What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Personal IFR limits, precautions, & concerns in an RV

Steve Brown

Well Known Member
The purpose of this thread is so that pilots can share what they do to stay safe while flying IFR in an RV, or could include other similar airplanes. I've noticed on some other threads that some pilots have great ideas and areas of concern that should be shared with others.

This is not a thread to debate whether IFR should be done in an RV, so if you want to pontificate on that subject, please start your own thread.

The scope is judgment, planning, hardware, health, basically anything you take into consideration. Reasons are helpful, especially if they involve almost dead experiences. Posts need not be all inclusive and in fact the top things that immediately come to mind may be most revealing and helpful. Don't hesitate to write the same things others have already written. This is also useful.

I'll post my comments after a while

Why am I bringing this up? I'm almost at the end of my IFR currency. I need to go fix that so this subject is on my mind.
 
dont have an RV yet, but I fly IFR in rentals... typically my personal minimums make it almost pointless to have my instrument rating... oh well. :)
 
stupid pilot tricks

The purpose of this thread is so that pilots can share what they do to stay safe while flying IFR in an RV, or could include other similar airplanes. I've noticed on some other threads that some pilots have great ideas and areas of concern that should be shared with others.

This is not a thread to debate whether IFR should be done in an RV, so if you want to pontificate on that subject, please start your own thread.

The scope is judgment, planning, hardware, health, basically anything you take into consideration. Reasons are helpful, especially if they involve almost dead experiences. Posts need not be all inclusive and in fact the top things that immediately come to mind may be most revealing and helpful. Don't hesitate to write the same things others have already written. This is also useful.

I'll post my comments after a while

Why am I bringing this up? I'm almost at the end of my IFR currency. I need to go fix that so this subject is on my mind.
Well you might not like my answer since I don't give any scary stories and pontificate. This is a very complicated serous subject, why do pilots crash or as you say "almost dead experiences". Excuse the pontification, but I think it might be useful to others and may be yourself as well.

Teaching, "judgment, planning, hardware, health, basically anything you take into consideration" is hard to do with stories. There's definitely benefit from reading NTSB reports or AOPA's annual safety stats, but you have to take that further into something you can apply to your flying (and new scenarios).

I understand you want "stupid pilot trick" or "I scared my self" stories. I use to be very interested in "Flying" magazine's, I learned about flying stories when I was starting out, "There I was at 10,000 feet and...." After reading them for decades I learned there are recurring themes. As my flying career progressed I realized what is more relevant than memorizing other peoples near disaster scenarios, is what can I do to avoid all accidents. For example following strict standard procedures is one, I call my safety net. The other is currency and continuous updating of knowledge, general aviation knowledge AND/OR real time in-flight knowledge, aka situational awareness.

Most of this subject has been synthesized and incorporated into a subject call Crew Resource Management or "CRM" for professional flight crews. The topic involves, skill, knowledge, communications, situational awareness and as the name implies, managing your resources. CRM does dissect accidents or near accidents. Again stories are useful, but the idea is to understand the human factor behind that story, to improve your thought process and decision making skill.

CRM applies to GA as much as multi crew airline flying. It comes down to human factors, that dreaded pilot error. What thought process causes accidents. When I was a newbie pilot, my simple concept of CRM (before CRM was coined) was lack of skill or knowledge, carelessness, complacency, overconfidence, ego and "I got to get there-syndrome" self induced pressures. So just paying attention and staying current, improving skill goes a long way. Don't be afraid to cancel the flight or divert. CRM is much more complicated than that, but this basic concept of "DON'T DO NOTH'IN STUPID" helped me in the early years. Am I doing this for ego or pride?" Why go fly? What if (consequences)?

My answer, the obvious solution, more training, practice, currency, preparation, knowledge and gathering all the info you can for the flight. Reading others mistakes can take you only so far. You are the PIC. No one will likely be there to tell you to GO or not GO, continue or 180, land or go around at that crucial moment.

You don't want to talk about type of aircraft or RV's relevance to IFR flight. That's fine. In my opinion that is an issue along with maintenance. RV's are faster, have more control authority, plus is less stable in all axes than a C-182. Nuff said on that.

The issue with all IFR rated Pvt pilots is currency. It's just hard to do even flying a Cessna with traditional/classic avionics and instruments. The bare min currency per FAR's is not enough, as most realize. If you want to be safe and ready for IFR flight, you might consider at least 30 min under the hood every week. How long can you go with out "attitude instrument flying" in IMC to be safe so you can to blast off into solid goo in your RV? A month, 5 months, a week?

Adding to the confusion, there is fancy glass. There are more than 2 or 3 kinds of certified EFIS on the market, 20 experimental brands. In the "old days" it was a six pax of analog gauges and Kings, the same in every plane. Now if a Pilot learns with a Garmin EFIS G1000 in a Cessna, they're lost in a Cirrus with an Avidyne EFIS or worse, a steam gauge plane. Over 50% of any jet training course is learning the avionics and systems. If transitioning to your first EFIS, you better do some serious re-currency with a safety pilot (VFR) to get real comfortable with it. The FAA does not have rules yet but they are coming. There is nothing FAR wise stopping a new IFR, who learned in a steam driven Cessna, launching IMC in a glass Cirrus the next day, except of course insurance and access to the Cirrus. Insurance requires time in type, FAR's don't.

Sorry no stories to tell. I have them but I don't think they'll do you any good, because no one is that dumb. :D :rolleyes: Stay current, keep learning and "don't do noth'in stupid". I am also reminded of Dirty Harry, "A man's got to know his limitations." Cheers
 
Last edited:
Lets just assume that you have decided that you are going to operate your RV IFR and you have all of the FAR required equipment and are FAR current and qualified as an insturment pilot. Now you want to fly and minimize your risk. What would I look at next??

As others have said, the pilot is a huge factor. He/she is probably the weakest link in the whole chain followed closely by weather and the capabilities of the aircraft.

Reduce pilot workload...

Stay current by flying in the IFR environment reagularly reduces the workload by developing and maintaining your comfort with the system. The more the better. Even if the weather is VFR.

Get XM weather. A Garmin 396 or similar, with basic weather package can increase your situational awareness greatly. Having a moving map display, being able to check weather rapidly, knowing where alternate airports are can allow you to make the right decision faster and aviod getting farther into trouble.

Install an autopilot and know how to use it. Having an autopilot that can at least hold heading or track and altitude is a great benifit. Fancier ones that can fly ILS approaches and climb and descend are cool, but can increase workload if the pilot isn't completely current on using all the features.

Have a real plan for any single system failure.

Avoid thunderstorms and icing.

Make sure you have plenty of fuel. I see no reason to ever land an airplane with less than 1 hour of fuel at cruise. I usually land with no less than 10 gals in my RV7.

Time to get back to work for me. More later.
 
I know that this response is probably not what you're looking for, but it was an eye-opening experience for me and made me think all the more seriously about getting an instrument rating.

Today I "shot my first approach" under the foggles in a Piper Arrow. Almost all my training up until this point has been in either a C172 or C152. Since I couldn't get my check-ride scheduled until the 21st of this month, I figured I'd go ahead and start working on getting my complex rating. The instructor asked before we went up if I'd like to start learning how to fly a GPS approach using the GNS 430; sure, why not?

So there we were making our turn inbound towards the runway. There is a lot of dashboard in the Piper (at least compared to the Cessna's I'm used to) but I had a small sliver of the outside world visible in the bottom left of my vision. As we banked that small sliver changed from the ground to the sky. As we continued the turn I felt an odd sensation overcoming me. As I looked down at the AI and T&BI I actually said "whoa". My instructor asked if I had gotten a little disoriented.

