Posted: 9/23/2014 7:19:52 AM EDT
|
I've read a dozen articles on every kind of method to determine what your personal minimums for flying IFR should be. What are yours and how did you determine them? How long after getting your endorsement did you re-evaluate and consider lowering them? |
| I generally have 1000 ft ceilings as my absolute takeoff minimum; 800 for arrival, though if conditions are forecast to improve, I will wait. I don't fly if there is any risk of embedded thunderstorms. Also, I won't fly at night if I don't have moonlight or ground lights -- especially if there's weather. I like to build up speed before tucking into the clouds as well. They say that you're most likely to experience a failure on takeoff and with low ceilings you have very limited options. I've heard of people having electric landing gear short out their electrical system on takeoff; I've had a cable keep me from locking my mechanical gear up and had to screw with it; people have crashed because of distractions such as leaving their baggage door unlocked. Ideally if you keep 1000 ft as your limit, all of these issues will have manifested themselves before you have to handle the plane in IMC -- and hand-flying with no one to talk to and no approach loaded in your EFB if you have an electrical failure. |
|
Quoted:
I generally have 1000 ft ceilings as my absolute takeoff minimum; 800 for arrival, though if conditions are forecast to improve, I will wait. I don't fly if there is any risk of embedded thunderstorms. Also, I won't fly at night if I don't have moonlight or ground lights -- especially if there's weather. I like to build up speed before tucking into the clouds as well. They say that you're most likely to experience a failure on takeoff and with low ceilings you have very limited options. I've heard of people having electric landing gear short out their electrical system on takeoff; I've had a cable keep me from locking my mechanical gear up and had to screw with it; people have crashed because of distractions such as leaving their baggage door unlocked. Ideally if you keep 1000 ft as your limit, all of these issues will have manifested themselves before you have to handle the plane in IMC -- and hand-flying with no one to talk to and no approach loaded in your EFB if you have an electrical failure. THIS! I , at one time, THOUGHT that I was a really competent pilot,,,,`till I was 300/1/2 with intermittent rain showers coming out of Hobby. Total electrical failure about 50 feet off the ground when I pulled the gear up. NOT a fun 41 seconds. There was some "do some of that pilot shit" involved. |
|
Whatever the mins are for two separate compatible approaches where I intend to go (generally 1 precision and 1 non-precision).
For what I've seen, that generally means above 400-1, but I prefer above 500-1. I'd pick the ILS/PAR first, but if something went squirrely, I'd have a LOC/VOR/TACAN as a back-up. IFR certed GPS is in the future 
...probably helps that my VFR min is also 500-1, lol. |
Back when I flew Part 135 (Be C90 & A100) with 2 flight crew - it was "why bother checking the weather? You gotta go anyway" 
Hope you are light enough so you can load on the fuel and find some kind of legal alternate - for departure or destination. It didn't hurt that we flew out of Northeast Ohio (for many years). As long as mountains weren't involved, we had pretty good experience with anything that was likely to come up. Many times one guy would fly the approach and the other would ID the runway environment at minimums and make the actual transition and landing - it worked well for me and the guys I flew with. Every deadhead leg was used as a training opportunity - had to do so anyway, 6 month checks came around awful fast 
Embedded TRWs without the Wx radar was something we did NOT feel casual about. Can't remember the radar being out all that much though. |
|
Thanks for sharing. I like the published minimums unless there are thunderstorms. I have a GTN 650 which offers a lot of RNAV/GPS approaches which in a lot of cases offer a LPV with a min. of 200 ft. I use the plane for work about 3 days a week and almost always file IFR so I'm getting a decent number of approaches and experience.
|
| Depends how bad I need to land. I remember one of my first flights in the fleet, 200' and the crosswinds were out of limits, sucked. For me depends on the aircraft and how comfortable I am in it. If I can go lower and slower published mins(or slightly below) are ok, aircraft without that option I get nervous at none precision mins. |
|
Twin engine turbine? What is on the chart?
Never been a big fan of the concept of single engine turbine, but I've also never done it. Lots of guys in PC-12s and C-208s banging around to minimums, every day. Personally, I'd submit that if you don't feel confident flying to minimums, you shouldn't be flying IFR at all. Its too easy to suckered into a place you can't fly out of. |
|
I agree. Either you trust yourself and your ability or you don't. I had a friend recently critique an approach that was just above minimums and said he thought I needed to be more conservative because it should take years to develop the skills to be comfortable under those conditions. |
|
Quoted:
I agree. Either you trust yourself and your ability or you don't. I had a friend recently critique an approach that was just above minimums and said he thought I needed to be more conservative because it should take years to develop the skills to be comfortable under those conditions. years to be comfortable, that is silly. if it is all you know, then it changes things a bit. |
|
I tell the same two jokes every class.
