Ron Lee

Well Known Member
I just finished a flyabout and had several weather encounters.

The first was after leaving Connecticut enroute to Eastport Maine (EPM). It was just a cloud layer that had me flying lower than my normal 10,500’ to 12,500’ Not a biggie but it did end up using more fuel. After a Touch n Go at EPM, I stopped for fuel then headed over to airports in Vermont and New Hampshire. Maybe it was the White Mountains but I saw the same lenticular like clouds that indicate high winds over mountainous terrain. Not being familiar with the area, and not a fan of associated downdrafts, plus clouds meeting the terrain, I diverted south and picked two airports in those states that were away from the questionable area. That worked fine but clouds had me still flying low so I stopped in Syracuse New York for fuel.

My destination was Niagara Falls NY (IAG) and after checking weather decided that it was worth trying to get there. I had options to return to Syracuse, or Rochester for larger cities plus several smaller airfields if the weather turned out worse than I was comfortable with. Realistically, I was really left with the larger airports since smaller ones typically shut down around 5 PM. It would not be fun to be stuck at an airport with no way to get to a hotel.

The conditions were adequate and I landed at Niagara Falls as it was getting darkish. After securing the plane, I asked about getting a rental car. The guys there were a bit surprised that I did not have a reservation. The fact is that I thought I would be in Bangor Maine that night. When issues about bus transportation in Martha’s Vineyard ruled out that stop, I went to EPM then planned on making Niagara Falls. After getting fuel at Syracuse, I did not know whether I would make it to Niagara Falls or spend the night elsewhere.

Fortunately, after some fact finding, I got a hotel (Holiday Inn Express) with walking distance of the FBO. The next day, I just used a taxi to get to and from the Falls. So no rental car was ever needed.

My next planned stop was in Michigan (AZO). The ADDS satellite map showed that area as being at the southern edge of an area of marginal VFR conditions. I checked up on special VFR clearances and considered trying that for the first time. However, as I passed over Toledo. I had to descend from 4500’ to around 3000’ to stay clear of clouds. Then as I exited their airspace to the northwest, the visibility ahead appeared to drop. My recollection of their weather broadcast while east of the airport was clear and 6-10 miles visibility. I am talking to Toledo at the time as I typically use VFR flight following on cross-countries. I told Toledo that I wanted to land there. They asked me for my intentions. I told them I wanted to make a full stop landing but should have said “54RL intends to land at Toledo so I don’t enter IFR conditions and kill myself.”

I honestly don’t know what the conditions were that made me decide to do a 180 and land but I did not like it. So I wear the weather wuss label proudly.

On the ground I checked the weather and considered getting to Elkhart. I called an FBO and they close at 5 PM. With my estimated arrival at 530 PM or later, I gave up and stayed at Toledo. The Budget rental car was $27 a day (not including taxes). And there are beaucoup hotels around. Here I made a tactical mistake. Had I checked on the FBO at South Bend just minutes away from Elkhart, I would have found out that they are open 24 hours a day. I could have been closer to my intended stop and closer to home for my expected last flying day.

Two days of rainy weather finally end with better conditions on Sunday. The TAFs around home suggest possible snow in the late afternoon So I decided that I would make three fuel stops. The last would be Kit Carson airport (ITR) which would give me plenty of fuel to get to my home airport area and divert east to Kansas if need be.

I depart Toledo later than planned. I think I am flying at 4500’ which is low for me but clouds don’t allow higher cruise plus the forecast winds were bad from the west. At some point the clouds are even lower so I chat with Flight Watch and decide to descend . Now I am 2000’ AGL for a hundred miles or so. While I have flown over clouds, it was with the bases 4000’-5000‘ AGL, summertime temps so no chance of icing if I had to descend through them, plus I had great visibility on top. Here the conditions were the opposite so I had no choice but to go down low where I had to watch out for towers.

I refuel at ITR and call someone at the home airport. The conditions are good. I start the 45 minute flight and as I get close see what may be a snow squall. I look around to the north and south and elect to skirt it to the north. Then I think about it. Higher terrain there. The system is coming in from the north. Less escape options to the north so I head south a bit and continue in towards home. As I get closer I assume that a 180 is very likely so I determine my escape heading, verify the autopilot (wing leveler) is ready and press forward. I call in on the Unicom to see if anyone can provide weather info. No joy. Colorado Springs has light snow. I was about twelve miles from home before I decide that this will not work and turned around.

