What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

C-124 zero/zero story

Great story

The C-124 was the heavy lifter when I was in the Air Force... Wow what a story! Thanks for sharing it. It does humble one.

Bob Axsom
 
Incredible!

I have a friend, in his 80's near Beaufort, S.C. Marine Corps air base. He asks for max lighting when heavy fog falls and he can't get to his nearby private strip.

He then flies down to DA in his Cessna 210 and remains level until the runway lights show through the fog, then descends to touchdown.

He then opens his pilot side door, looking at the yellow stripe, and taxies in.

I mentioned that he busted minimums and he said, "No, I could see the runway environment from the DA that I held."

True story, told to me and a friend, by him:eek:

Opinions? It scares me thinking about it.

Best,
 
I've practiced this sort if thing in VMC to my county airport with a waas approach down to les than 50 feet. In those zero/zero conditions, my touchdown without a radar altimeter wouldn't be as smooth. But I figure if I slow up enough to give an appropriate deck angle, the gps will take me right down centerline. Hopefully with a little visibility, I'd be able to flare and reduce the 400 fpm descent to something less. If not, I probably did worse as a student. Contingency planning is good. Best, Jim
 
pierre smith said:
I have a friend, in his 80's near Beaufort, S.C. Marine Corps air base. He asks for max lighting when heavy fog falls and he can't get to his nearby private strip.

He then flies down to DA in his Cessna 210 and remains level until the runway lights show through the fog, then descends to touchdown.

He then opens his pilot side door, looking at the yellow stripe, and taxies in.

I mentioned that he busted minimums and he said, "No, I could see the runway environment from the DA that I held."

True story, told to me and a friend, by him:eek:

Opinions? It scares me thinking about it.

Best,
Click to expand...

Aside from the fact that the vast majority of IFR approach arrival accidents are not only fatal, but a result of not following the rules, you can cite the part 91 requirements for him. I don't care how he "interprets" them, he's clearly violating them, and doing so at his and his pax peril. DA is not an MDA. It's the MAP and the desicion point.

§ 91.175 Takeoff and landing under IFR

(e) Missed approach procedures. Each pilot operating an aircraft, except a military aircraft of the United States, shall immediately execute an appropriate missed approach procedure when either of the following conditions exist:

(1) Whenever operating an aircraft pursuant to paragraph (c) or (l) of this section and the requirements of that paragraph are not met at either of the following times:

(i) When the aircraft is being operated below MDA; or

(ii) Upon arrival at the missed approach point, including a DA/DH where a DA/DH is specified and its use is required, and at any time after that until touchdown.

(2) Whenever an identifiable part of the airport is not distinctly visible to the pilot during a circling maneuver at or above MDA, unless the inability to see an identifiable part of the airport results only from a normal bank of the aircraft during the circling approach.
 
Last edited:
Familiarity helps

pierre smith said:
I have a friend, in his 80's near Beaufort, S.C. Marine Corps air base. He asks for max lighting when heavy fog falls and he can't get to his nearby private strip.

He then flies down to DA in his Cessna 210 and remains level until the runway lights show through the fog, then descends to touchdown.

He then opens his pilot side door, looking at the yellow stripe, and taxies in.

I mentioned that he busted minimums and he said, "No, I could see the runway environment from the DA that I held."

True story, told to me and a friend, by him:eek:

Opinions? It scares me thinking about it.

Best,
Click to expand...

I flew from SNA/John Wayne/Orange County airport to EMT/El Monte going to work each morning for 15 years and I had to make my fly/drive decision before the tower opened at SNA or EMT based on weather from three airports forming a triangle around EMT. The VOR-A approach is (was ?) from the POM VOR (something like the 257 radial as I recall) with a circle to land (usually on runway 19). Initially the minimum descent altitude was something like 400 feet but some jerk flying an incorrect missed approach conflicted with an airliner on approach to LAX caused a recertification that resulted in around a 600 ft rise in the MDA. Anyway, after flying the same approach every IFR day for years you know every house, street light, intersection and you know exactly how the clouds illumination below gets darker just before you break out. That doesn't mean you change the approach minimums but you can complete approaches with confidence when others less familiar would not be able to interpret the visual clues (runway lights in your friend's case) fast enough to be prepared for completing the visual part of the approach.

I have made several zero-zero takeoffs from SNA where following the barely visible yellow line to an intersection with 19R centerline was the the most difficult part of the departure. Breakout on top of the stratus layer was usually around 500 feet. At EMT the south end of the runway is sometimes in fog while the approach end of 19 is clear and that can cause roll out and taxi to transient parking difficulty. Going slow and following the yellow line was effective for me - again with environment familiarity. Another situalion that causes a surprising problem is thin ground fog - you have great visibility of the runway until you settle onto it then everything goes white and the brakes and directional gyro take on added importance. Familiarity never led to complacency in me - I always tightened up the limits and sharpened my senses in dealing with less than perfect conditions. The C-124 story of this thread is amazing - remember this was before GPS and moving map displays. When you are in DS with no options it is good to have a workable plan even if it requires that you think about the situation and exercise the Pilot-in-command responsibility rather than a set of standard rules in a book somewhere.