Still not even a private pilot all of my "instrument" time has been simulated; further, there hasn't been that much and a lot of it was done at night. When my brain saw the blue sky out of the corner of my eye it interpreted that as a climb, yet when I looked down at my instruments I saw that I was in a nice bank and not climbing at all and I said "whoa". If I had followed my instinct I would have pushed the nose over and... A quick look at the instrument panel however showed what the plane was actually doing and as my brain caught up to what was happening all I could say was, "whoa".

Suddenly my personal minimums shot through the roof. This was my first experience (in just a little over 40 hours flight time) of actually being disoriented. It was a very humbling experience but I think a very good one for me. It helped support my desire to get my instrument rating.


-Chase
 
Sad but true reality

http://www.newsargus.com/news/archi...n_plane_crash_thursday_near_shine/index.shtml

This just happened and saw on the news. A Lancair flying from Florida to Connecticut crashed Tuesday right after reporting ice and disappearing from the radar. I am not going to speculate but the NTSB is not going to investigate and the FAA will do a "limited" investigation May be because there is nothing left of the plane. May be it is because ice has been already ruled as a cause?

Flying IFR in icing conditions is dangerous. A Lancair some might think is a more capable IFR plane in some ways? However flying IMC in the winter time and avoiding ice is hard to do. North Carolina has had some serious weather come thru in the last day; no doubt a wise VFR pilot would have avoid it and stayed on the ground. However you are IFR rated and have a wizbang $400,000 airplane, no doubt with all the bells and whistles. It's friday and you have things to do this weekend.... I don't know what happened but I can say north Carolina made the news in the last day with tornadoes and severe thunderstorms and hail.
 
Last edited:
legal and proficient

I can't say anything good or bad about flying IFR in an RV. I haven't even flown one yet. All I can tell you about flying IFR is stability is everything in a simple approach or hard IFR. There is a big difference flying in a 172 verses a 182, 210 or my 310. In hard IFR give me my stable twin any day. But that is not to say I wouldn't fly IFR in an RV. The type of IFR ,personal minimums is the big issue. Just because you've shot six approaches and made a hold or two does not mean you are proficient you may be legal but that doesn't mean much. And no matter what any body tells me about how quick you can end up side down in an RV so you need an autopilot, you better be able to hand fly it. If you lose your auto pilot you'll have to be proficient without one then. Personally and this is for myself. I'm building a VFR airplane because I already have my IFR plane if I need to get there under certain conditions. I realize not everyone can afford more that one aircraft for different missions. But no matter what you chose to fly IFR in be able to fly that approach and hold with minimal everything and be proficient or don't go. And I will tell you I'm proficient at single engine approach even though I have two engines. My instructor and I practice single engine work twice a year. In my my own plane because if it happens that's where I'll be in my plane not a sim. Cockpit organization and practice practice practice. Practice at night with foggels or a hood and you'll get proficient fast. Don't just think you can do it. KNOW you can. Thats Preachy AEY!
 
IFR Rules I Live By

There always seems to be a lot of ego and emotion in the responses you get to the question of flying IFR in RV?s. I try to keep emotion out of the cockpit, as it leads to unsettled judgments - and above all (yes, above equipment, skill, and experience) - good judgment is the most important aspect of safe instrument flying in my opinion. I have no desire to die or even get myself scared (or even mildly troubled) in an airplane, and to keep things calm and orderly, here are just a few of my personal rules (I have more...):

1) Always have a backup plan. Whether it is for equipment failures, pilot skill, or weather, ask yourself ?if this bad thing happens, what is my alternate plan?? If the answer is that you don?t have one, then it is probably time to abort - and that might mean never leaving the ground in the first place. I?ve written about this a lot. Design your plane with unlike redundancy by asking ?what do I do when XXX fails?. (I'll give my take on that "single engine" thing below)

2) Reduce your workload. Let machines do the hard part for you - there is no pride lost in letting the autopilot fly, the GPS tune the radios, and the EFIS show you where you are on the map. Free your brain to think AHEAD of the game - what will the weather be at arrival? What will I do if that line of showers turns nasty? What is my current fuel radius of action? Never let the airplane get to where your mind hasn't been first.

3) If you absolutely, positively have to be someplace, the most important piece of paper to have in your trip plan is a ticket on an airliner. (?I have a Southwest Airlines ticket - and I am not afraid to use it!?) Louise and I routinely make a backup airline reservation when we really need to be someplace, and sometimes, they get used. If everything meets our personal standards (weather, equipment, and pilot), then we take an RV.

4) Currency is vitally important, as others all say, but comfort in the IFR environment is paramount. If you are really working hard when you are IFR, you probably aren?t as safe as you could be. For me, IFR is something that I just ?get?. If your palms get sweaty thinking about going IFR, then to be blunt, you probably shouldn?t? go until you work those issues out. Figure out what it is that bothers you and work on that before trying to get in the real soup. If the thought of hand flying the entire trip really gets you worked up, you need to work on your hand flying skills. And then, fly the trip with the autopilot to reduce your workload. I have mentioned before that I generally hand fly ILS?s, partially to make sure I am still sharp.

5) No Thunderstorms, No Ice!! Period!! I?d rather stay VFR and land when I can?t do that rather than be in the clouds wishing I wasn?t. Ice scares the heck out of me, and I give any cold clouds a wide berth.

6) XM weather is a god-send. I flew for years without it, and probably won?t choose to do so again. If I don?t have XM available, I will be much, much more cautious about the conditions in which I choose to go IFR. In the ?old days?, I was much more conservative than I probably needed to be, and cancelled trips more often. I can maintain the same level of safety with more margin when I have more knowledge. It's all about margins.

7) Acknowledge the risk. Yes, flying SEL in the clouds is more risky than flying MEL in the clouds. If that ?SE? quits, you are a glider. I personally am comfortable that with good maintenance and a clear conscience, Lycomings just don?t up and quit very often. Usually, the owner isn?t truly surprised when an engine packs it in - they knew something was coming, and fooled themselves into thinking it would be OK. Yes, random mechanical failures on perfectly maintained engines happen - but they are rare enough that they fall into my acceptable risk category. I choose not to fly hard IFR at night - there is more pucker factor than I am comfortable with. Others draw the line elsewhere. But good risk acceptance means KNOWING the risk, and having a backup plan?then ACCEPTING that the remaining risk is there.

In closing, it is important to be brutally honest with yourself. Is there something about your plane, yourself, or the weather that makes you nervous about the trip? If so, then Don?t Go! It is not really important what other people think about what you are doing (as long as you aren?t putting them at risk, which is another whole topic for discussion), but each individual knows deep in their hearts whether or not they should be flying the trip. It?s OK to have a few butterflies (one of my friends says about test flying ?if you aren?t just a little nervous before you take one of these up, then you probably don?t understand what it is that you are doing?.?), but sweaty palms are a no go.

Remember that there are lots of heavy-iron pilots that won?t touch IFR in SEL airplanes. Of course, when they go to work, they KNOW they are going to have to go fly the trip, regardless of what the weather is going to do (with a few exceptions of course). That leads to lots of ugly experiences. I also know a fair number of airline pilots who routinely fly their SEL airplanes IFR - with good judgment! As long as you remember that you don?t HAVE to go in your RV, you can stay a lot safer?.

Paul
 
You got it + currency & proficiency

......I have no desire to die or even get myself scared (or even mildly troubled) in an airplane, and to keep things calm and orderly, here are just a few of my personal rules (I have more...):
........
Paul

Paul,

Thanks for sharing your personal limits. Obviously you read and understood my original post that started the thread.

I've been drafting mine off line while waiting for at least one other pilt to respond on-subject. I plan to share mine a piece at a time. There is going to be a lot of overlap between pilots who actually use their IFR, but I expect to get some insights from the small differences.

Here is my personal rules on Currency & proficiency:
-Meet the FARs for currency.
That said, there is some room for interpretation in terms of what is "IMC". For example, does 100% of an approach need to be in the clouds to be "IMC"? I say no. If I'm IMC at any point between IAF and MAP I call it IMC.

