb ice
on the trip. Interestingly, it began when I pulled power to slow down to
pattern speed. After the break (and checking the weather with the FBO's
system), we launched off to Eagle River for the rest of the trip. The
396 and the FBO's radar both showed rain ending in about 30 miles (we
had 140 to go). The actual weather was just a little different and
ceilings were lowering plus we were getting intermittent light rain with
visibilities around 6 miles or so. All this in an area that both radars
showed as no rain. Also, all the airports were showing VFR conditions at
the FBO and on the 396. So far, not a real concern, but I was wondering
about the difference in what I saw vs. what was on the machines. With
about 40 miles to go, the ceiling was down and we were at around
1700'AGL with 4 miles vis. The light rain was still on and off and I did
pull carb heat a couple of times but there was no ice. I was probably
getting paranoid. Again, the 396 showed no rain. At about 20 miles out,
we were down to about 1200'AGL with a 500' cushion to the deck above.
The vis was about 4 miles, light rain on and off with the temps lowering
a bit to about 45 degrees. The 396 terrain warning went off and the
inset showed a red tower 2 miles ahead. We did see it on the sectional
before but did not really calculate that we were at 1200' AGL and this
monster was 1425' AGL. I immediately spotted it and we were heading at
it so we circled around. Entering the pattern we were about 500' under
the deck and 800'AGL. The vis was at 3-4 miles. So, the bare pattern
minimum.

The trip was pretty tiring with all the squinting and deteriorating
conditions. Upon landing, the airport weather depiction went from VFR to
marginal VFR. A good reminder that the indications on the 396 are not
instant since the METARs can be up to an hour old. Again, inside the FBO
the radar showed no rain where we were at. It was a light mist to
drizzle. I was curious why the 396 and the FBO systems did not show it
up here but faithfully produced an accurate picture from home and along
the first 150 miles.

The trip back from Eagle River to Chicago on Monday was even more
eventful. The early morning forecast called for Tstorms in the Chicago
area from 2:00p.m. Later in the morning it was amended to 6:00p.m. We
launched off in CAVU clear skies at 10:45a.m. thinking we would easily
beat the weather. The TAF for our arrival was 8000' scattered-broken
with 6+ mile vis and current conditions were clear skies. Stopped at
Dodge County again and their radar showed some yellow returns (and
growing) Southwest our destination at about 20 miles. Upon launch, the
396 showed the exact same picture. It was noon. So much for the forecast
of 6:00 p.m. As we passed Milwaukee, the entire area from O'Hare to 50
miles West was yellow to orange and moving East. Busted. We turned right
to stop in Lake Geneva to wait it out. 45 minutes later, the Internet
radar showed no returns from O'Hare Westward until Iowa. We launched off
and 10 minutes into the 25 minute flight a dark green blob began to
develop about 40 miles West of our destination heading straight for our
airport at a pretty good clip. 15 minutes later it changed to yellow and
grew. We were now encountering a 30kt headwind so it became a much
closer race. 10 miles from home the blob had skirted South and changed
to light orange. If it had stayed on course we were going to turn
around. We constantly reminded each other that these pretty color
pictures could be 4-6 minutes old. So, we wanted a wide berth from any
yellow+ returns. Conservative to some but we wanted to play it safe.

We landed without a drop of rain but the skies 20 miles South were
pretty dark with visible rain shafts. We then caught a short bolt of
lightning from the area as the 396 now showed the area as solid orange.
The entire airport was wet from the earlier deluge. It started raining 4
hours later (9:30 p.m.) with wicked Tstorms for the following 4 hours.
THAT was the forecast weather!

That was about the worst we are prepared to fly in. At no time was
safety an issue. However, without the on board information, I would not
have even attempted it. If the GPS went out, I would have landed and
waited till the next day. It was a good case of having the info needed
to avoid bad weather. This thing certainly earned its keep on the trip.
It also proved that less than perfect weather does not have to cancel a
trip. We easily saw the line between "go" and "no-go" and made timely
decisions to avoid trouble.

