Matronics Email Lists Forum Index Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
 
 Get Email Distribution Too!Get Email Distribution Too!    FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

"Light" IFR???

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> AeroElectric-List
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
psiegel(at)fuse.net
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Jan 15, 2006 8:26 am    Post subject: "Light" IFR??? Reply with quote

The concept of "light IFR" should be put to rest once and for all.

Once you fly into the clouds, the distinction of light or heavy IFR is GONE! IMC is IMC! (Let's not even consider ice and/or thunderstorms for this discussion.)

Once IMC, you are essentially at the mercy of the controllers from that point on!

When in IMC, you better plan on the possibility AND be prepared for any eventuality including an ILS approach down to minimums! Design you panel accordingly! Consider radios and an autopilot to which you can literally trust you life!

Why do I feel so strongly about this? One flight in my log book stands out: I was making a trip from Cincinnati Lunken to Detroit City Airport. Because my light twin was in for maintenance, I decided to make the trip in my Long EZ. Detroit was supposed to be marginal VFR. To be conservative I filed an IFR flight plan (with the concept of "light IFR" in mind.) Got into the soup over Dayton and never saw the ground again until after one missed and finally a second successful approach close to minimums into Detroit. The concept of "kissing the ground" upon deplaning took on a whole new meaning after that experience!

PLEASE keep this in mind when designing your panel!

Paul Siegel


- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
Back to top
richard(at)RILEY.NET
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Jan 15, 2006 10:23 am    Post subject: "Light" IFR??? Reply with quote

At 08:24 AM 1/15/06, you wrote:

Quote:


The concept of "light IFR" should be put to rest once and for all.

Once you fly into the clouds, the distinction of light or heavy IFR
is GONE! IMC is IMC! (Let's not even consider ice and/or
thunderstorms for this discussion.)

In southern California airports close to the coast - like Santa
Monica, Torrance, Long Beach, Orange County, Palomar, Oxnard, Santa
Barbara - get "early morning and late night overcast." It's a pretty
thin layer, 2 to 500 feet thick, that can last till early
afternoon. It extends some mile inland. And it sits. It's stable,
it doesn't change quickly or much. It burns off fairly predictably.

If you can't get through it sometimes you'll sit on the ground from
March till July.

It's what I consider light IMC. No rain, no fog, just 30 seconds on
instruments. If I'm flying back in and it deteriorates, I divert
inland where - 5 miles away - it's 20 miles vis and clear.

I understand that in the midwest it's another thing altogether,
things change quickly. But in my climate, light IFR is a reality.

OTOH, my idea of a panel for light IFR is a Bluemountain EFIS 1,
Garmin 480, EHSI, and backup electric AI and T&S, airspeed and altitude.
--


- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
Back to top
highflight1(at)gmail.com
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 6:17 am    Post subject: "Light" IFR??? Reply with quote

I don't think that "light IFR" has as much to do with equipment as it does
with intent.
To fly IFR, you have to be legally equipped to handle whatever equipment the
type of approach you want to shoot requires. Period. Anything else is not
"light IFR", it's just plain suicide.

Light IFR is more to explain a person's intent and how he/she will accept
minimums and alternate minimums. If a "light IFR" pilot gets into heavy
soup, they will still have the equipment they need to land safely if they
are equipped to fly what they filed.

Now, the matter of that pilot being mentally prepared and currently
trained... that's a different issue.

Vern W.
On 1/15/06, Richard Riley <richard(at)riley.net> wrote:
Quote:



At 08:24 AM 1/15/06, you wrote:

>
>
>The concept of "light IFR" should be put to rest once and for all.
>
>Once you fly into the clouds, the distinction of light or heavy IFR
>is GONE! IMC is IMC! (Let's not even consider ice and/or
>thunderstorms for this discussion.)



- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
Back to top
rtitsworth(at)mindspring.
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 6:41 am    Post subject: "Light" IFR??? Reply with quote

Quote:

The concept of "light IFR" should be put to rest once and for all.
Once you fly into the clouds, the distinction of light or heavy IFR
is GONE! ....


Quote:
In southern California airports close to the coast - like Santa
Monica, Torrance, Long Beach, Orange County, Palomar, Oxnard, Santa
Barbara - get "early morning and late night overcast." It's a pretty
thin layer...


My $.02: The comments/posts got me thinking about ADM, Risk Management,
personally minimum, and the "reality" of IFR flight decisions. I'm not a
writer, but thought I'd share my thoughts 1) to help personally crystallize
them and 2) to invite/provoke comment with the desire for additional
learning.