-Stay proficient with an IFR simulator.
I use "On Top" V9. When I had a Mooney I trained with a Mooney. Now that I have an RV9A, I have set up a 172 with light weights to approximate, to some degree, the flight characteristics on my airplane. Its not perfect, but I have found that its close enough to get the training benefit I need.
Also, I keep a log of my simulator flying to keep myself honest.
I break proficiency into two categories: spacial orientation & flying skill. There is overlap between the two, but they are also distinct.

The spacial orientation part is being sure my brain is able to integrate the instrument picture in so that I know which end is up without having to consciously think about it. Since I don't need to do this in everyday life, this ability decays over time and needs refreshing at some frequency.
I have found that simulator flying is very adequate in this regard because there are no physical clues to orientate. No sunlight peeking though, no G forces, nothing.
With the simulator I get spacial orientation practice while working on flying skills, but I direct some specific time to it as well. Ascending and descending turns, unusual attitude recovery (with devious wife assistance), and IFR aerobatics including loops, rolls, stalls, and attempted spins (On Top doesn't really spin)

The flying skills part is keeping the needle center, altitude dead on, staying ahead of the airplane and flight, knowing precisely where I am at. I practice departures to altitude, approaches, and holds. I tend to fly (simulator) the departures and approaches that I intend to use soon, but if no specific IFR flying is planned I look for approaches that provide some unusual challenge (DME arc, etc)
Flying an approach in the simulator dramatically improves my performance in the airplane. I really feel like I just did it.

-Make go, no-go decisions based on legality and performance relative to conditions
If I'm not legal I don't fly IFR at all. Proficiency, however, is varying shades of gray.
This month I need to get some approaches in to stay legal. I've been lazy about my simulator flying so last night I did some departures from PAO, some rout flying, and the ILS into SCK down to near minimums, all on my simulator.
No problem keeping the airplane right side up, and I finished the ILS over the numbers, but I was not happy with my overall flying skills performance. I'll do some more today and be fine.
That lackluster performance, however, would not keep me from flying some IFR today. Here is why:
-I was flying at midnight, totally fatigued, which I would never do in the airplane. No doubt my performance would be better when rested.
-Today my flying will be better than yesterday. I know that sleep allows my brain to capitalize on practice, resulting in better performance. This is not wishful thinking, this is based on the experience of doing it.
-IFR does not imply I do that same flight I did last night. IFR comes in many different flavors. Flying IMC takeoff to touchdown, and down to near ILS mins is way tougher than punching through a layer to get on top, or flying an easy approach with good margins over mins.
From my simulator flying, I know where I stand on the proficiency scale. I just need to stay well within that with any actual IFR flying. Successfully (which means honestly) making that kind of judgment is the essence of flying safe whether VMC or IMC.

 
Its all about how you manage risk

We all have a different perspective on how we react to risk. Over the years, I've become significantly more careful mostly as a result of how I've been trained by the military and the airlines. There's an old aviation saying that says "good judgement comes from experience and experience comes from making mistakes." Having sucked enough seat cushion over my 12k hours, I no longer want to be scared or even moderately concerned about what I'm getting myself into. I can promise you, its no fun flying with your palms sweating and your knees knocking.

Let me simply say there are three key areas to operating successfully in an IMC environment:

- Pilot proficiency
- Equipment
- The weather I'll operate in (or not)

Proficiency: Real IFR proficiency is much harder to attain than many of us would like to admit to ourselves. Truth is it takes some very good training to start with, and then regular practice to stay current. Even with 20+ years experience, and using some very darn good eqipment, I still make mistakes from time to time that require a nudge from the guy sitting next to me. I'd venture to guess there are VERY few really proficient IFR pilots who only fly recreationally.

Equipment: I agree with the general sentiment here about how to equip your airplane for IFR: Use some nice glass if possible, have backup primary flight instruments, use an autopilot, etc. But we will forever be single engine airplanes: NO propulsive backup. Lycomings can and do fail even under the best circumstances. Propellers: ditto. Of couse I agree its smart to maintain your engine in tip-top shape but reality says failures DO happen. I personally have had two show-stoppers in light aircraft. IMHO this is the one impossible-to-get-around factor when planning IFR in the RV.

Weather: Think about it: you can legally take off into IMC in your light single and fly the whole trip, around or even through heavy weather, right down to vis only CAT-I minimums. Of course we'd never do that, but the point is the weather you fly in is pretty much up to you. The FARs don't rule out scenarios that we should never-ever see in our aircraft.

But take a closer look at how nearly every professional flying outfit does business: They always take engine failure into account when planning a trip. The airlines do, the military does, the commuters do, etc etc. And why shouldn't we? The point is - in my humble opinion - that we need to figure on the engine quitting at some very inappropriate point in the flight. Its the engine-out forced landing that I plan for... always. Personally, I want at least a minute to see and glide after I break out of an undercast and no night IFR. In the RV4 that was 1000/3. At lease I'd have a chance to maneuver a bit and put the airplane down and walk away from it. If you're flying something that doesn't glide as well (bigger engine, shorter wing, heavier, draggier, etc) then plan accordingly.

------------------------------------------

Now I'm not at all saying that we shouldn't fly IFR in our airplanes. As you can see, my post focuses on the single engine aspect of the operation. You will no doubt read and hear differing opinions on this - but this is simply how I assess risk, both at work and in my personal flying.

Steve: Thanks for starting this thread - really! I wish you all the best in your instrument flying endeavors...

Fly safe!
 
Last edited:
Thanks Bill

I thought that was a well thought through and well presented argument!

Cheers

Frank
 
"Pilot know thy self"

One other thing to add. Really know your self. I know many pilots who know they are weak in something, they know they don't really understand something or lack confidence in their skill in some maneuvers.

When I do flight reviews or inst comp checks I say what are you weak on, what do YOU want to work on. You know better yourself. Now if they have nothing I can usually figure it out in about 15 minutes what they need to work on, but rather they tell me. That shows they can be critical of their own flying.

You have to be your own worst critic. In the airlines or military you must be evaluated every 6 mo. In GA you can get a friendly flight review that does the same thing you already know. You have to challenge your self or allow yourself to be challenged.

How to stay current as a GA IFR pilot is difficult. It takes more effort and the IFR environ is more critical. Losing control of an airplane in IMC is usually deadly. The cases of pilots over-stressing high performance singles is well known, aka the "V-tailed doctor killer", the beech bonanza. The faster more agile the slick'er the plane the higher the skill level. Now all those things, fast, agile and slick can work to your advantage in IFR flying, but also can be a handful.

This reminds me of the "Can I fly a tail dragger" question. If you never did it you will not know. No one can tell you you can do it, espcially someone who has never flown with you.

If you have an RV that meets the FAR's for IFR flight, you are IFR rated, go up with a suitable safety pilot, CFI or CFII in VFR conditions under the hood and practice-practice-practice. Than you'll be better able to answer the question, can you fly IFR in a RV. It's like that old joke. The patient broke both his hands but healed and recovered 100%, so he ask the doctor, will I still be able to play the piano. The doctor says YES! The patient says great, I never could play before.

Now that you decide to fly IFR in your RV, I'd choose your poison or weather. Start with HIGH MIN's flying where you are just penetrating stratus on climb out or descent. Than work your way up to high min approaches. By high minimums, I mean double or triple all mins.

Also consider flying with a IFR rated co-pilot.

Do you really want to be a RV pilot with 1 hour of hood time, flying an ILS to 200 & 1/2, sky obsc, indefinite ceiling, mod turb, in rain and fog after 3 hours of solid en-route IMC? Probably not.