It appears that the Nexrad returns of moderate to heavy rain can be
overstated, but the lighter stuff may not show up at all. The locations
of most rain appeared to be pretty accurate as long as it was not very
light to drizzle. At no time were we getting "old" data, most was 3
minutes or so. I'm sold.

Good Luck,
Mike

mike, thanks for the pirep. i just happen to be sitting here doing
my first session with robert buck's WEATHER FLYING (4th ed). i've got a
396 in the skyhawk but it's new and so am i so i found your report
really interesting. while aloft, did you work with flight watch at all
during all this decision making??

dan


Mike Spera wrote:
We made a 250NM trip from the Chicago area up to Eagle River, WI this
weekend and it was the first cross country with the new 396.

snip....

It appears that the Nexrad returns of moderate to heavy rain can be
overstated, but the lighter stuff may not show up at all. The locations
of most rain appeared to be pretty accurate as long as it was not very
light to drizzle. At no time were we getting "old" data, most was 3
minutes or so. I'm sold.

Good Luck,
Mike

No, I did not contact Flight Watch. On foul weather days, everyone seems
to be calling them. The weather was changing so quickly on the return
trip that I doubt whether FW would have more current radar data. Chances
are they may have the same stuff I had.

The workload was high enough without adding FW. The 396 told me
everything the person at FW would tell me, only I get the added benefit
to seeing the radar myself.

By the way, I am Instrument rated. But there was no way I was going to
attempt flying in the clouds that day. The cold/damp conditions almost
assured getting a load of ice in the clouds.
Thanks,
Mike


mike, thanks for the pirep. i just happen to be sitting here doing
my first session with robert buck's WEATHER FLYING (4th ed). i've got a
396 in the skyhawk but it's new and so am i so i found your report
really interesting. while aloft, did you work with flight watch at all
during all this decision making??

dan


Mike Spera wrote:

We made a 250NM trip from the Chicago area up to Eagle River, WI this
weekend and it was the first cross country with the new 396.


snip....

It appears that the Nexrad returns of moderate to heavy rain can be
overstated, but the lighter stuff may not show up at all. The locations
of most rain appeared to be pretty accurate as long as it was not very
light to drizzle. At no time were we getting "old" data, most was 3
minutes or so. I'm sold.

Good Luck,
Mike

No doubt the 396 helped a lot in getting the big picture of the
weather. However from reading your report the entire trip was VFR, so
the storm avoidance isn't really an issue here isn't it? You see that
dark thing in your windshield, and you turn around and land :-)

Mike Spera wrote:

By the way, I am Instrument rated. But there was no way I was going to
attempt flying in the clouds that day. The cold/damp conditions almost
assured getting a load of ice in the clouds.
Thanks,
Mike

Storm avoidance is CERTAINLY an issue VFR.

Karl
"Curator" N185KG


"M" wrote in message
oups.com...
No doubt the 396 helped a lot in getting the big picture of the
weather. However from reading your report the entire trip was VFR, so
the storm avoidance isn't really an issue here isn't it? You see that
dark thing in your windshield, and you turn around and land :-)

Mike Spera wrote:

By the way, I am Instrument rated. But there was no way I was going to
attempt flying in the clouds that day. The cold/damp conditions almost
assured getting a load of ice in the clouds.
Thanks,
Mike

On 5-Oct-2006, Mike Spera wrote:

By the way, I am Instrument rated. But there was no way I was going to
attempt flying in the clouds that day. The cold/damp conditions almost
assured getting a load of ice in the clouds.



Not sure I understand this. If I read your trip report correctly, you had
about 45F at 1500 ft. I don't know what the MEAs are in that neck of the
woods, but I doubt they are over 5000 ft. At typical temperature "lapse
rate" of 3 degrees F/1000 ft, it should have been above freezing at 5000 ft.

My experience is that it's almost always safer to fly IFR than do scud
running. The weather info provided by XM WX makes the difference larger
because it allows you to avoid embedded storms.

-Elliott Drucker