Bob Axsom
 
Last edited:
Great story

I remember reading it in Flying or one of the other magazines many years ago.
Not a story you forget. Thanks for sharing it.
Bill
 
Radar altimeter saved their bacon for sure. Wonder how hard it would be to design/build one that is light and integrates into an EFIS. ;)
 
Here, Bob.

They had them on display at our recent NAAA convention. They're mounted in a standard, round inspection plate hole and tell our absolute altitude.

Lemme see what I can find out.

OK, Bob, I just got off the phone speaking with Southeastern Aircraft in Ft. Pierce, Fl. and it's a Laser altimeter...cost $4,900 and they can order you one from Air Tractor.

I found the manufacturer here: http://www.mdl.co.uk/en/15103.aspx

Best,
 
Last edited:
RV8R999 said:
No take-off minimums at SNA?
Click to expand...

From AOPA website:

"Takeoff minimums
Those of us operating under Part 91 of the FARs are legally allowed to take off in zero-zero conditions. It's not particularly smart, but then again it's not prohibited by the regs."
 
What he said

I committed to take this method to get to work and accepted the risks associated with it.

Bob Axsom
 
C-124

I had a number of flights in 'Old Shaky!'

Seemed like we would drone on and on and never get there. But, get there she did!

Besides the nose clam shell doors, she had a small elevator under the fuselage that could load something the size of a jeep. Each engine ignition could be monitored from the Flight Engineer seat with an ocilloscope type device. There were tunnels in the wings so that a limited amount of engine work could be done in-flight.

Like a bumble bee, the C-124 did not look capable of flight, but Mr Douglas proved us wrong.
 
Vern said:
I had a number of flights in 'Old Shaky!'

Seemed like we would drone on and on and never get there. But, get there she did!

Besides the nose clam shell doors, she had a small elevator under the fuselage that could load something the size of a jeep. Each engine ignition could be monitored from the Flight Engineer seat with an ocilloscope type device. There were tunnels in the wings so that a limited amount of engine work could be done in-flight.

Like a bumble bee, the C-124 did not look capable of flight, but Mr Douglas proved us wrong.
Click to expand...

Cool!!!! Love the details.
 
tobinbasford said:
From AOPA website:

"Takeoff minimums
Those of us operating under Part 91 of the FARs are legally allowed to take off in zero-zero conditions. It's not particularly smart, but then again it's not prohibited by the regs."
Click to expand...

Huh...just looked it up in the FARs and you are correct. I was erroneously applying Navy standards and ASSuming...ooops.

The Navy allows 0/0 take-off but you have to have a special qualification (something like 2000 total hours and 500 hrs instrument).

In 27 years I only used it 3 times - all for emergencies.
 
An emergency take off?

RV8R999 said:
Huh...just looked it up in the FARs and you are correct. I was erroneously applying Navy standards and ASSuming...ooops.

The Navy allows 0/0 take-off but you have to have a special qualification (something like 2000 total hours and 500 hrs instrument).

In 27 years I only used it 3 times - all for emergencies.
Click to expand...

Isn't that a contradiction in terms?..:)

i have made several 0/0 takeoffs as well..I actually rather enjoy them..

Frank
 
frankh said:
Isn't that a contradiction in terms?..:)

i have made several 0/0 takeoffs as well..I actually rather enjoy them..

Frank
Click to expand...

Emergency take-off:

1. Sailor had a heart attack while at sea on an FFG. Fly to carrier or sailor dies - my call. Sailor died anyway.
2. SAR - F18 pilot ejected at sea at night. Strike group is 0/0 in fog/mist, while search area is reported CAVU. We are closest ship by 50 miles,easy decision - launch. MIA.
3. Mission tasking GOA
 
Last edited:
RV8R999 said:
Can you be specific, how so?
Click to expand...

I think he's referring to taking off as an emergency action - most of us would not consider a takeoff as an emergency, but if you had a condition you needed to escape from (military action) or an urgent mission (cargo delivery or rescue) you could consider that emergency conditions requiring the flight.

Since you make reference to Navy criteria immediately prior to that statement I'm guessing that has something to do with it?
 
That was my thought

After I posted the msg..it must have been SAR/military related and not GA where there is no such thing..At least I hope not!