Last RV's are small short coupled planes. They really move around in turb, dutch roll. I can fly with full panel but if you try to fly with just needle ball and airspeed, IMC in turb, it can be scary. Make sure you can fly partial panel really well. Even so called current IFR rated GA pilots in basic Cessna's and Pipers have an abysmal record of survival after gyro failures. I have to admit as a CFII, my inst students get the min proficiency partial panel. They are proficient but if they never practice again it could be deadly if they need it for real in an emergency. Believe me partial panel in a RV in hard IMC is an emergency. I know I did it. Now that is a scary story. I survived obviously but it was a pucker factor of 10.
 
Last edited:
Thunderstorms - Opionions & personal limits

Opinions:
Personally I think the danger is over exaggerated on the one hand, but cannot possibly be overstated on the other. The huge difference between a light thunderstorm and a severe thunderstorm is so great that they are barely the same weather phenomena. In fact, recently I have read information that suggests they are really not the same phenomena.

I think you have a decent chance of surviving flight through a light thunderstorm, if you are IFR proficient and if you are flying a sturdy airplane (RVs qualify), if you keep your head and fly attitude instead of altitude, if you fly about 10% below VAand if you fly straight through. Also, if ice is not a big factor, I think chances of surviving such encounter are better in an RV than a 747. The RV can take higher G loads, and will tend to go-with-the-flow better than the much heavier 747 - same as any wind shear situation. Even so, there are too many "ifs" in this paragraph for me.

One the other hand, the goings on in a severe thunderstorm will unceremoniously just tear the wings off your airplane.

So--->

TS rules for me:
-If there are severe thunderstorms along or near my route, I don't fly at all.
-I consider on board weather (garmin 496 + xm right now) an absolute must for IFR flying when convective activity is even a slight possibility. I don't like guessing.
-I limit my deliberate flying to "green" areas, but will even deviate around those if I can. If I fly through "yellow", its because something sprung up since the last Nexrad update. This seems to happen very rarely.
-I don't fly IMC with embedded TS. Even with on board weather "the best instrument for TS avoidance is your eyes". I like to be in the clear so I can fly around them.
-Exception to rule above, I will tolerate brief periods IMC with widely scattered embedded thunderstorms if my XM tells me I'm a very safe distance from the nearest cell.
-If there is a line of TS along and perpendicular to my route, I'm done flying for the day, even if it looks like there are sufficiently wide "holes" in the rough stuff.
-Exception to above rule is when the line is created by TS forming over a ridge or other geography, and where the hole is large and known to be stable because it is caused by a geographical feature.
-When I've got WX on board and I'm flying in clear air, I don't mind flying parallel to a line of thunderstorms. This dependent obviously on distance, severity, cause, etc. Lightning looks cool!
-I've learned and still learning to suspect unforecast convective activity created by local geographical features
-When it comes to avoiding TS, ATC is not in control of my airplane. I'll ask for a deviation, but I'm just asking to be polite. Its going to happen. If ATC is too busy jabbering with someone else, I'll let him know what I did when he's done talking.
-I try to make sure my weather briefing, in whatever form, actually covers the route I'm flying. The weather where I am flying is the only important weather.

Experiences:
So far I never have flown in a developed TS and hope to keep it that way. I have had some too-close experiences that have made me even more wary. Of the two that I learned the most from, one was IFR, the other was VFR. Hopefully you'll see from the rules above, that these experiences were integrated into my flying rules.

The IFR experience was 2005 in a TB20, flying TOA to VGT. My recollection is that I wanted and filed V442 at 11,000. The reasons is I expected build-ups and icing in the vicinity of Cajon pass. At 11,000, I expected to be able to visually avoid the buildups, including the turbulence and ice I knew were inside. Also, I expected (and it happened) that some of the build-ups would become local TS. ATC, in their infinite wisdom decided 9,000 was a good altitude.
I was in-and-out, picking up a little light icing and negotiating for higher when we hit an elevator ride.
No way to hold altitude and ice started slobbering onto the airplane in big globs of white goo. meanwhile, some kind of alarm went off in the airplane because of the autopilot. There was the alarm, ice like I've never seen before, and an updraft that was going to take us into orbit. No weather on board so I was flying blind in terms of what was going to happen next. I suspected it was not going to be good. Needless to say, my stress level was through the roof.
I was about to make a 180 when I saw an obviously light patch to our right and slightly behind.
I flew for it.
I was about to tell ATC what I was doing when another pilot confessed to making a deviation without permission for the same reason, except I think he was flying the opposite direction. ATC took to giving him a tongue lashing about asking first. I just waited for that to get done (took a while) before I told him what I had done. He didn't lash into me. Good thing, because if he had, he was in for a lecture about tying up the frequency with his tantrum while there was important communication that needed to happen.
Anyway, he told me to do whatever I needed to do. We had already flown, blindly, into a bad spot so 11,000 didn't fully solve our problem. At 13,000 I was in the clear, maneuvering between gigantic pillars that went at least to the 20 thousands.

The VFR was 2006, flying my Mooney from ORS to TOA, with a fuel stop at FAT. For some reason my XM weather wasn't working. That happened occasionally with that setup. Anyway, since the flight was VFR along the whole route (planned route) I didn't think it was a big deal.
Although my planned route was classic flight planning with way points along the way, the weather was so good I decided to fly a GPS direct (great circle) to FAT.
Instead of taking me over Redding, this route arced over the sierras, well east of Redding. Problem is that I didn't check the weather for that route.
Of course I was on flight following, talking to ATC when I started to see the weather ahead. It still looked VFR possible, but I could see some scary looking build-ups. ATC could see them and gave me some vectoring advice.
Then they dropped me.
That was one of the worst feelings I have ever had. My route west, back to my original plan was blocked. The route ahead looked dicey at best. Now there were build-ups behind me, so I did not consider making a 180 to be a good solution.
I knew I had definitely suckered myself into a bad situation.
I could see lightning in various locations 360 degrees. The rate these things had developed from the first time I noticed them was alarming.
There were VFR holes through the build-ups and I could see the ground. I could also hear popping and hissing in the headset that I knew was from lightning and lightning about to happen.
I saw an airport way down on the ground and considered landing there, but doing so would require giving up altitude in an unknown convective situation. I decided to tough it out in the air.
I considered that a lightning strike was becoming a probability and being boxed in and forced to fly through a TS was now a possibility I had to contemplate.
Mooney's are incredibly tough and these were, I believed, relatively weak TS. I believed (still believe) the airplane could make it.
I began to think about how I would fly in a TS and began to wonder if I had "the right stuff" to get us through alive. That is, going through the long list of "ifs" at the top of this e-mail.
I did not share these thoughts with my wife, though I did express some concern about the weather. I'll freely admit I was scared (terrified?), because for the first time in my flying life it was not clear to me what was the best course of action to stay alive.
Then I saw a large opening. I flew through it, popping and hissing all the way. I kept flying west until we were well over the valley.
 
Must be irrestistable

.....
This reminds me of the "Can I fly a tail dragger" question. If you never did it you will not know. ....

That is, the urge to give unsolicited advice.

With the tail dragger post, I was asking for advice from those who had the experience. I was thankful I got some!

The purpose of this thread is not for advice to me, or anyone else. It is to share collective knowledge and experience of RV IFR pilots.

I've made my IFR decision years ago and have my own set of rules which I am gradually sharing. I have no doubts that I have made the right choice, but my "rules" are always subject to revision as I learn. I want to hear what other pilots do so I can consider whether I should do it to.

I have a suspicion that other GA pilots would like a peek at the habits of others as well.

Its difficult for that to happen with the high noise level of assumptions that GA IFR pilots do know what they are doing and lectures to set them straight.

Put another way, the purpose for this thread is not as a forum for pro pilots to tell the rest of us what we have already learned from our CFII's, books, articles, etc. Frankly, its tiring, counter productive, and is inhibiting the exchange of information that could enhance safety.
 
