IFR just 5.4% of the time

Andrew Sarangan writes:

Whats wrong with flying around the mountain peaks instead of above?

Nothing, if you do it under conditions that allow it to be done safely, and
you're competent at mountain flying. How common are the former, and how many
pilots satisfy the latter criterion?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Recently, Andrew Sarangan posted:

On Mar 3, 10:59 am, "Neil Gould" wrote:
Recently, Andrew Sarangan posted:





On Mar 3, 7:28 am, "Neil Gould" wrote:
Recently, Andrew Sarangan posted:

Terrain avoidance at night becomes a problem only in unpopulated
areas under an overcast moonless sky. It has happened, so it is a
real issue, but most pilots fly in areas where there are at least
some ground lights, moon or stars, and it is really not that hard
to tell if you are heading towards a mountain. On the other hand,
unlit towers are a real concern, regardless of whether it is day
or night, and this is why they get NOTAM'd.

The above is an excellent example of bad pre-flight planning. All
one has to do to avoid terrain, day, night, IMC, etc. is stay above
the altitude of any obstructions in the sector. As this is plainly
listed on every sectional, it is not a difficult task.

Neil

If you insist on flying above the MEF for each quadrant, you will
not be able to do any GA flying in the mountain states. This is the
very definition of mountain flying - ie flying below the peaks.
Please don't flame my responses as "examples of bad preflight
planning" when it is your reponse that is not adequately thought
out.

I would consider a "go" decision to fly in the mountains at night to
be *exceptionally* bad pre-flight planning. Exceptions do not
invalidate a rule.

Neil- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


No, these areas are not the exceptional areas. Large chucks of this
country falls ine areas where MEF is simply not attainable or
practical in small airplanes.

I can see the sprit of the 'rule' that was taught to you, but that is
by no means a rule. It is easy to follow that rule in the eastern and
midwestern states, but it is impossible in the west.

The field elevation of Colorado Springs Airport is about 6200ft. The
MEF is 12000 ft and higher. If you believe that, just go out there
some day and see for yourself how many night VFR operations are
conducted there well below the MEF.

Interesting that you should mention this area, as I was out there last
summer, and am somewhat familiar with it. I was doing some mountain flying
around Magdelena/Socorro, and have spent time in Santa Fe, Taos, Silver
Springs, and Ruidoso as well. So, for those who are unfamiliar with the
area, I'd add the following details that may make your story appear a bit
differently.

If you're flying *west* out of Colorado Springs Airport, say to Nevada,
then you'll have to deal with the Rockies and the MEF you're indicating.
For a good distance to the north, south, and to the Manzano range in the
east it's a different story entirely, and if you follow the interstate
it's easy to fly a MEF at around 2000' AGL. Someone mentioned flying from
Alburquerque to Santa Fe. Unless their planned route takes them through
the Sandias, they also will not be doing any "mountain flying" (again,
just follow the interstate). And, full moons are the exception to night
time; 12 vs. 365. So, to be relevant to the topic at hand, I'd like to
know if you're suggesting that taking any of the *mountain flying* routes
at night are safe, good planning, as your responses imply? ;-)

Neil

On Mar 4, 8:06 am, "Neil Gould" wrote:
Recently, Andrew Sarangan posted:





On Mar 3, 10:59 am, "Neil Gould" wrote:
Recently, Andrew Sarangan posted:

On Mar 3, 7:28 am, "Neil Gould" wrote:
Recently, Andrew Sarangan posted:

Terrain avoidance at night becomes a problem only in unpopulated
areas under an overcast moonless sky. It has happened, so it is a
real issue, but most pilots fly in areas where there are at least
some ground lights, moon or stars, and it is really not that hard
to tell if you are heading towards a mountain. On the other hand,
unlit towers are a real concern, regardless of whether it is day
or night, and this is why they get NOTAM'd.

The above is an excellent example of bad pre-flight planning. All
one has to do to avoid terrain, day, night, IMC, etc. is stay above
the altitude of any obstructions in the sector. As this is plainly
listed on every sectional, it is not a difficult task.

Neil

If you insist on flying above the MEF for each quadrant, you will
not be able to do any GA flying in the mountain states. This is the
very definition of mountain flying - ie flying below the peaks.
Please don't flame my responses as "examples of bad preflight
planning" when it is your reponse that is not adequately thought
out.

I would consider a "go" decision to fly in the mountains at night to
be *exceptionally* bad pre-flight planning. Exceptions do not
invalidate a rule.