Frank
 
My Take On 0/0 Takeoffs

First, gotta admit that I did one once. Rural airport, back taxied full length of RW to check for deer - no wind to worry about anyway. Shifted right of centerline so I could follow the stripe. Full power to the PA28-300 and off before I could break a sweat. On top at 200 feet and all the way across southern Michigan without seeing the ground and knowing it was all 0/0. My first thought after breakout? Geez, this isn't the brightest thing I've done with an airplane.
I know, I know; it was legal. I was qualified and my plane was really well equipped- dual VORs and the latest in ADF ( a movable compass card). What struck me was that while I had considered the risk to myself, I hadn't really given a second thought to anyone on the ground should the engine quit running.
This was about 30 years ago, and I still hold onto it as one of my three top bonehead flying decisions-no emergency, no rescue mission. Just headed out to work. My other top two involved ice and also occurred back when I knew everything about flying.
Terry, CFI
RV9A N323TP
 
zero-zero takeoffs

I don't consider these foolish or stupid. They are a carefully calculated risk. I have done rvr 700/700/600 in a jet where in reality you can only see one or two centerline lights. With a rotation speed of 150 plus knots in the jet, I am probably slightly more comfortable in a much slower single with a rotation speed of 70/80 knots. Any one who regularly flys low IFR weather should be prepared to make a zero zero landing. The reality is that in the era of the C124, centerline and touchdown zone lights probably had not even been thought of. Understand that when you buy a ticket on the airline there is always the chance you will do a 7/7/6 takeoff and or a landing to cat 3A, depending on the airline and the airplane. I much prefer to be in the left front seat for either event, even if the airplane is single engine. I don't know of any single operators approved for cat 3 but certainly there are some corporate jet operators approved for this. I am reminded once again of the time Dick Rutan dead sticked the Long Eze to an abandoned runway in south TX. He could see the runway straight down thru the fog, the next time he say the runway was at touchdown. A timed pattern from overhead, essentially zero visibility in the fog.
 
There's quite a bit of a difference doing a low vis takeoff in a jet where the loss of an engine means a lower climb rate, but still climbing, and a single where you're going down. Even a 1/4 mile visibility may give the single driver some chance of redirecting the aircraft toward a safer landing spot versus zero.
 
zero takeoff

In the jet the problem is maintaining directional control in the event of an engine failure before V1. In a single with a 8000' runway an engine failure should put you back in the vicinity of the runway-straight ahead.
 
More Than One Engine Makes 0/0 A Whole Different Game

"They are a carefully calculated risk."
Jim:
I certainly agree with you, but extensive areas of coverage well under minimums makes single engine instrument flight a very high risk - for those in the plane as well as those on the ground. Overflight is one thing, as risk may be mitigated somewhat by increased altitude. Launching off into 0/0 or below minimums with no "outs" for a significant time in a single moves the calculation off my scale, especially if the flight has nothing to do with saving a life.
Fortunately around the Great Lakes, if you don't like the weather, you usually don't have to wait more than 10-15 minutes for it to change. For those times when it doesn't, I've usually got a RON kit aboard.
Terry
 
Airlines do it, or used to...

The commuter airline I used to work for made us do zero/zero take offs routinely, if they needed the plane back at the hub. I remember doing several out of Charleston, WV. The fog would often form below the airport in the valleys and then lift up to the airport elevation by our departure time.

They would put the passengers on a later flight out, since it was below take-off minimums for 135 or 121, and we would fly back Part 91 so we could fly the rest of our trip. Saved them money rather than have the plane sit there until conditions improved.

I enjoyed them myself. Nothing like flying down the runway with only a few visible RW CLs lines in front of you, then pulling back on the yoke. Usually within seconds you would be blasting out of the top into the bright sun. Very dramatic. We trained in the sim for it as well.

Lest some are tempted, I would never do it in a single, or even a non turbine twin.
 
zero zero

A few years ago I flew with a gentleman that had over 300 ocean crossings in light aircraft, the majority single engine. Louise Sacchi had over 330 ocean crossings. Max Conrad well over 200. Conrad had one engine failure and deadsticked on the Greenland icecap. As far as I can determine none of the above ever went in the water. Look up earthrounders and see the amazing number of people that have flown singles around the world. Zero/zero takeoffs seem rather benign when compared to an ocean crossing in a single. A typical situation where I MIGHT CONSIDER a zero takeoff would be where the departure airport is fogged in and the big airport 15 miles away is clear.
 
jrs14855 said:
A few years ago I flew with a gentleman that had over 300 ocean crossings in light aircraft, the majority single engine. Louise Sacchi had over 330 ocean crossings. Max Conrad well over 200. Conrad had one engine failure and deadsticked on the Greenland icecap. As far as I can determine none of the above ever went in the water. Look up earthrounders and see the amazing number of people that have flown singles around the world. Zero/zero takeoffs seem rather benign when compared to an ocean crossing in a single. A typical situation where I MIGHT CONSIDER a zero takeoff would be where the departure airport is fogged in and the big airport 15 miles away is clear.
Click to expand...


I'll take ditching in the ocean over losing an engine off the departure end when it's zero/zero. Having been "blue water" I can tell you it's unnerving, but losing a sole engine in the goo just off the end I'd rather not experience.

In one case you're likely to have put a rescue plan in place, have been in comms or position reporting, and have all survival gear pre-po'd. The other... well just hope for the best. The whole risk mitigation argument...

BTW I have that SIFR rating that Ken was talking about, and I've never seen anyone use it including myself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top