My Second Solo X-Country

Well, I did my second solo xc today. I went from 3A1 (Cullman, AL) to RMG
(Rome, GA), then to CHA (Chattanooga, TN), and back to 3A1.

I was supposed to depart at 8:00am CDT but had to wait until the ceilings
changed for the better. So I did not leave until 11:30am CDT. I had asked
my CFI if he thought I should fly another time and he replied with something
along the lines of how do YOU feel about it? Since I was anxious to fly, I
told him I felt good about it and I was heading out. (Looks like he smiled
but I can't be really sure).

The trip to RMG went rather smooth. There were no issues except I kinda
botched the landing a little since the winds were high. BTW, my school
still wants the logbook signed. (I guess they want to make sure the
students actually land).

Going to CHA was an "interesting" flight. The winds on this flight had me
really going bump, bump, bump. I was getting thrown around like there was
no tomorrow . After landing at CHA and getting my logbook signed, I
headed back to 3A1. This was a 94nm flight. About 40 nm from 3A1, I really
had an experience. There were clouds everywhere! The MEF for this quadrant
is 2200 feet. So now I got to make a decision since the clouds were about
2300 feet. I decided to go above the clouds. I talked to Huntsville Center
and informed them of my intentions. They had no problem with my decision
but cautioned me to get below the clouds when I see land again. I was above
the clouds about 10 minutes although it seemed like forever! I got below
the clouds about 25 miles from 3A1. Boy was I relieved. After landing and
tying down the plane, I went and completed my paperwork and logbook.

Thinking back over the day, I really feel good about this xc, even with the
difficulties that existed. I think these type of events will make me a
better pilot

--
CareBear

"CareBear" wrote in
:

everywhere! The MEF for this quadrant is 2200 feet. So now I got to
make a decision since the clouds were about 2300 feet. I decided to
go above the clouds. I talked to Huntsville Center and informed them
of my intentions. They had no problem with my decision but cautioned
me to get below the clouds when I see land again. I was above the
clouds about 10 minutes although it seemed like forever!

Having been there and done it, I would never suggest going above a cloud
deck that you cannot see the other side where it may be clear.... I did
this after getting my VFR license and instead of Owensboro KY where I was
headed, I ended up in Lawrencville IL to wait out the weather (couple of
hours). Needless to say, after that trip, I got a'workin on my IFR ticket.

The forecast in my trip was nothing compared what I experienced and I had
to divert. I fessed up to center as I had flight following too and they
were graceful enough to help me find a VFR airport.

I thought students had to have a constant visual ground reference and were
not to do VFR over the top, but I could be mistaken.

On your excursion, did you contact FSS to evaluate the weather at 3A1 or
did you check the AWOS 124.175 at 3A1 to help you evaluate the weather in
Cullman?

If anything, you will now become a better meteorologist *big smile* after a
trip like you had!

Allen

Congratulations on the 2nd x-c; you're not that far off your
certificate now, although it may seem a long way off.

A few morsels of food for thought:

1. As a student pilot, you are not allowed to climb through a layer of
few or scattered clouds and then fly on top of a broken or overcast
ceiling, before descending back down through scattered or fewer clouds.
You didn't specify how cloudy it was, but the fact that your time above
the clouds felt like forever implies to me that maybe it was a ceiling
(broken or overcast). If this is the case, bear in mind you're only
allowed to do this in an emergency, until you are a private pilot,
after which you still can't fly through ceilings but you can fly on top
of them from one area of few or scattered across an area of broken or
overcast to another area of few or scattered. Of course all this
assumes you are able to maintain the separation from clouds required in
the FARs.

2. Huntsville Center is not responsible for your safety nor for
preventing you from breaking the rules. Just because they have no
problem with you doing something does not mean you won't break any laws
or put yourself in danger.

3. You broke a cardinal rule of flying - you made the decision to fly
because you were anxious to do so. This is the stuff accident reports
are made of. Now clearly your instructor wouldn't have signed you off
to go if he/she didn't think the conditions were safe, so I'm not
suggesting that conditions were dangerous, but you are going to have to
get used to flying when you are confident in the conditions and staying
on the ground when you aren't, irrespective of how much you want to
fly.

Sorry if it seems like I'm being overly harsh - all of this is written
only in the interests of safety, and it's just my opinion - others may
disagree.