Neil- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No, these areas are not the exceptional areas. Large chucks of this
country falls ine areas where MEF is simply not attainable or
practical in small airplanes.

I can see the sprit of the 'rule' that was taught to you, but that is
by no means a rule. It is easy to follow that rule in the eastern and
midwestern states, but it is impossible in the west.

The field elevation of Colorado Springs Airport is about 6200ft. The
MEF is 12000 ft and higher. If you believe that, just go out there
some day and see for yourself how many night VFR operations are
conducted there well below the MEF.

Interesting that you should mention this area, as I was out there last
summer, and am somewhat familiar with it. I was doing some mountain flying
around Magdelena/Socorro, and have spent time in Santa Fe, Taos, Silver
Springs, and Ruidoso as well. So, for those who are unfamiliar with the
area, I'd add the following details that may make your story appear a bit
differently.

If you're flying *west* out of Colorado Springs Airport, say to Nevada,
then you'll have to deal with the Rockies and the MEF you're indicating.
For a good distance to the north, south, and to the Manzano range in the
east it's a different story entirely, and if you follow the interstate
it's easy to fly a MEF at around 2000' AGL. Someone mentioned flying from
Alburquerque to Santa Fe. Unless their planned route takes them through
the Sandias, they also will not be doing any "mountain flying" (again,
just follow the interstate). And, full moons are the exception to night
time; 12 vs. 365. So, to be relevant to the topic at hand, I'd like to
know if you're suggesting that taking any of the *mountain flying* routes
at night are safe, good planning, as your responses imply? ;-)

Neil- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

As you mentioned, a flight from Albuquerque to Santa Fe does not
involve what we normally consider as mountain flying. However, you
will be flying in an area where the MEF is high, and your cruise
altitude is well below the mountain peaks. The original posted claimed
that flying below the MEF under night VFR was an example of poor
planning. My point was that there was nothing wrong with that, it is
done all the time, and there is no immediate danger of colliding with
terrain just because you are below the MEF at night under VFR.

As to whether any mountain flying routes are safe at night, it
depends. You would not want to, for example, fly to Glenwood Springs,
CO (GWS) at night because the traffic pattern is way too close to high
terrain. A wide pattern will put you in the path of the rocks. But go
20 miles to the west to Rifle, CO and it is safe to fly at night. Both
airports share the same MEF, and their airport elevations are almost
the same. One is safe at night, the other is not.

To reiterate my point, MEF cannot be used as a blanket rule for flight
planning purposes. One has to know more about mountain flying tactics
to make an intelligent decision. For the flat lander, it may be wise
to avoid these areas altogether at night until they get some
instruction.

Recently, Andrew Sarangan posted:

On Mar 4, 8:06 am, "Neil Gould" wrote:
Recently, Andrew Sarangan posted:
No, these areas are not the exceptional areas. Large chucks of this
country falls ine areas where MEF is simply not attainable or
practical in small airplanes.

I can see the sprit of the 'rule' that was taught to you, but that
is by no means a rule. It is easy to follow that rule in the
eastern and midwestern states, but it is impossible in the west.

The field elevation of Colorado Springs Airport is about 6200ft. The
MEF is 12000 ft and higher. If you believe that, just go out there
some day and see for yourself how many night VFR operations are
conducted there well below the MEF.

Interesting that you should mention this area, as I was out there
last summer, and am somewhat familiar with it. I was doing some
mountain flying around Magdelena/Socorro, and have spent time in
Santa Fe, Taos, Silver Springs, and Ruidoso as well. So, for those
who are unfamiliar with the area, I'd add the following details that
may make your story appear a bit differently.

If you're flying *west* out of Colorado Springs Airport, say to
Nevada, then you'll have to deal with the Rockies and the MEF you're
indicating. For a good distance to the north, south, and to the
Manzano range in the east it's a different story entirely, and if
you follow the interstate it's easy to fly a MEF at around 2000'
AGL. Someone mentioned flying from Alburquerque to Santa Fe. Unless
their planned route takes them through the Sandias, they also will
not be doing any "mountain flying" (again, just follow the
interstate). And, full moons are the exception to night time; 12 vs.
365. So, to be relevant to the topic at hand, I'd like to know if
you're suggesting that taking any of the *mountain flying* routes at
night are safe, good planning, as your responses imply? ;-)


As you mentioned, a flight from Albuquerque to Santa Fe does not
involve what we normally consider as mountain flying. However, you
will be flying in an area where the MEF is high, and your cruise
altitude is well below the mountain peaks. The original posted claimed
that flying below the MEF under night VFR was an example of poor
planning. My point was that there was nothing wrong with that, it is
done all the time, and there is no immediate danger of colliding with
terrain just because you are below the MEF at night under VFR.