I live in Detroit and agree with psiege. In the Mid-west, we can be IFR
with low ceilings, low vis, multiple layers, sometimes wind/turbulence,
often icing, for days/weeks and 250 miles or more in all directions -
nothing to "play" with. Many experienced pilots have near-miss stories, a
few others were not so lucky, and there are numerous NTSB reports about VFR
into IMC. All IFR in the Midwest (or elsewhere) is IFR. If fact some VMC
is really IFR (over remote areas on a dark night, in the clear over the hazy
great lakes at dusk/dawn, etc).

However, I did my initial instrument training while on an extended work
assignment in SoCal. As rriley states, the LA "sea layer" overcast is
typically "local" and relatively stable/predictable - more so than a Detroit
VFR day. It often implies a different IFR scenario and offers various
bailout options.

In SoCal, if we're going to consider different IFR equipment/currency for
Hard vs Light IFR, then the "need", is to be sure we can tell the difference
and have the discipline to respect it. This is not easy as there is no
real/fixed definition, the Wx briefs aren't necessarily setup to help us
clearly discern it, and many Pilots will occasionally "push" the envelope -
this thread is proof.

The risks with a SoCal coastal sea layer may be much different than a
typical Midwest "white flight", but are not insignificant. First, there's
lots of traffic, lots of radio congestion, relatively tight/complex complex
airspace, and fewer good off-field options over the congested metropolis -
Little room for less than our full attention. But wait, the AI/DG/CDI/ALT
or PFD also demand our full attention (even if for only 60-90 seconds) -
Thus, the need for not stretching "field of vision" definitions or selecting
equipment which may not be IFR reliable, or unnecessarily increase our IFR
workload.

While the existence of the sea layer itself is often stable/predictable -
what's sometimes "unpredictable" about the sea layer is the ceiling. I've
seen it drop from 1000ft/5mi to 0/0 in 1 min (especially on the fringes
and/or close to the ocean). I've been cleared and landed on a visual
approach at MRY through a (VFR) scattered layer, and then not been able to
see the Ramp/Tower 1 minute later while taxing. I know MRY is technically
NorCal - same point.

Since the SeaLayer if often very local, the ATIS can become more? important
than the TAR/TAF/AreaForecast. Yet, I'm sure we've all had an "ATIS
experience" that was less than accurate - either too high or too low - or
"being updated", etc. Any concept of "light IFR" still demands vigilance to
MDA/MDH and needs to contain the real possibility of missed approaches and
all the workload/discipline that goes with them.

Additionally, SoCal has CummuliousGranite (terrain/mountains). Many
"sealayer" airports are right next to them (TOA, SBA, SMA,...). Mix a night
VFR flight over a scattered/broken sea layer and the dark spots/splotches
(clouds and mountains) can look very similar. This can be very disorienting
- even when technically VFR. Again, no room for IFR error.

ATC is always there to help. But again, I've been cleared to "turn 10'
right and incept the localizer...", when the localizer was 10' left. Yes a
bad clearance and a mistake by ATC, but ultimately the pilot is the guy with
his butt on the line and thus required to be aware of everything - even on a
simple "light IFR" approach.

All said, there might be "SoCal Light IFR" and I might successfully fly
through it multiple times (IFR with minimum equipment/workload). BUT IT CAN
STILL BE TRICKY/DANGEROUS/DEADLY STUFF. I'd never imply anything different
to a student and/or fellow pilot!

For a well trained/skilled/current IFR pilot, a "minimally adequate"
aircraft in "SoCal light IFR" may be technically legal and perhaps within
his/her personal minimums. But, the risks are real, they're still "pushing
the envelope", and adding "some" stress to the entire IFR system.

If we accept that, well ok, we're PIC's, and flying itself is has some risk.
But if we try and convince ourselves (or passengers) of anything less, we're
not being honest.

Perhaps there's another ADM dangerous attitude: "I'm within the letter of
the regulation (or it's ambiguity), so it's ok/acceptable". The anecdotal
thought would be something like: "the regulations/minimum are just that
minimums, and I should treat/respect them as dangerous ground."

The FAM/AIM are decision floors set by the FAA, they are not perfect and
sometimes/often unclear. Sometimes they may be/seem too conservative - but
the NTSB stats indicate that, overall, they still allow pilots (like us) to
get into trouble. It's up to us to take individual responsibility to raise
the bar and set personally honest minimums. As a group we should be
encouraging each other to honestly review/set/raise these as appropriate -
since the common natural tendency is to build skill/experience/capability to
otherwise lower them.

My $.02

Rick


- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
Back to top
Dan.Beadle(at)hq.inclines
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 8:11 am    Post subject: "Light" IFR??? Reply with quote

I think you make a great point about the So-Cal weather.