IMC in Turbulence in an RV8

I have 65 hours in my RV8 and I am one of those who has always found it difficult to stay current IFR. I did zero IFR while building the plane and just recently had an IPC. I thought today would be a good day for my first actual IFR in the RV8 since the ceilings were relatively high (1500 AGL). After 2 hours of actual and two approaches today these are my observations:

Hand flying an RV8 in the clouds and in turbulence is not trivial for someone with my level of proficiency. Most of my attention was required just to do the basics like maintain heading and altitude.

I found wearing a kneeboard on my right leg interfered with my right hand on the stick. To copy a clearance I would have to switch to the left hand to fly, fumble for a pen, write with the right and inevitably climb or find myself in a bank. The map on my left leg kept falling to the floor in turbulence.

My takeaways are I need map pockets up front or some other way to stow things conveniently (or maybe a better kneeboard), I would very much like to have autopilot and I need to keep working at becoming proficient.

Luis Luciani
 
Not Preachy this time

My last post in this thread was preachy and I even said so. So I apologize for disrespecting the intent of this thread.:eek: I'm just trying to figure this place out. I don't have any experience in an RV so I should of kept my keyboard shut! :D
Alan
 
The thunderstorm mentions reminded me of coming back from OSH 4 years ago in my RV6. I was VFR in very murky skies just skirting K.C. Bravo airspace to the northwest. It began getting darker and just as I saw lightning flash all **** broke loose. My Garmin 295 that sits on the glareshield ended up behind the seats in the baggage compartment.
I turned south regained VFR and asked for Bravo clearance and was denied. I informed KC approach that I was coming in and deviating because of a thunderstorm, he gave me a code and cleared me. No way would I ever again poke my nose into another one of those monsters.

I will equip my RV8 for instrument flight and fly with very conservative personal limits.
 
I don't have any RV-specific IFR experiences, but general opinions on IFR:

Personal Minimums
1. For planning and takeoff, they can be good tool. Choosing the No-Go option when you are still on the ground can be a very good decision, even if the wx will allow the trip, assuming you don't feel comfortable with it.

2. Setting higher minimums for an approach than are published can range from not-so-smart to downright dangerous. I've been over this with non-professional pilots a lot. People think that since they aren't as proficient, going missed early and diverting is somehow a good move. Unfortunately, the procedures don't get any easier no matter how high you are above the ground. So you end up doing at a minimum the same amount of work, and possibly a lot more if you don't make it into your intended destination. End up making 2 extra procedures (Missed approach, approach at alternate), simply because you wouldn't descend the last 150' through the layer. Does that make sense?

Equipment
1. Know the airplane you are flying, what equipment it has, and HOW TO USE IT FOR IFR! I'm amazed by how many people I fly with that don't know how to use some of the basic stuff in the airplane that they've owned for years, and fly IFR with regularly... stuff like the Audio Panel. Knowing how to get the most out of your equipment can save you if you get into a tight spot.
2. Don't overload your airplane (with equipment). I've done the vast majority of my IFR flying in my Dad's Cardinal, single Nav (SL30, can monitor radial on stby) Single GPS (GX60, talks to the SL30 for DME), 2 coms, MX20 for situational awareness, but not really necessary. No autopilot, though I think that at least a wing leveler would be prudent in the RV.

Most of all, get some recurrent training, there are tons of people out there who would love to go up in an RV to critique your flying, most of the time you'll have to pay a CFII, but other IFR pilots can do similar functions. If you don't get outside input, habits can develop that are less than ideal, and there will be no one to point them out.
 
My last post in this thread was preachy and I even said so. So I apologize for disrespecting the intent of this thread.:eek: I'm just trying to figure this place out. I don't have any experience in an RV so I should of kept my keyboard shut! :D
Alan
Absolutely nothing wrong with your post. Turn your keyboard back on.:)
 
Risk management and attitude...

WARNING: LONG POST!

Another poster mentioned risk management, but failed to expound. Whether they know it or not, when pilots discuss aviation safety , what they are really talking about is risk management.

Each and every activity we engage in has risk. What is obvious is some activities are more risky than others. What is not so obvious is the relative risk of an activity may change depending on the situation. The idea of risk management as a pilot activity allows one to assess each risk as it applies to a particular situation.

Click here for an example risk assessment tool.

Of course, all the risk assessment/management tools on the planet won't help if the pilot chooses not to use them...

In my experience as a 20-year veteran military flight crew member, safety is an attitude, an attitude instilled over years of indoctrination, reinforcement and continual pounding on the podium by those in charge. Considering its mission, the USAF has a remarkable aviation safety record.

How can we create the right attitude here? This thread is a GREAT start!

Many people believe attitude cannot be taught; I vehemently disagree! IMHO, the idea that attitude cannot be taught has resulted in a tremendous number of needless deaths in our community.

Attitudes can be learned just as knowledge or skills may be learned. In fact, knowledge, skill and attitude comprise the three learning domains of Bloom's Taxonomy. In Bloom's taxonomy, the three domains are:

  • Cognitive - Knowledge
  • Psychomotor - Skill
  • Affective - Attitude

Adult learning experts have long opined teaching and learning in the affective domain presents unique challenges on the part of both the teacher and the student, but no one disputes effective learning can occur.

Click here for a good treatise on learning and teaching in the affective domain. If you don't want to read the entire page here are a few highlights:

The best way to teach an attitude is to create a need for one during ground school (cognitive) and flight training (psycomotor), then teach by example. Students will best learn from their primary instructor, either thru discussion or direct observation/imitation, the importance of safety. Research shows that aside from personal experience, role modeling and social acceptance are the most powerful attitudinal devolopers. Think about the implications of that for a moment. Unless you survive a life-threatening experience from which to learn, your instructor and the rest of the flying community will likely form the basis of your attitude toward flight safety when faced with a "life or death" decision.

Experts categorize levels of learning within the affective domain on the following scale:

  1. RECEIVING PHENOMENA -- an awareness; willingness to listen
  2. RESPONDING TO PHENOMENA -- taking an active part in learning; participating
  3. VALUING -- the value a person attaches to something
  4. ORGANIZATION -- organizing values into order of priority
  5. INTERNALIZING VALUES -- behavior which is controlled by a value system

NOTE: It's generally accepted this scale is progressive; before one can value an attitude one must have learned of it, etc.

I think if asked, everyone of us would SAY we believe that flight safety is paramount; when faced with dire straights, getting the plane on the ground without injury to people or damage to the aircraft is the primary goal -- we are beyond the first three levels as regards learning an attitude. The problem seems to come when we're asked to PRIORITIZE. Even though we believe flight safety is paramount, our behaviour often reflects conflicting values. We make silly decisions that lead to injury/death and seem to make no sense. They seem to make no sense until we discern the controlling value. In many cases, pilots allow themselves to be influenced by factors having little to do with flying the aircraft.

In my opinion, our problem isn't teaching new attitudes (values). Our problem is how to ORGANIZE and INTERNALIZE our values so that we may properly prioritize. Our behaviour should (and most likely will) reflect our beliefs.

Which brings us back to risk management. Using a tool such as the assessment checklist at the link posted above helps us to look at each situation, list the risks, value and prioritize them and assign a "score" to the flight. Score too high and you don't fly -- it's just that simple.

Here's another suggestion: appoint an aviation guardian. Each of us knows someone whose aviation judgement we trust. If you are having trouble assessing risk on a mission, involve your guardian. Call him/her with the situation and discuss it. Someone that doesn't have a stake in completing the flight will have a much different view of the risks than you might. You might even take it a step further and commit to NEVER FLYING an IFR flight unless you consult with your guardian. Just knowing your guardian will be looking over your shoulder can strongly influence your risk assessments...