As to whether any mountain flying routes are safe at night, it
depends. You would not want to, for example, fly to Glenwood Springs,
CO (GWS) at night because the traffic pattern is way too close to high
terrain. A wide pattern will put you in the path of the rocks. But go
20 miles to the west to Rifle, CO and it is safe to fly at night. Both
airports share the same MEF, and their airport elevations are almost
the same. One is safe at night, the other is not.

To reiterate my point, MEF cannot be used as a blanket rule for flight
planning purposes. One has to know more about mountain flying tactics
to make an intelligent decision. For the flat lander, it may be wise
to avoid these areas altogether at night until they get some
instruction.

The way I read it, you were suggesting that *mountain flying at night* was
safe, and I see that as being quite different from "flying at night in a
state that has mountains". Again, one who planned well would know that,
and IMO, no amount of planning would make flying in the mountains at night
safe.

So, I maintain that flying above MEF covers most of the US airspace, and
flying in a state that has mountains in a quadrant nowhere near where
you're flying is an exception that doesn't change the rule. Do you
disagree with that?

Neil

P.S. -- I meant "Silver City", above.

On Mar 4, 10:16 am, "Neil Gould" wrote:

The way I read it, you were suggesting that *mountain flying at night* was
safe, and I see that as being quite different from "flying at night in a
state that has mountains". Again, one who planned well would know that,
and IMO, no amount of planning would make flying in the mountains at night
safe.

So, I maintain that flying above MEF covers most of the US airspace, and
flying in a state that has mountains in a quadrant nowhere near where
you're flying is an exception that doesn't change the rule. Do you
disagree with that?

Neil



A discussion on mountain flying is not what I was attempting to start
here. I was only responding to the comment that "flying below the MEF
is an example of poor preflight planning". One example, as you also
pointed out, is a flight between Albuquerque and Santa Fe.

Regarding mountain flying at night, I won't say that it is perfectly
safe or that it is always dangerous and unsafe. Mountains don't always
mean they are unsafe. You have to consider a multitude of factors,
such as topography, sky condition, ground lighting, wind conditions,
density altitude etc.. MEF is not a high ranking factor in the
decision matrix.

So, I agree with you in the sense that mountain flying at night can be
tricky if you don't know the terrain, or if you are new to this.

However, I disagree that flying above MEF is the norm for most of the
U.S. In most areas of CO, NM, UT, AZ, ID and some areas of CA, NV,
OR, WA, MT and WY as well as VA, WV and TN one would routinely fly
below the MEF. I have not done the math, but I would not describe
these massive areas as exceptions to the CONUS.

Recently, Andrew Sarangan posted:

On Mar 4, 10:16 am, "Neil Gould" wrote:

The way I read it, you were suggesting that *mountain flying at
night* was safe, and I see that as being quite different from
"flying at night in a state that has mountains". Again, one who
planned well would know that, and IMO, no amount of planning would
make flying in the mountains at night safe.

So, I maintain that flying above MEF covers most of the US airspace,
and flying in a state that has mountains in a quadrant nowhere near
where you're flying is an exception that doesn't change the rule. Do
you disagree with that?


A discussion on mountain flying is not what I was attempting to start
here.

Well, it was your post on 3/3/07 that I responded to:

Recently, Andrew Sarangan posted:

If you insist on flying above the MEF for each quadrant, you will not
be able to do any GA flying in the mountain states. This is the very
definition of mountain flying - ie flying below the peaks.

This statement seems pretty unambiguous.

I was only responding to the comment that "flying below the MEF
is an example of poor preflight planning".

Wait a second. Your above statement is NOT something I wrote, so it should
not be in quotes.

My comment in response to your statement:
"On the other hand, unlit towers are a real concern, regardless of whether
it is day or night..."

was:
"The above is an excellent example of bad pre-flight planning. All one has
to do to avoid terrain, day, night, IMC, etc. is stay above the altitude
of any obstructions in the sector. As this is plainly listed on every
sectional, it is not a difficult task."

Perhaps it rubbed you the wrong way, and if so, sorry about that. But it
is still a true statement that the altitude of obstructions are listed on
every sectional, and obstacle avoidance is easy to do with a little
planning. The whole business about MEF came up later and in the context of
moutain flying.

