WX

Happened to me and the twin I got my ME in. Gets your attention it does.

Joe Johnson wrote:
"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message
online.com...

As someone else posted, you can watch it at:

http://www4.passur.com/hpn.html

The aircraft which I assume is it - N61AF - appears at about 15:14 on the
23rd. Watching is somewhat spooky.

Someone else flew the approach at 15:10, which may be useful for

comparison

purposes.

- Andrew


OK, now I'm really spooked. That's the plane in which I passed my private
checkride a year ago, almost to the day...

Maule Driver wrote:

I like practicing in actual but I'd stay away from that weather.
- 1/8SM and 200 in fog with 12/12 says to me that it could go
zero/zero
in a sec. I can practice misses under the hood.

IMO, flying under the hood and flying actual IMC are two different,
albeit similar experiences. However, the differences are such that I
believe there is simply no substitute for the real thing. This
statement is only meant to offer another opinion.

Additionally, I believe that practicing in actual low IMC to a real
missed when possible, assuming again that there is a suitable alternate
and proper fuel, is very important to the active instrument pilot,
since it may very well happen that an airport goes from "low to no"
during a real approach. A good example of low IMC going to below
minimums would be during lake effect snow season downwind of the Great
Lakes, something that is not always correctly forecasted.

--
Peter

Andrew wrote:

OK, now I'm really spooked. That's the plane in which I passed my
private
checkride a year ago, almost to the day...

Bad things sometimes happen to good airplanes and pilots.

A few months ago I queried the NTSB database for all of the eight or so
aircraft I flew during my initial training or rented soon thereafter.
The only one I found in the NTSB reports was a new C172SP I rented out
in Palm Springs, California. A few months after I rented it, an
instructor. as the sole occupant, had flown the aircraft to a nearby
airport and, upon landing, taxied off the runway and into a ditch
between the runway and a taxiway.

--
Peter R.

"Maule Driver" wrote in message
.com...
Happened to me and the twin I got my ME in. Gets your attention it does.

Remember TWA 800, which blew up off the coast of Long Island? My DPE
brought that plane back from Athens as captain the previous evening. It had
2 crews on board, one flying the plane and one being deployed to Paris for
some other assignment. They were all colleagues and friends of my DPE.
While this HPN tragedy is not of the same magnitude, I now understand a
little better how he must have felt.

Antonio wrote:

Enter the airport identifier in the subject line (ex: KLAX) of your
email and the wx reports immediately come to your inbox.

That's certainly a service, but I don't see how this helps the OP. He
was looking for weather from a few days ago. It appears to me that
this site only offers current weather and forecasts. Am I missing
something?

--
Peter

In article . com,
Peter R. wrote:

Antonio wrote:

Enter the airport identifier in the subject line (ex: KLAX) of your
email and the wx reports immediately come to your inbox.

That's certainly a service, but I don't see how this helps the OP. He
was looking for weather from a few days ago. It appears to me that
this site only offers current weather and forecasts. Am I missing
something?

Try this:

http://vortex.plymouth.edu/sa_parse-u.html

wrote in news:1114444542.583751.157440
@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:

Judah wrote:

Kinda elucidates the value of personal minimums...

Assuming there were a sutable alternate airport and the C172 contained
adequate fuel, I view this weather as excellent conditions for
training, since a real missed approach seems to be a rarity for those
of us who are not professionals.

It will be interesting to read what the investigators find.


Only if both the pilot and instructor are up to the task that day. There is
one good reason to fly such a mission, and many more reasons to cancel.

From the Passur site it looks as if the pilot was frequently and
consistently low at various phases of the approach, and the instructor did
not correct him promptly. For example, at one point, outside the outer
marker, the plane is shown at 1200', when the MSA is 1900'.


As you say, it will be interesting to read the reports...

I'm a little late getting into this, because I have been offline since late
April, but I have to ask...what does MSA have to do with anything? It is not
a part of an instrument approach procedure and is for use in emergencies
only.

Now I have to go find the original post.

Bob Gardner

"Judah" wrote in message
. ..
wrote in news:1114444542.583751.157440
@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:

Judah wrote:

Kinda elucidates the value of personal minimums...

Assuming there were a sutable alternate airport and the C172 contained
adequate fuel, I view this weather as excellent conditions for
training, since a real missed approach seems to be a rarity for those
of us who are not professionals.

It will be interesting to read what the investigators find.


Only if both the pilot and instructor are up to the task that day. There
is
one good reason to fly such a mission, and many more reasons to cancel.

From the Passur site it looks as if the pilot was frequently and
consistently low at various phases of the approach, and the instructor did
not correct him promptly. For example, at one point, outside the outer
marker, the plane is shown at 1200', when the MSA is 1900'.


As you say, it will be interesting to read the reports...

Bob

It may be true that one never actually flies the MSA. However, I don't
agree that MSA has no relavance for routine flying. If that is the
case, then OROCA also has no relavance either, as well as all the
obstacles depicted on the IFR charts. If you are descending below MSA,
then you better be on a published segment of the approach. It certainly
has value in that respect.

"Bob Gardner" wrote in
:

I'm a little late getting into this, because I have been offline since
late April, but I have to ask...what does MSA have to do with
anything? It is not a part of an instrument approach procedure and is
for use in emergencies only.

Now I have to go find the original post.

Bob Gardner


snip

I incorrectly referred to the Minimum Altitude for that segment of the
approach as the Minimum Safe Altitude. Someone else also corrected my error
in this thread.

I'm not sure what the "official" name for the minimum altitude published on
the approach segment outside the outer marker is, but the minimum altitude
that I refer to is undoubtedly part of the approach, and they unquestionably
busted it by a significant amount...