IFR is dangerous. It is a compromise: increased risk for increased
utility (getting there).

While " CummuliousGranite" provides some additional risk, it also makes
IFR less risky: If you have problems in the June Gloom, you can most
always get to VFR and proceed to a nearby VFR airport. The June Gloom
stratus layer is rarely 2000' thick. Big Bear, at 6700' is always VFR
during these conditions. As are the desert airports.

This makes IFR-LITE a possibility in So-Cal, where it may not be in
areas with low ceilings stretching for hundreds of miles.

Airplanes are inherently dangerous - that is why we train. To fly IFR,
we also need to equip airplanes adequately to survive any system
failure. A single point of failure should not bring down an airplane.
Some planes are designed to tolerate dual failures (ie. Fail the vacuum
and an instrument electrical bus) The design issue is a compromise:
dollars, weight, pilot work load,etc.

For most of us, the most likely single point of failure is the pilot.
Adding a redundant pilot (or two if we want to take a vote) probably
makes more sense than dual AHRS, unless they are part of completely
redundant systems (separate batteries, separate PFDs, etc.).

Me, I am going EFIS, brand TBD, with a separately powered electric gyro.
--


- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
Back to top
lhelming(at)sigecom.net
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 4:12 pm    Post subject: "Light" IFR??? Reply with quote

Light IFR: defined in the Midwest as being on top of or below an overcast
cloud layer with AWOS/ASOS info that tells them on the other side of the
layer there are VFR conditions -- with adequate ceiling near the ground, or
above a certain level where the overcast top is. Light IFR pilots have not
filed IFR or may not be IFR qualified or legally equipped for IFR, but they
go on the instruments long enough to fly up or down through the clouds to
the other side expecting better conditions.

Is there another definition of light ifr? do not archive

Indiana Larry, RV7 Tip Up SunSeeker 77 hours

"Please use the information and opinions I express with responsibility, and
at your own risk."
---


- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
Back to top
gyoung



Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 211
Location: Republic of Texas

PostPosted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 5:16 pm    Post subject: "Light" IFR??? Reply with quote

My god, I hope there's another definition that doesn't involve being
both stupid and illegal... With emphasis on the stupid.

Greg Young
Quote:
Light IFR: defined in the Midwest as being on top of or
below an overcast cloud layer with AWOS/ASOS info that tells
them on the other side of the layer there are VFR conditions
-- with adequate ceiling near the ground, or above a certain
level where the overcast top is. Light IFR pilots have not
filed IFR or may not be IFR qualified or legally equipped for
IFR, but they go on the instruments long enough to fly up or
down through the clouds to the other side expecting better conditions.

Is there another definition of light ifr? do not archive

Indiana Larry, RV7 Tip Up SunSeeker 77 hours



- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 6:11 pm    Post subject: "Light" IFR??? Reply with quote

Light IFR is the flying done on a computer flight simulator. IFR is not
light.

John Cox

Quote:


On 1/15/06, Richard Riley <richard(at)riley.net> wrote:
>
>
> <richard(at)riley.net>
>
> At 08:24 AM 1/15/06, you wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >The concept of "light IFR" should be put to rest once and for all.
> >
> >Once you fly into the clouds, the distinction of light or heavy IFR
> >is GONE! IMC is IMC! (Let's not even consider ice and/or
> >thunderstorms for this discussion.)
>






- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
Back to top
rtitsworth(at)mindspring.
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 7:45 pm    Post subject: "Light" IFR??? Reply with quote

[quote] --

- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
Back to top
brian



Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 643
Location: Sacramento, California, USA

PostPosted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 8:41 pm    Post subject: "Light" IFR??? Reply with quote

John W. Cox wrote:
Quote:


IFR is not light.

There are different levels of difficulty in flying IFR. The skill level
to penetrate a cloud layer and then break out 1000' above the ground
with 2-3 mi visibility is not the same as flying in known ice,
turbulence, avoiding embedded CBs, and then shooting a tricky approach
breaking out at minimums. The former will permit a greater degree of
inaccuracy without endangering the aircraft or passengers.

I know that, depending on how I am feeling and my recent practice, I
will change my go/no-go decision point. I will accept "light" IFR when I
might not be willing to launch into something heavier.

We can be pedantic if we choose to but the bottom line is that there are
degrees of IFR difficulty.