Finally, share your experiences -- both good and bad. I might suggest Mr. Reeves start an "AFTER ACTION" section on VAF forum, an area where the intrepid few with thick skin post their experiences in an open forum allowing others to opine on how they might have handled things differently. From my experience as a USAF crewmember, the post-flight critique was a critical and effective attitude reinforcement tool.

After every mission, the crew (or crews in the event of a multi-aircraft flight) review the mission as regards flight safety and mission effectiveness. For training missions, flight safety rules; operational missions might requir more emphasis on mission effectiveness. Crews discuss safety issues without pride, prejudice or passion (hopefully). All comments by everyone involved are taken at their face not as a personal attack, but as one person trying to help another aviod death or injury. No opinion is suppressed. Sometimes the discussion involves how safety relates to mission effectiveness, and these are the most beneficial because they help clarify one's system of value organization.

It was not uncommon for these discussions to occur openly in view of other crewmembers that weren't on the flight. Comments from the peanut gallery were encouraged -- all actions are open for scrutiny. Can you say "social acceptance?"

I know some of you have posted your experiences in other threads on this forum -- I salute your effort to better prepare the rest of us to make those "life or death" decisions. I would encourage those of you who share to try and see past your emotions when reading others' opinions about your experiences. Email sometimes conveys emotions not intended by the poster. Try to accept any and all comments on their face as an attempt to help foster a "safety culture" here on the forum. Beware your individualism; the same attitude that led you to eschew certified aircraft and choose to build your own aircraft can lead to an unwillingness to listen to other's opinions.

For those commenting on another's experience, in my opinion, the most effective observations are made without rancor or contempt. This serves to limit an emotional reaction in those we are observing (trying to help). To ensure a rich supply of material for discussion, we should remember that those not familiar with a system like this will be much more amenable to posting their experiences for dissection if they don't feel like they're opening themselves up for cheap shots and personal attacks.

This is a great thread and I hope we can keep it going!

Regards,

Mark Sletten
 
Flight physiology - me factor

Rules:
-Can I do it today?
This is my overarching rule. Really all things considered, is this a flight that I am capable of, with reasonable safety margins, today.
-Brain needs oxygen for IFR. So, I use oxygen above 8000 in IMC. That means if I'm actually going to be in the stuff up there. If I'm cruising on top, my limit is about 11ish, depending on duration of flight and how difficult getting back on the ground is going to be. I periodically check my O2 levels on any flight above about 8000'.
-No IFR when too fatigued. The difficulty of IFR flight I'll accept decreases throughout the day. I don't do IMC after my bedtime. By dinner time the limits are low (difficulty). If its familiar routes, approaches, etc, I'll do some after diner. Otherwise I wait for the next day.
-No IFR when too sick. I find as I get older "sick" is a sliding scale. I don't fly IFR if I have impaired inner ear function due to illness. If I have a mild controllable fever, I'll do light IFR, which means punching out through a thin layer, easy approach at the other end, and the ability to stay on top in between. Anything beyond that is "too" sick for IFR.
-Assess "feelings", but don't obey them. Feelings about a flight can pull you either direction. I find the importance of a trip or the desire to get home, for example, tend to make me want to fly when other indicators are saying don't. On the other hand, sometimes I'm feeling gloomy about IFR when my simulator log is really saying a particular flight is no problem. I try to figure out if my feelings have any basis in fact. If they do, I follow them, if they don't, I ignore them. I hate to use the word "try" in relation to flying, but the fact is that "feelings" have the ability to warp the way we analyze facts.
-No IFR when too stressed. I've got some stress all the time so its a matter of degree. Also, for me, flying, and especially IFR flying is a stress reliever. It forces me to focus my attention to the immediate needs of the flight, which takes my attention off of my problems. For me, excessive stress impairs my ability to stay ahead of the airplane and the flight plan. If I'm stressed to the point of not being able to move my focus from the stress, I won't fly IFR.

Background:
This is probably where my "rules" have evolved the most.
The reason I started flying was for business travel. I wanted to have a small farm in Lake Co CA and work in Silicon Valley. I didn't actually "enjoy" flying until I was a few hours into my training.
The first entry in my logbook is 10/10/89. I got my Private 12/26/89 and my IFR 7/4/90, when I was 33 years old.
Because I was air commuting, I was flying 4 days a week. By July 1992, I had passed 600 hours.
Due to a change in my work situation, my flying tapered off after that, and I had about 750 hours in Feb 1996, when I gave up flying for 9 years.
During those early years I was flying out of necessity. It was a 45 minute VFR flight to the bay area, verses 4 hours by car. IFR added 15 minutes on average
I can tell you I always flew on schedule (66 M20E), except for one or two flights a year. Embedded TS or continuous ice (more on that later) would keep me on the ground, little else.
I can remember flying home, dark, fatigued, stresses at work and home, plus solid IMC. More than once under these conditions I got vertigo of a spin or two (in my brain) of the cockpit. I just shook it off. I felt that was just something I needed to cope with.
One night in particular flying north on v27 between PYI & ENI is etched in my brain. Solid IMC, continuous moderate turbulence and fatigued to the bare functioning level. The spinning wouldn't stop. It was constant along that whole route, first one way, then the other. I remember thinking: "that's annoying".
At the age of 35 and with as much flying as I was doing, I was able to just force myself to stay focused on the gauges and keep the airplane right side up. My thinking was that "I should be able to do this"
If you are wondering how I would have fared in a partial panel emergency in that situation - join the club.
Fast forward to Jan 2005. We were living in SoCal. Our grown kids had moved away, as had all our extended family. My wife said: "It sure would be nice if we were flying again so we could visit everyone"
Woo hoo!!!!!!!!!
I got my BFR and started working on my IFR proficiency, which was a lot harder.
On about my second trip with the CFII, we were doing some TEC between local airports in actual IFR. I was running a fever and had been awake since 2AM. My brain was functioning at about the chimpanzee level.
I was trying to copy a TEC clearance from HHR to TOA and I could not understand the controller. After 3 tries I knew I was going to have to come clean.
I told my instructor about my health, lack of sleep, etc. I told him that if I was alone I would taxi back, park the airplane, and have my wife pick me up. I suggested that he fly the last leg to TOA.
My instructor was about the age and with the same amount of hours as I was back when I felt "invincible", so that confession was one of the hardest things I have ever done in an airplane. Probably the most valuable though.
He said "no problem we'll share the workload", and we finished the trip. I was afraid he would conclude that I shouldn't be flying IFR anymore, but to my surprise he seemed pleased that I had recognized my shortcomings.
So was it my youth that saved my bacon years earlier, or God having mercy on the stupidity of my youth?

Bottom line:
The lyrics to the Beatles song comes to mind "Suddenly, I'm not half the man I used to be"
Regardless of what I used to do, or what I should be able to do, the only thing that matters is what I can safely do today. Rejecting a flight because I'm not up to it today, helps ensure I'll live to fly another day.
 
Great post Mark. You hit on most of the real points, causes and effects and this is a great thread. No matter how good we think we are in safe decision making processes and how multiple crosschecks should help us avoid incident, things still do happen. Often times, events leading up to an accident are completely inexplicable. Sometimes we look back after the fact and can realize how stupid we were- if we are lucky enough to survive. Once you've survived one, your whole outlook usually changes- a lot.

The USAF is doing an amazing job with safety these days and I'm not shaking the stick specifically at the USAF here but 2 cases in point are the Dover C5 accident a few years back which left anyone with the the details shaking their heads in disbelief at the multiple errors that experienced flight deck crew made while others looked on. The details published in AW&ST were chilling as was the famous video simulation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fI5xTmmPbsY&feature=related. No doubt this fortunately non-fatal accident is used today as a valuable training tool.