This is odd. This looks worse than while I was checking it coming in. I did encounter a few snow flakes but was clear of that quickly. I believe that I went west several minutes too long. While never in a life threatening situation, I suspect that I let the obvious escape path windows get slightly behind me. No more. Once that obvious escape path reaches the 3 and 9 o’clock positions (if not sooner) it is time to retreat.

The trip to La Junta (LHX) is non-eventful and I get there in time to get a courtesy car, put the plane in a hangar and get a $20 room in the FBO building for the night. What a deal. I was stranded there once before after hours and had to call the sheriff to get a ride to a hotel. This was great. Today I flew back in typical Colorado clear blue skies.

Overall, the weather was the winner. I had to fly lower than desired. I had to make alternate stops which caused some inconvenience. I had to delay my return another day because of snow. But I did get more experience in dealing with less than perfect weather safely. I did push my limits close to home but never to the point of no return. Ultimately, being a weather wuss served me well.

Bottom line: There is no pressing need to get to any destination if there is a reasonable chance that doing so will result in crashing and dying.
 
Last edited:
Me too ...

Im with ya, dude. I too am a member of the Weather Wuss club. If there was a vaccine at one time for "Get There-itis", it looks like you and I took it. :eek:
 
Good decisions!

You are here to tell us about it. Had you pressed forward we may have read about you on the NTSB website. Excellent decision making skills. Flying is one of the greatest pleasures in life, but it isn't worth dying for. Neither is getting home. Most weather related crashes are found on sunny days.:(
I too am a proud member of the weather wuss club.
 
Actually Aaron the thought of having people read about me killing myself and saying I was an idiot did cross my mind.

The two real weather issues were at Toledo and near home. The one near home I did deliberately test my boundaries. While I never entered the snow squall area ahead, in retrospect I should have turned back about three minutes sooner. I tried calling to see if anyone could provide local weather info. Perhaps the snow squall was localized and I could fly south, then west and north to enter a clear area. Without that info, I just elected to divert to La Junta where conditions were good.

The Toledo event was one where I did not wait nor did I test my boundaries. I have never flown in marginal VFR conditions. I don't know if that area northwest of Toledo was MVFR or just crummy VFR. My normal flying conditions are such that I can see mountains 100 miles away. Previous trips back east exposed me to flying with perhaps 10 miles visibility. I was not fond of it but did it.

Perhaps the visibility NW of Toledo was five miles. I did not assess it since it seemed to go "bad" (which is very subjective) quick enough that a 180 and landing at Toledo to assess things was my best option.

I try to never let schedule, deadlines, or cost ever drive me to continuing a flight when I should not.

Based upon Toledo, the thought that I might have been able to make it to Kalamazoo was not viable. MVFR flight is not going to be a planned event and hopefully never by accident.
 
Hi Ron

Some good decisions for sure. Do you by any chance have a 496 with wx? They really help a lot in decision making.

Regards,
 
Good Decision

Ron, as someone who was raised in aviation in the NE Ohio area, you were probably in "good VFR" conditions for us! However, the conditions were below your comfort level, which made your decision to land in TOL a very good one. For those like you who normally fly in 50+ miles of visibility daily, our conditions in the Great Lakes area is like flying with the Foggles on. You don't need to try to bring back rusty instrument flying skills at that time.

Don't beat yourself up too badly. It's always better to second-guess yourself in the office the next day, instead of waking up in a hospital (or worse) wondering what happened.

It's too bad you went as far as TOL. Next time, if you pass thru the NE Ohio area, stop in at 1G5 (Medina) or another airport near CLE, and you'll find at least one RV on the field. Medina has three and mine will make four next year. We'd be glad to offer some hospitality! Check the Builders' Directory for the locals.

I might suggest that, prior to your next trip east, fly with an instructor pilot or a safety pilot and get some instrument time in (if your RV is equipped). It would help raise your comfort level.
 
Pierre, I do not have in cockpit weather info. You are right...it would help but I don't fly enough in this type weather to justify the cost.

