Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
  • 1
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 16
User avatar
By Rob P
#1911524
It's a difficult one. If you don't once in a while explore the edges of your own flying weather you will end up restricted to CAVOK, calm wind days.

If you do try and widen your experience you risk the aircraft and yourself.

I'm not sure there really is an answer.

Rob P
Ibra, TheFarmer, FrankS liked this
By Ibra
#1911526
It’s “easy”, try smaller yourself with a way out or fly with someone who has the right experience? there is no harm in expanding flight enveloppe as long as you have a way out, training, equipment & currency

I flew into convective clouds on my own locally “for fun” and once with someone on a challenging trip, in both cases expectation & skill & currency were slightly bellow exposure & risk & unknown but there was a clear way out…

PS: you don’t have to be in a dark clouds to get a taste of severe turbulences you would get inside convective clouds: cloud surfing tops of stratocumulus, thermaling beneath dark cumulus, flirting downwind of an anvil cloud in VMC before it send hail…all these have enough taster on what to expect (inside you get more: darkness, icing, no radio, lightning, hail….)
TomWW liked this
User avatar
By Flyin'Dutch'
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1911536
Rob P wrote:It's a difficult one. If you don't once in a while explore the edges of your own flying weather you will end up restricted to CAVOK, calm wind days.

If you do try and widen your experience you risk the aircraft and yourself.

I'm not sure there really is an answer.

Rob P


Exploring one's personal envelope does not require people to go beyond the boundaries of safety or legality.
A4 Pacific, A le Ron, AlanM and 1 others liked this
User avatar
By Rob P
#1911546
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:Exploring one's personal envelope does not require people to go beyond the boundaries of safety or legality.


The 'legality' is a given. But for 'safety', how are you supposed to know where that boundary is? You can't get it from a book. You can't get it from an instructor.

Rob P
By TomWW
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1911562
GAFlyer4Fun wrote:
TomWW wrote:It may well be that they had done it before and got away with it. So they thought they could do it again. That is definitely a point as far as I am concerned. Normalisation of risk is an insidious process. You seem to be missing the point that they have done it before with no problem.


Not specific to this mishap, but to some extent isnt this how most PPL pilots spread their wings with their weather comfort zone? It wont always be cavok and eventually they will go beyond the familiar local flying area.

…….

It is particularly difficult for inexperienced pilots to know what is seriously ok and what is bar talk/gung-ho.


I couldn’t agree more. If you never push your limits you will be very restricted.

The problem here, as I see it, is they were pushing into weather the aircraft was not capable of safe flight in and, total speculation, possible did not realise what they were doing.

The airframe was cold soaked flying at that height. Then they flew into seriously nasty cloud and possible got icing. If they got icing or not I suppose we will never know. But on top of the turbulence it may well have added to the problems.
By TomWW
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1911563
Rob P wrote:
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:Exploring one's personal envelope does not require people to go beyond the boundaries of safety or legality.


The 'legality' is a given. But for 'safety', how are you supposed to know where that boundary is? You can't get it from a book. You can't get it from an instructor.

Rob P


As an IR rated pilot I won’t fly VFR at the legal limits. I want more visibility than the legal min in class G.

I do know a lot of VFR pilots who fly a bit of IMC. I’m not saying it’s right, but it happens.

I saw someone flying legal VFR today. When I decided not to fly due to weather.
Flyin'Dutch' liked this
#1911567
To bring home to students as well as anyone just how quickly desperation and panic sets in when attempting to avoid either the onset or developing spatial disorientation, perhaps an hour of blind flying with an instructor should be included in the pilot training syllabus or, as part of the biennial revue.
Rob P liked this
By TopCat
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1911570
Loco parentis wrote:All the aircraft I've ever owned were unable to leave the ground unless the tanks were full and the sky clear of cloud.

Is this some kind of trick post? What do you mean, 'unable', for a start?

If it's not a trick, it's ridiculous. Full tanks might mean overweight, and SKC can be legal vis yet so appalling that it isn't safe for anyone that isn't instrument qualified.

If this is some kind of actual weather go/no-go criterion, it's a rubbish way of building any kind of judgement in a pilot.

If it's some kind of play on words, I've been had.
By TopCat
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1911573
Rob P wrote:If you don't once in a while explore the edges of your own flying weather you will end up restricted to CAVOK, calm wind days.

If you do try and widen your experience you risk the aircraft and yourself.

I'm not sure there really is an answer.

I think there is. The ultimate test is whether, when you approach the edge of what you know, and go beyond it, you have a route back to the known.

If you don't, then it was unsafe. Maybe you got away with it, but if you did, that isn't what made it safe. It's the abort options that make the difference between safe and unsafe.

If you have a route back, you can explore the unknown. Back in the day, I taught myself far more about aircraft handling than I ever learned with an instructor. Except spinning. You can't be in a spin a little bit.
Last edited by TopCat on Sun May 15, 2022 9:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By Iceman
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1911585
@Loco parentis’ suggestion sounds quite sensible to me. If you’re not going to go to the trouble of a full IR(r), then an hour under the hood of ‘get out of trouble’ flying is going to be a good thing to do (save that the advice would be “don’t put yourself there in the first place”). When I did my CAA PPL, you had to do four hours of the 40 hour PPL course under the hood. Sadly, they reduced this to an hour under JAA / EASA.

Iceman
Last edited by Iceman on Sun May 15, 2022 10:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
#1911586
TopCat

I think there is. The ultimate test is whether, when you approach the edge of what you know, and go beyond it, you have a route back to the known.


I really like that thinking. It’s excellent. :thumright:

Blundering into cloud without current skills and/or qualification is suicidal. Push the limits for VMC and you’re likely to be taken. As has been explained, the legal limits are already very marginal, and that’s even if you can accurately assess them at those limits in flight!
Last edited by A4 Pacific on Sun May 15, 2022 10:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Andrew Sinclair, TopCat liked this
  • 1
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 16