The second was the sickening B52 airshow crash some years ago now where years of inappropriate behavior, complaints and inaction led to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E21byPXR1ek&NR=1

Entrenched safety oversights were ineffectual in both cases and nobody spoke up or nobody listened. The blame can be placed at many levels in both accidents. Very tragic and both were totally preventable.:(

Speak up, listen, evaluate, learn, critique, apply and use checklists. Sometimes a tactful suggestion is enough to make someone think twice. Sometimes you might have to be forceful or rude. Better to tick someone off than have them dead or have them injure or kill you too. We can apply many lessons learned from other accidents even to simple aircraft operations in our RVs. A Piper Cub can kill you just as surely as an F104, given the right conditions. IFR or night operations throw in many more things to be aware of. I cringe when I hear people flying over the rocks at night single engine- no second chances on that decision if something goes bad.
 
Last edited:
The spacial orientation part is being sure my brain is able to integrate the instrument picture in so that I know which end is up without having to consciously think about it. Since I don't need to do this in everyday life, this ability decays over time and needs refreshing at some frequency.
I have found that simulator flying is very adequate in this regard because there are no physical clues to orientate. No sunlight peeking though, no G forces, nothing.
With the simulator I get spacial orientation practice while working on flying skills, but I direct some specific time to it as well. Ascending and descending turns, unusual attitude recovery (with devious wife assistance), and IFR aerobatics including loops, rolls, stalls, and attempted spins (On Top doesn't really spin)

Steve,

Just a small point: While I heartily agree with your use of the simulator to maintain an instrument scan, a sim is not good for spatial orientation issues, specifically because it cannot provide you with the very things you mentioned: shifting sunlight, Gs, visual illusions, and other vestibular inputs that try to trick your mind and body while flying in actual IMC. As you know, dealing with these issues is a significant part of the initial difficulty in learning to fly a plane by reference to instruments alone. The sim merely keeps your scan and procedural skills sharp, but only actual flying keeps the actual "spatial orientation" stuff sharp. Perhaps we're just using different terminology for the same thing ...

Back to the issue.

Here are my some of my personal mins for flying IFR in single-engine General Aviation aircraft. They are separate and independent from the requirements and minimums established by my employers.

Weather mins:
1. No overflight of weather less than 500'-2 miles.
2. No forecast ice along the route of flight, within 5000' of planned altitude. No reported icing, period.
3. Maximum use of XM weather and all other resources for thunderstorm avoidance, icing, and moderate or greater turbulence.
4. Below 10,000' MSL, remain 20 NM away (upwind) from radar returns showing tight banding of precipitation, indicative of Level 2 or greater cells. Downwind of cells, increase by 1 mile for every 10 knots of wind. I will fly though rain only. No thunderstorm of any size is appropriate to fly though. Ever.
5. Destination airports: 500'-1 within +/-2 hours of ETA, and forecast to remain stable or improve.
6. Alternate airports: Suitable weather forecast (FARs) within +/-2 hours of ETA.
7. Night IMC is limited to penetration of cloud decks less than 1000' feet thick, with underlying ceiling/visibility of no less than 2000'-5. Very limited exposure to night IMC in general.
8. No night flight over designated mountainous terrain.
9. Personal RV crosswind limit: 20 Kts. (15 on a wet runway). I may increase this someday, after I have more hours in RVs.

Equipment and miscellaneous:
1. Autopilot must be operational, and must be used enroute.
2. Current charts and plates onboard, and organized for the particular flight. (I could write a book on cockpit organization, and how critical it is to good IFR flying... and maybe I will someday.)
3. Use oxygen above 10,000' MSL.
4. Desired fuel at touchdown: 1:15 (FAR requirements notwithstanding).
5. Wear survival vest for all flights over sparsely-populated areas.
6. Wear parachute (in aircraft from which egress is possible) for all night flights.

Personal:
1. Must consciously use the IMSAFE checklist before each flight. (Illness, Medication, Stress, Alcohol, Fatigue, Eating.) Even small head colds can be debilitating in IMC. I wait 48 hours "bottle to throttle." (Yes, I said 48. Call me crazy, but I know my own physiological characteristics). Remember, any issues you have on the ground will be compounded greatly under IFR/IMC. The "IMSAFE" factors accumulate exponentially, not linearly.
2. Consideration of all "get-there-itis" factors I might be subject to. I remind myself that airline travel is cheap compared to the consequences of a poor decision to fly a light airplane.

There are more, but most of them have been mentioned already by other people. My guidelines are conservative, and I like it that way. 12,000+ hours has taught me that personal comfort and confidence in IMC is all about stacking the deck WAY in your favor.
 
Last edited:
S.E. IFR? An emergency procedure.

Stay proficient to save yourself, but don't do it intentionally.

Ask Scott Crossfield... he WAS a very good pilot BTW.


Bob

(Heavy iron driver and former [very young brave] single engine night IFR mail pilot. No siree Maynard, never again.)
 
S.E. IFR? An emergency procedure.

Stay proficient to save yourself, but don't do it intentionally.

Ask Scott Crossfield... he WAS a very good pilot BTW.

Bob,

Thank you for contributing your opinion. Since your've laid out a fairly provocative position with no explanation, I'll be the first to bite -- what event or series of events precipitated your conversion from a "very young, brave, single-engine night IFR mail pilot" to someone who now considers S.E. IFR an emergency procedure? There must be some specifics there, and I for one would sincerely like to hear the story!

If your reason for considering single-engine IFR to be an emergency procedure is that an extraordinary pilot like Scott Crossfield went down while flying IFR, perhaps you should review what actually happened to Scott: While flying near an area of rapidly-changing enroute weather, he chose not to get any updates on this weather. Center did not volunteer much information, and he proceded, flew into a thunderstorm, and his airplane was ripped up and dashed to the ground. I only repeat this chain of events because, in retrospect, you can see where the chain could have been broken.

Skilled pilots (even legendary ones!) are subject to the same human factors as all of us other lowly pilots, including certain lapses in judgement. I cannot and will not make judgements about Crossfield's actions that day, but his accident is another indication of how messing with bad weather can get you in trouble.

But IFR does not necessarily mean "bad weather." Are you opposed to "cloud-break" IFR climbs and descents? How about cruising over a solid, 1000'-thick deck with 5000' of clear air underneath?

I hope you'll clarify your blanket statement about single-engine IFR flying. Just curious, that's all.
 
Bob,

......There must be some specifics there, and I for one would sincerely like to hear the story!.....

The only thing that changes anyone's mind about SEL IFR is personal experience. Telling a story does not do it. It can be interesting reading but it won't change a mind set on doing it. A personal experience will - but only if the pilot survives that defining moment.

Same can be said for those who enjoy low altitude buzz jobs....they are destined to meet their destiny when they find out airplanes don't fly through rocks.

The airplanes we fly in this world are not designed to fly in weather no matter how much equipment is installed or how much we wish it were not so. The risk meter always reads higher under these circumstances. If the pilot knows it and accepts it, have at it - that's risk management - it's as simple as that. No amount of discussion will alter the basic risk factor, nor will it change many minds on the subject. Personal experience will but this discussion won't do it.
 
Because its a different subject

..... Personal experience will but this discussion won't do it.

That's because the subject of this thread is "how" RV pilots fly IFR, not to debate whether they should.

I've noticed some commonalities and some uniqueness between posters. I plan to post some more of mine, probably this weekend. Eventually, I'll try to compile a summery.

That may not be of value to you, but it is too me (hopefully to a few others). That's why I started this thread.

On the other hand, your opinions about why not to fly IFR do not contribute to this thread in a positive way. They only add to the noise level, making it less likely that any positive result will follow.

You can certainly torpedo the intent of this thread, but I request that you do not.
 
I'd have to add that flying SE IFR over suitable terrain below with at least a 1000 foot ceiling gives you half a chance at a survivable forced landing. Doing the same thing over mountains, forests or water reduces your chances considerably in the event of a power loss or other major emergency. Doing it with very low ceilings makes your survival chances very small indeed.