Gary, I am not lambasting myself. Since I got the RV I have expanded my comfort zone and abilities a lot. But there are still limits...mostly weather. My guess is that the lowest visibility I have flown in is around 10 miles in Florida. So if Toledo dropped to five miles...or four, that could have been enough of a degradation from my experience/comfort zone to turn around.

Frankly, if more experienced pilots secretly are laughing, it does not bother me. I do what is right and safe for me. While I have taken instrument training, I am hardly "current" and would not have taken that time to try something I was not qualified to do.

What I do kick myself over is not taking three or four minutes to check on an FBO at South Bend. Had that been viable (I think it was), I would have been better off for that stop as well as possibly being able to beat the snow storm at home. The fact is that on any long trip it is not atypical to realize later that I could have done something better.

It is all an adventure and flying VFR means adjusting flight plans according to events beyond my control. Don't get upset. Just make the best of what comes along and enjoy the unique opportunity that we have.
 
ATP, but still a wuss.

You know this is a very good thread, and not just from a VFR-only perspective. It's the combination of Pilot skills, Pilot experience, Pilot comfort and equipment capability that counts. Whatever is the weakest link on that day calls the shots and sets the limits.
You might have the ticket and the equipment to do a CAT III ILS with an Auto-Land down to 600' RVR and 50' decision height (I've done 'em) but if it's late, and you're tired you can still wuss out if it just feels wrong: that's the judgement thing our instructors told us all about. On another day one crewmember might be a new guy, or some part of the aircraft system is inop making you a VFR guy.
As far as the RV equipment part of the equation, well it can handle way more G's than any airliner, so it should tolerate turbulence better, at least up to the limit of the pilot! Other than the lack of de-icing and anti-icing capability, and the less-than-real-time radar available via satellite, it seems like a pretty good instrument platform.
Any comments from the hard core IFR RV drivers out there? What limits on IFR flying have you found with the plane as you've equiped it?
Clay "CookieMonster" Cook
Paused.
 
Any comments from the hard core IFR RV drivers out there? What limits on IFR flying have you found with the plane as you've equiped it?

You can probably search the "IFR" forum here for a bunch of threads on this Clay - hours of enjoyable debate and reading!;)

But you have hit the nail on the head when you say that no two situations are ever the same. The combinations of weather, pilot experience, pilot currency, and airplane equipment are so widely varied that it is impossible to generalize in a meaningful way.

I do believe that the RV is a good IFR platform, but not necessarily because of it's handling - for that, you really might want a good autopilot to help with the mechanics of keeping it upright. The thing I like is the speed and range combination. What that means is that as long as you don't fly into an area of IFR that is a thousand miles in extent, you can almost always have a backup plan that gets you back to VFR if you don't like what you find at your destination.

For example, a couple of weeks ago, Louise and I were trying to get from Nevada to the Oregon coast. The weather was good at both ends, but in between, there were clouds down to the mountain tops with tops in the flight levels, with Airmets for icing in the clouds. We set out to try a VFR over the top (because the alternative was to continue playing solitaire in the FBO in Winemucca...), just to go have a look. We had more than enough fuel for an out and back, which is what we ended up doing - no danger, easy divert, and a 3 hour flight that couldn't be logged as a cross-country...:rolleyes:

IFR capability in the airplane and in the pilot's walllet is useless without good judgement. That means ALWAYS keeping a large margin for error, and an iron-clad "out". Never be in a situation where your ONLY alternative is to complete a low approach. The capabilty is especially useful when operating in coastal areas that experience morning or evening fog and/or low clouds. While the coast might be socked in, you generally have great weather just 100 miles inland - and that is a 20 minute divert in an RV. I used to file for Galveston Island to shoot practice approaches in 200 and a half BECAUSE I knew that I had good VFR just 30 miles inland. Good practice, and no pressure to complete the approach.

Now the truth of the matter is that with all of the IFR equipment I have installed, and the remarkable capability that modern avionics provide, I only file IFR a few times a year for real - I just don't NEED it that often to complete a mission. If there are significant chances of real adverse weather (icing, thunderstorms...), I don't go, or find a way around the mess. But it is awful handy to get in and out of benign conditions when you have a good set of "outs" in your hip pocket.

Paul