--
Brian Lloyd 2243 Cattle Dr.
brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)

I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery


- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List

_________________
Brian Lloyd
brian-yak at lloyd dot com
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)

I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
lhelming(at)sigecom.net
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2006 5:12 am    Post subject: "Light" IFR??? Reply with quote

---

- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
Back to top
cjensen(at)dts9000.com
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:47 am    Post subject: "Light" IFR??? Reply with quote

All violation of FAR are not stupid, all stupid things are not illegal,
but as you pointed out, this is both stupid and illegal. The closet I
am willing admit to stupid and illegal was getting caught above an
overcast a couple times before being rated and requesting an IFR Letdown
from Approach, which they gave. I already knew the cloud cover was
2000'+ agl.

After being rated, on a flight with flight following, I was above a
layer. The request for an IFR Letdown was followed by a quiry if I was
rated-and-equipped, which I was able to answer honestly 'yes'. But
transversing layers while not on and IFR flight plan or in contact with
Approach---no way. That ain't 'light IFR'.
Chuck Jensen
Do Not Archive

My god, I hope there's another definition that doesn't involve being
both stupid and illegal... With emphasis on the stupid.

Greg Young
Quote:
Light IFR: defined in the Midwest as being on top of or
below an overcast cloud layer with AWOS/ASOS info that tells
them on the other side of the layer there are VFR conditions
-- with adequate ceiling near the ground, or above a certain
level where the overcast top is. Light IFR pilots have not
filed IFR or may not be IFR qualified or legally equipped for
IFR, but they go on the instruments long enough to fly up or
down through the clouds to the other side expecting better conditions.

Is there another definition of light ifr? do not archive

Indiana Larry, RV7 Tip Up SunSeeker 77 hours



- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
Back to top
Tim(at)MyRV10.com
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2006 7:01 am    Post subject: "Light" IFR??? Reply with quote

Greg is saying "illegal" (and I agree with him) because
Larry said "fly up or down through the clouds to the other
side expecting better conditions".

What Larry basically described, is VFR on top, and plain
VFR. The blasting through the layer made it illegal.

IFR flying carries with it some pretty heavy responsibilities
and extreme consequences. It is only through the very high
level of legal procedures that everyone is kept safe.
I think it would be nuts to blast through the cloud
layer without an IFR clearnace. Why? Because the only
way you're going to get separation from other IFR traffic
that might be IN that same cloud, is if everyone is
following the rules and in communication with ATC.

Here's a question for you.... Why does the VFR standard
cloud clearance call for only 500 below, 1000 above,
but it looks for a whole 2000 laterally? 2000' isn't
even nearly enough in clear skies to have a 200mph
plane come blasting out the side of a cloud at you.
Being IN the cloud without the clearance does make
it stupid.

VFR is VFR, IFR is IFR. The worst problems happen
when people try to allow themselves to get caught
where the 2 mix.
Tim Olson -- RV-10 #40170

Greg Young wrote:
Quote:


My god, I hope there's another definition that doesn't involve being
both stupid and illegal... With emphasis on the stupid.

Greg Young



>Light IFR: defined in the Midwest as being on top of or
>below an overcast cloud layer with AWOS/ASOS info that tells
>them on the other side of the layer there are VFR conditions
>-- with adequate ceiling near the ground, or above a certain
>level where the overcast top is. Light IFR pilots have not
>filed IFR or may not be IFR qualified or legally equipped for
>IFR, but they go on the instruments long enough to fly up or
>down through the clouds to the other side expecting better conditions.
>
>Is there another definition of light ifr? do not archive
>
>Indiana Larry, RV7 Tip Up SunSeeker 77 hours
>



- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
Back to top
Larry McFarland



Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 36
Location: East Moline, Illinois

PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:27 pm    Post subject: "Light" IFR??? Reply with quote

Tim,
I must agree that flying between layers is dangerous if you've not got
flight following
going, even if the legal access and clearances are maintained. My son
and I were flying
to southern Illinois in a Cessna near Peoria with an overcast we
wouldn't climb thru and
a broken layer below us heading south east when we noticed very briefly,
a C-130 emerging
from the lower layer crossing our path only 100 feet beneath us. Its
right wing was not visible
as it passed essentially below us. There weren't 10 seconds between the
time we saw it and
the football sized aircraft crossed and disappeared into the white
overcast on our right.
I don't know if they knew we were there, but since, I've felt uneasy
about flying "VFR"
between layers of overcast.

Larry McFarland - 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com
do not archive

Quote:


VFR is VFR, IFR is IFR. The worst problems happen
when people try to allow themselves to get caught
where the 2 mix.
Tim Olson -- RV-10 #40170










- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List

_________________
Larry McFarland - 601HDS - Stratus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Eric M. Jones



Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 565
Location: Massachusetts

PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2006 2:14 pm    Post subject: Re: "Light IFR" Reply with quote

"Light IFR" is flying through a storm that doesn't have a name.

(do not archive)


- The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List

_________________
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> AeroElectric-List All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group