Regarding mountain flying at night, I won't say that it is perfectly
safe or that it is always dangerous and unsafe. Mountains don't always
mean they are unsafe. You have to consider a multitude of factors,
such as topography, sky condition, ground lighting, wind conditions,
density altitude etc.. MEF is not a high ranking factor in the
decision matrix.

Again, I understand and agree with your point about ranking MEF in the
decision tree. Still, I won't go mountain flying at night with anyone
(e.g. in the mountains and below the peaks) unless my chances of living
are significantly reduced by not doing so. YMMV.

However, I disagree that flying above MEF is the norm for most of the
U.S. In most areas of CO, NM, UT, AZ, ID and some areas of CA, NV,
OR, WA, MT and WY as well as VA, WV and TN one would routinely fly
below the MEF. I have not done the math, but I would not describe
these massive areas as exceptions to the CONUS.

I would exclude those states east of the Mississippi, as most GA aircraft
would have no problems staying above MEF, and except for take-off and
landing, I see little reason to fly below the peaks at night in those
states. As for AZ, CA, CO, NM, NV, MT, UT, WA, and WY, even though there
are mountainous areas, there are also very large, open areas relatively
free of mountains in each of those states. So, in terms of square mileage,
I'd stick to my opinion about the practicality of flying above MEF.

Regards,

Neil

On Mar 4, 1:18 pm, "Neil Gould" wrote:
Recently, Andrew Sarangan posted:


I was only responding to the comment that "flying below the MEF
is an example of poor preflight planning".

Wait a second. Your above statement is NOT something I wrote, so it should
not be in quotes.

Neil,
I did not say that I was responding to your comments. Someone else
made that statement, and that is how this thread got started. I agreed
with most of what you said, and no, you did not rub me the wrong way
at all. I apologize if it came across that way.

Sorry for the confusion :-)

Recently, Andrew Sarangan posted:

On Mar 4, 1:18 pm, "Neil Gould" wrote:
Recently, Andrew Sarangan posted:


I was only responding to the comment that "flying below the MEF
is an example of poor preflight planning".

Wait a second. Your above statement is NOT something I wrote, so it
should not be in quotes.

Neil,
I did not say that I was responding to your comments. Someone else
made that statement, and that is how this thread got started. I agreed
with most of what you said, and no, you did not rub me the wrong way
at all. I apologize if it came across that way.

Sorry for the confusion :-)

No problem. I must have missed the post that you quoted in this thread. I
also agree with most of what you were saying, and understand the viewpoint
you presented. The rest is picking nits about the finer points. ;-)

Regards,

Neil

On Thu, 01 Mar 2007 19:11:03 -0800, Jay Honeck wrote:

This brings up a whole 'nother aspect of this discussion, which quite
simply asks: Who *wants* to fly IFR?

Being cotton-balled is dull for passengers, as much as I might enjoy it.
But flying between layers, in and out, or amongst the clouds is fun for
her (and for my 4-y-old son).

Cloudscapes offer some incredible views.

- Andrew

Matt Whiting wrote:

If you are flying the minimum IFR altitudes, it still should not be a
problem, unless there is a chart error.

Matt, you have provided a great leadin to what I think got missed in
this discussion. Yes, flying the minimum IFR altitude is ok...
PROVIDED you can MAINTAIN that altitude.

One of the most insidious things about mountain flying is the wind!
You can be going DOWN (or UP) over 2000 FPM in the laminar flow and
not feel a thing! This can be a VERY BAD (TM) thing at night.

As you remember, in the mountains, the minimum IFR altitude is only
2000' above the highest terrain in the area. But, at 2000 FPM down,
you are at mountain top level in one minute.

4000 FPM down is not uncommon. Day or night!

I profess that until you are flying at over 18000 MSL, AND you can
overcome a 4000 FPM downdraft, IFR in the mountains should be
avoided.

Conversely, VFR in the mountains, day or night, if you choose your
route carefully, and the winds are less than 25 knots at mountain
top level and you and stay about 2000' above the canyon floor, you
are rarely out of gliding distance to a survivable landing spot.
Not an airport, but a survivable landing spot.

Best regards,

Jer/ "Flight instruction and mountain flying are my vocations!"
--
Jer/ (Slash) Eberhard, Mountain Flying Aviation, LTD, Ft Collins, CO
CELL 970 231-6325 EMAIL jer'at'frii.com http://users.frii.com/jer/
C-206, CFII Airplane&Glider, FAA-DEN Aviation Safety Counselor
CAP-CO Mission&Aircraft CheckPilot BM218 HAM N0FZD 247 Young Eagles!