If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Andrew Gideon wrote
In his book "WeatherFlying," Captain Bob Buck offers this advice: First, fly from good weather to good weather; ceilings should be 1000 feet or higher, tops 7000 feet or lower. Takeoff and landing, of course, are in VFR conditions. Second, bad weather to good weather...take off into an overcast, climb to on top, land in VFR conditions. Third, good to bad...take off VFR, shoot an approach in deteriorating weather. If you can't get in, you can always turn around and go back to good weather. Fourth, bad enroute. Take off in decent VFR, fly in nasty conditions (clouds, no ice), land in VFR conditions. His fifth step deals with flying in thunderstorm weather, and I draw the line at that. At a minimum, I'd put #4 before #2. #2 might require a quick approach to return in case of a problem. I strongly disagree. Option #2 puts you in weather for only a few minutes, and at the very beginning of the trip when the weather information you have is at its freshest and your weather picture at its best. Relatively little is likely to go wrong, and if it does you have an escape path to VFR that you have already planned. Yes, option #2 makes less of a provision for mechanical failure - but mechanical failure is far less likely than unforecast weather deterioration. Option #4 puts you in weather for prolonged periods. There is every opportunity for the weather to deteriorate without you catching it. I just flew an example of #4 this past weekend, and it was easy. I took off in VFR, climbed into clouds, spent much of the trip in clouds, and dropped below the ceiling to execute a visual approach at the destination. Plenty of airports along the way were VMC, so I'd plenty of options. I've seen options disappear quickly and over a wide area. Sure, option #4 is TECHNICALLY less demanding - it requires less skill in aircraft control and following procedures. But that's precisely the area where the instrument rating curriculum is strongest. Option #4 also puts the most demands on your ability to monitor and predict the weather - exactly the area where the instrument rating curriculum is weakest. Michael |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Logging approaches | Ron Garrison | Instrument Flight Rules | 109 | March 2nd 04 05:54 PM |
CFI logging instrument time | Barry | Instrument Flight Rules | 21 | November 11th 03 12:23 AM |
Instrument Rating Ground School at Central Jersey Regional (47N) | john price | Instrument Flight Rules | 0 | October 29th 03 12:56 PM |
Instrument Rating Ground School at Central Jersey Regional (47N) | john price | Instrument Flight Rules | 0 | October 12th 03 12:25 PM |
Got my Instrument Rating! | Jazzy_Pilot | Instrument Flight Rules | 4 | August 21st 03 02:35 AM |