Tom


CareBear wrote:
Well, I did my second solo xc today. I went from 3A1 (Cullman, AL) to RMG
(Rome, GA), then to CHA (Chattanooga, TN), and back to 3A1.

I was supposed to depart at 8:00am CDT but had to wait until the ceilings
changed for the better. So I did not leave until 11:30am CDT. I had asked
my CFI if he thought I should fly another time and he replied with something
along the lines of how do YOU feel about it? Since I was anxious to fly, I
told him I felt good about it and I was heading out. (Looks like he smiled
but I can't be really sure).

The trip to RMG went rather smooth. There were no issues except I kinda
botched the landing a little since the winds were high. BTW, my school
still wants the logbook signed. (I guess they want to make sure the
students actually land).

Going to CHA was an "interesting" flight. The winds on this flight had me
really going bump, bump, bump. I was getting thrown around like there was
no tomorrow . After landing at CHA and getting my logbook signed, I
headed back to 3A1. This was a 94nm flight. About 40 nm from 3A1, I really
had an experience. There were clouds everywhere! The MEF for this quadrant
is 2200 feet. So now I got to make a decision since the clouds were about
2300 feet. I decided to go above the clouds. I talked to Huntsville Center
and informed them of my intentions. They had no problem with my decision
but cautioned me to get below the clouds when I see land again. I was above
the clouds about 10 minutes although it seemed like forever! I got below
the clouds about 25 miles from 3A1. Boy was I relieved. After landing and
tying down the plane, I went and completed my paperwork and logbook.

Thinking back over the day, I really feel good about this xc, even with the
difficulties that existed. I think these type of events will make me a
better pilot

--
CareBear

"A Lieberma" wrote in message
. 18...
"CareBear" wrote in
:

everywhere! The MEF for this quadrant is 2200 feet. So now I got to
make a decision since the clouds were about 2300 feet. I decided to
go above the clouds. I talked to Huntsville Center and informed them
of my intentions. They had no problem with my decision but cautioned
me to get below the clouds when I see land again. I was above the
clouds about 10 minutes although it seemed like forever!

Having been there and done it, I would never suggest going above a cloud
deck that you cannot see the other side where it may be clear.... I did
this after getting my VFR license and instead of Owensboro KY where I was
headed, I ended up in Lawrencville IL to wait out the weather (couple of
hours). Needless to say, after that trip, I got a'workin on my IFR
ticket.

The forecast in my trip was nothing compared what I experienced and I had
to divert. I fessed up to center as I had flight following too and they
were graceful enough to help me find a VFR airport.

I thought students had to have a constant visual ground reference and were
not to do VFR over the top, but I could be mistaken.

First of all congratulations on safely completing the flight...

Second of all, I hate to be the "spoil sport", but Allen is correct, and I
was going to say something too, but Allen kind of beat me to it.... These
do exist for a reason... mostly safety.

From the Student Pilot section of the FARs...

61.89 General limitations.
top
(a) A student pilot may not act as pilot in command of an aircraft:

(7) When the flight cannot be made with visual reference to the surface; or

(8) In a manner contrary to any limitations placed in the pilot's logbook by
an authorized instructor.

"CareBear" wrote:

I had asked my CFI if he thought I should fly another time and he
replied with something along the lines of how do YOU feel about it?

This is really what the solo X/C is all about -- learning how to make
decisions on your own.

About 40 nm from 3A1, I really had an experience. There were clouds
everywhere! The MEF for this quadrant is 2200 feet. So now I got to
make a decision since the clouds were about 2300 feet. I decided to go
above the clouds.

That's a decision that concerns me. What were you going to do if the cloud
deck went on for 100 miles and you couldn't find a place to get back down?
There is a reason why they've got this rule:

61.89 General limitations.
(a) A student pilot may not act as pilot in command of an aircraft:
(7) When the flight cannot be made with visual reference to the surface

which, BTW, you violated.

I talked to Huntsville Center and informed them of my intentions. They
had no problem with my decision

It's not ATC's job to tell you what you're allowed to do, or what's a good
idea. The controller doesn't know what your abilities are. It's not his
job to know what legal restrictions apply to student pilots, and it's
certainly not his job to make judgment calls about what's appropriate or
safe for you to do.

You probably told the controller something like, "I'm going to climb to
4500 to get above the clouds". What did you expect the controller to say?