As long as the engine keeps running of course, no worries.
 
That's because the subject of this thread is "how" RV pilots fly IFR, not to debate whether they should.....You can certainly torpedo the intent of this thread, but I request that you do not.

Steve,

The subject of your thread is "Personal IFR limits, precautions, & concerns in an RV"

I am not torpedoing the intent of the thread - just expressing "limitations, precautions and concerns" about doing it from a safety point of view. That perhaps is outside the box of the discussion.

The conditions set down welcome comments on "I fly IFR and here's how I do it", but not on "I won't fly IFR and here's why". How can you draw a rational conclusion on the subject from such a restricted filtered discussion?

When all is said and done, and you gather together the excellent salient comments on the subject from others, you may well decide it is not worth it. The most important parts of the effort - currency, proficiency, a safe weather envelope and adequate equipment - make for a mighty expensive undertaking just to legally fly around in a cloud and not get paid for it.

(If thoughts as expressed here and in the previous message are not appropriate to the subject, say so and I will delete both and be quiet. My only concern in this matter is your personal well being. :))

 
Bob,

Thank you for contributing your opinion. Since your've laid out a fairly provocative position with no explanation, I'll be the first to bite -- what event or series of events precipitated your conversion from a "very young, brave, single-engine night IFR mail pilot" to someone who now considers S.E. IFR an emergency procedure? There must be some specifics there, and I for one would sincerely like to hear the story!

If your reason for considering single-engine IFR to be an emergency procedure is that an extraordinary pilot like Scott Crossfield went down while flying IFR, perhaps you should review what actually happened to Scott: While flying near an area of rapidly-changing enroute weather, he chose not to get any updates on this weather. Center did not volunteer much information, and he proceded, flew into a thunderstorm, and his airplane was ripped up and dashed to the ground. I only repeat this chain of events because, in retrospect, you can see where the chain could have been broken.

Skilled pilots (even legendary ones!) are subject to the same human factors as all of us other lowly pilots, including certain lapses in judgement. I cannot and will not make judgements about Crossfield's actions that day, but his accident is another indication of how messing with bad weather can get you in trouble.

But IFR does not necessarily mean "bad weather." Are you opposed to "cloud-break" IFR climbs and descents? How about cruising over a solid, 1000'-thick deck with 5000' of clear air underneath?

I hope you'll clarify your blanket statement about single-engine IFR flying. Just curious, that's all.

Hi Buck,


My opinion comes from a good bit of experience doing it. I've had many occasions when I DEFINATELY wished I was on the ground and not in the air while flying single engine IFR. All were weather related. All were due to the aircraft not having the proper equiptment need to REALLY fly IFR safley.

Sure this is my opinion, but at a minimum, A pilot needs a good 200 NM radar, not nexrad, but radar, proper deicing equiptment, and a strong stable platform.

Yep, they flew DC-3 ' and such without radar, but it was a really tough stable airplane, and yep they took unimaginable beatings routinely flying it ( and plenty were lost).


Until you experience IMC severe turbulence in a small single engine airplane, it really can't be described.

On more than one occasion, I can remember being pelted by the flailing cockpit microphone as it flew wildly around the cockpit in severe turbulence. Forget about charts...everything was scattered througout the cabin.

It's an unbelievably ugly experience, that all to often, results in inflight breakup, no matter how good the pilot. There are many including myself that share the opinion that pilots are incapacitated due to violence resulting in upset and high speed disintegation. As these common crashes leave little evidence it will likely never really be known.

While no one will really know what happened to Crossfield, it's entirely likley he never experienced the incredible violence of a big CB tossing around a C-210, and it was too much for him and/or the airframe. Again, we'll never know, yet it happens every year to excellent pilots so why risk it?

A fellow freight dog got into some stuff that was so violent it stalled his Cessna 206 sending it tumbling in the WX. He thought his goose was cooked and waited for the end, in a flash he was thown out of the side of his big CB, still tumbling, into sunshine. His 206 fell like a dart into the clear smooth air, righting itself and he flew away to tell the story. Lucky pilot, known to be a good stick as well.

Add to this turbulence from mountains/wave/rotors, fog, ice, and frontal passages and you need to ask "Do I really want to accept this risk"?

In summary, I KNOW flying light single engine aircraft IMC is way riskier than most pilots accept. It's my choice to avoid it all. Light aircraft instrumentation isn't up to the risk, nor are the aircraft or powerplants. I know many pilots get away with it, and reinforce their minds that everything went ok, another attempt is ok also. But eventually, your luck will run out and....

Been there, lucked out, learned from my good fortune and won't ever go there again.

Fly safe,

Bob (no torpedo intended)
 
Icing - personal limits, planning, opinions, & definitions

Limits
-No deliberate flight into moderate icing (FAR 91.527) of whatever brevity.
-Take evasive action within seconds after inadvertent encounter with moderate icing
-Light icing OK if widely spaced intermittent, during decent though a layer, or during climb though a thin layer. In all cases terrain must allow for a "plan B" of descending out of it
-Trace icing. No problemo if all the planning information available gives a certainty that it won't get worse (see below), and as long as exposure time will not be extended.
-Above assumes rime icing. Zero tolerance for mixed or clear icing and any sign of runback will have me demanding a different altitude from ATC. Any delay from them and I'll be taking one of my own choosing.
-For all above I allow an altitude safety band (above or below) that varies with terrain. If decent to warmer altitudes is very easy, such as over the central valley of CA, 500 feet (away from icing) is plenty. Any icing or suspected icing over mountainous terrain has got to be far enough above me that I'm sure I won't be in it. How far? That depends on the multidimensional picture I get from planning, but its a lot more than 500 feet.
-When I file a flight plan designed to keep me out of icing, I mention that in the remarks so ATC won't get creative with my routing or altitudes. So far I've gotten cooperation.

Planning:
Duat no longer contains light or trace icing forecasts. Also, icing Airmets cover extremely large areas which are not homogeneous in terms of weather (at least where I live). The tendency by those who compile it seems to be CYA which keeps me out of the air more than is necessary. On the other hand, sometimes they miss some important icing warnings that I wish I had. Basically, I find it useless.
If I actually think icing is a risk, or if briefing information suggests it may be, I rely heavily on the NOAA web site. There is a lot of good weather information there, but this for icing:
http://adds.aviationweather.gov/icing/
http://adds.aviationweather.gov/winds/
http://adds.aviationweather.gov/pireps/java/
The "winds" link also has temps

Particularly, I've had encounters with SLD icing that were not in the DUAT briefing and at altitude below which any icing was predicted in the DUAT briefing. After my first one I went looking on the NOAA site to figure out what went wrong in my planning. What went wrong was trusting the DUAT forecast.

I still get my DUAT briefing because I want a legal paper trail of the briefing, but to stay alive I primarily rely on the NOAA web site.

Opinions:
I find the pireps informative, but I also suspect that ice is under reported because GA pilots are afraid of enforcement action for busting the regs. So, I always wonder if the icing is one notch worse than they reported, or especially about all the encounters that didn't get reported at all. I wish the FAA would remove the rules and handle icing the same way as convection so this could be about staying alive and helping others to do so, rather than staying legal.

Definitions (the standard ones):
Trace icing
Ice becomes perceptible. Rate of accumulation is slightly greater than the rate of sublimation. Deicing/anti-icing equipment is not utilized unless encountered for an extended period of time (over 1 hour)
Light icing
The rate of accumulation may create a problem if flight is prolonged in this environment (over 1 hour). Occasional use of deicing/anti-icing equipment removes/prevents accumulation.
Moderate icing
The rate of accumulation is such that even short encounters become potentially hazardous and use of deicing/anti-icing equipment or flight diversion is necessary.
 
Back
Top