When teaching Alternate airfield planning and selection: "If you're going into the clouds, you better have a plan that guarantees that you can get back out of the clouds because we have a perfect record in aviation... We've never left one up there." And then once we get out to the flight line and we're number 3 in line for the pad waiting for my IFR release, I sigh and say "This is the second worst part of IFR." They, invariably, look at me quizzically and ask "What's the worst?" I smile and say "Not breaking out on the ILS when you need to." 
|
| And while I'm thinking about it, every approach that I flew in the foggles (which was about 85% during training) was down to the minimum and then proceed to the missed. Nobody ever yanked the foggles 300 ft above min and said "oh look, you broke out." So, even the training conditions you to fly to the minimum. |
|
Quoted:
I agree. Either you trust yourself and your ability or you don't. I had a friend recently critique an approach that was just above minimums and said he thought I needed to be more conservative because it should take years to develop the skills to be comfortable under those conditions. I wonder how long it took those Berlin Airlift guys flying ASR approaches for 8 hour shifts... |
|
Quoted:
THIS! I , at one time, THOUGHT that I was a really competent pilot,,,,`till I was 300/1/2 with intermittent rain showers coming out of Hobby. Total electrical failure about 50 feet off the ground when I pulled the gear up. NOT a fun 41 seconds. There was some "do some of that pilot shit" involved. Quoted:
Quoted:
I generally have 1000 ft ceilings as my absolute takeoff minimum; 800 for arrival, though if conditions are forecast to improve, I will wait. I don't fly if there is any risk of embedded thunderstorms. Also, I won't fly at night if I don't have moonlight or ground lights -- especially if there's weather. I like to build up speed before tucking into the clouds as well. They say that you're most likely to experience a failure on takeoff and with low ceilings you have very limited options. I've heard of people having electric landing gear short out their electrical system on takeoff; I've had a cable keep me from locking my mechanical gear up and had to screw with it; people have crashed because of distractions such as leaving their baggage door unlocked. Ideally if you keep 1000 ft as your limit, all of these issues will have manifested themselves before you have to handle the plane in IMC -- and hand-flying with no one to talk to and no approach loaded in your EFB if you have an electrical failure. THIS! I , at one time, THOUGHT that I was a really competent pilot,,,,`till I was 300/1/2 with intermittent rain showers coming out of Hobby. Total electrical failure about 50 feet off the ground when I pulled the gear up. NOT a fun 41 seconds. There was some "do some of that pilot shit" involved. Your story stuck in my mind about that incident from when I spoke with you when you were selling your plane. IIRC, you diverted from ATC instructions to communicate that something was wrong. I ended up buying a very clean and modernized older Mooney. |
|
Quoted:
Your story stuck in my mind about that incident from when I spoke with you when you were selling your plane. IIRC, you diverted from ATC instructions to communicate that something was wrong. I ended up buying a very clean and modernized older Mooney. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I generally have 1000 ft ceilings as my absolute takeoff minimum; 800 for arrival, though if conditions are forecast to improve, I will wait. I don't fly if there is any risk of embedded thunderstorms. Also, I won't fly at night if I don't have moonlight or ground lights -- especially if there's weather. I like to build up speed before tucking into the clouds as well. They say that you're most likely to experience a failure on takeoff and with low ceilings you have very limited options. I've heard of people having electric landing gear short out their electrical system on takeoff; I've had a cable keep me from locking my mechanical gear up and had to screw with it; people have crashed because of distractions such as leaving their baggage door unlocked. Ideally if you keep 1000 ft as your limit, all of these issues will have manifested themselves before you have to handle the plane in IMC -- and hand-flying with no one to talk to and no approach loaded in your EFB if you have an electrical failure. THIS! I , at one time, THOUGHT that I was a really competent pilot,,,,`till I was 300/1/2 with intermittent rain showers coming out of Hobby. Total electrical failure about 50 feet off the ground when I pulled the gear up. NOT a fun 41 seconds. There was some "do some of that pilot shit" involved. Your story stuck in my mind about that incident from when I spoke with you when you were selling your plane. IIRC, you diverted from ATC instructions to communicate that something was wrong. I ended up buying a very clean and modernized older Mooney. I never got to fly a Mooney. Looks like a slick fast bird. I`m riding a Can Am Commander now and fly fishing. I miss flying but it was always a "tool" for us and not a Saturday morning hamburger deal. |
|
At work, as low as I can legally depart for takeoff, and published minimums for landing.
For myself in the 172, I haven't really set them yet. Just got it IFR certified a couple of months ago, and haven't figured out my comfort zone yet. At the moment it's around a mile above required vis and a couple hundred above mins for the ceiling. I've also come to realize how much work it is flying single pilot IFR in a light single with no autopilot! |
|
Quoted:
At work, as low as I can legally depart for takeoff, and published minimums for landing. For myself in the 172, I haven't really set them yet. Just got it IFR certified a couple of months ago, and haven't figured out my comfort zone yet. At the moment it's around a mile above required vis and a couple hundred above mins for the ceiling. I've also come to realize how much work it is flying single pilot IFR in a light single with no autopilot! Tell me about it. The first 350 or so hours I flew my Mooney the wing leveler wasn't working due to dry rotted hoses. After those were all replaced, I'd say the IFR workload dropped to about 25% of what had been. It doesn't do heading or altitude, but it makes the IMC workload a lot closer to VMC, especially in turbulence. Even in just solid overcast, rolling level after a prolonged turn would make me feel a little uneasy. Having the wing leveler fight you helped to prevent that as well. |