(a) A student pilot may not act as pilot in command of an aircraft:
(7) When the flight cannot be made with visual reference to the surface; or

While a student pilot flying "over the top" ("on top" is an IFR
clearance) is dumb, the rule cited above does not (IMHO) prohibit it.
One can have visual reference to the surface while not legally being
able to fly to the surface due to cloud clearance or visibility
restrictions.

That is, a layer can be broken enough to provide visual reference to the
surface, but not broken enough to descend VFR through.

Any FAA decisions to the contrary?

Jose
--
"Never trust anything that can think for itself, if you can't see where
it keeps its brain." (chapter 10 of book 3 - Harry Potter).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose wrote in
. net:

(a) A student pilot may not act as pilot in command of an aircraft:
(7) When the flight cannot be made with visual reference to the
surface; or

While a student pilot flying "over the top" ("on top" is an IFR
clearance) is dumb, the rule cited above does not (IMHO) prohibit it.

What part of "may not" or "cannot" in the above rule permits VFR over the
top WITHOUT ground reference?

One can have visual reference to the surface while not legally being
able to fly to the surface due to cloud clearance or visibility
restrictions.

That is, a layer can be broken enough to provide visual reference to
the surface, but not broken enough to descend VFR through.

Entirely different sceneario what you have above. You say so yourself,
there is visual reference to the surface. The original poster gave me
the impression it was a solid cloud deck below him.

Bottom line would be VFR over a solid overcast would be a no no for a
student. VFR over the top over a broken overcast would be legal as long
as the student has the ability to identify surface features.

What you say is correct, doing a VFR flight over a broken cloud deck may
not be a wise decision, but as long as one has a visual reference to the
ground, the student pilot is following the letter to the law as he does
have ground references.

Smart no.....
Wise no.....

After all, the student may just have to descend through the crud....

Allen

What part of "may not" or "cannot" in the above rule permits VFR over the
top WITHOUT ground reference?

The fact that you can SEE the ground (have ground reference) through a
broken layer if it's "not that broken", even though you can't legally
descend through it VFR.

The original poster gave me
the impression it was a solid cloud deck below him.

In that case he not only would not be over the top, but he would also
not have ground reference. Two different things at the same time.

Bottom line would be VFR over a solid overcast would be a no no for a
student. VFR over the top over a broken overcast would be legal as long
as the student has the ability to identify surface features.

Yep. My point exactly.

the student pilot is following the letter to the law as he does
have ground references.

Smart no.....
Wise no.....

Ayup. "What's legal isn't always safe, and what's safe isn't always legal."

Jose
--
"Never trust anything that can think for itself, if you can't see where
it keeps its brain." (chapter 10 of book 3 - Harry Potter).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

CareBear wrote:

Going to CHA was an "interesting" flight. The winds on this flight had me
really going bump, bump, bump. I was getting thrown around like there was
no tomorrow .

Did you slow the plane down to 10-15 knots below VA? If you do you'll
find the bumps feel much softer and easier to handle. I often see
inexperienced pilots keep the airspeed high when flying through
turbulence, a natural reaction trying to escape a stressful situation
faster. In reality, slowing down would not only reduce the airframe
stress, it'll also makes the flight more pleasant by reducing the G
load you body feels when hitting a bump.

On 2006-10-29, CareBear wrote:

I had asked
my CFI if he thought I should fly another time and he replied with something
along the lines of how do YOU feel about it?
[snip]
I decided to go above the clouds. I talked to Huntsville Center
and informed them of my intentions. They had no problem with my decision

One of the great things about aviation is that the regulations and the
flying community still value personal responsibility. Aviation is not
a world of safety scissors, low-temperature coffee and stickers on
everything saying "Do Not Eat". When you're pilot in command, the buck
stops with you. I applaud you for getting the input of your instructor
and a controller. However, I'm concerned that you seem to be deferring
to their judgement to rationalize an iffy decision when your own instincts
suggest a more conservative course. Controllers, in particular, will
from time to time give you very bad advice. You need look no farther
than these newsgroups for ample evidence of that!

Also, since I didn't notice anyone else suggesting it, you might want to
send in an ASRS form since you did bust the rule about students flying
without visual reference to the ground.

--
Ben Jackson AD7GD

http://www.ben.com/