IMC in the winter.

[hrjet]

Hi all,
I'm currently working on my instrument rating in Omaha, Nebraska. I'm planning on taking my checkride for my IR in early May. I do however have one concern, I've been in IMC once with my previous instructor and I thought it was one of the coolest things in the world. It was very short lived, so it wasn't logged. My previous instructor left town and my new instructor plans on having me get my instrument rating with all simulated instrument time. I do NOT want that, Sim isnmt. is nothing like the real thing in my opinion and I want to have experience before I can legally endanger my life in the clouds. I know a few instrument rated pilot's who actually fear clouds, I do not fear them but my instructor dosn't seem to want to go through them. Granted, it's winter I know it's cold out, and I know iceing is a potential hazard. But I know people who go up in single pistons in the winter for Instrument training. I've read as much as I can online, but I wanted to know your opinions. Any day it's broken or overcast he won't go up in the winter, once the time overcast was reported as 400 feet think. From what I know this is good practice for shooting approaches... Which is what I want?
What do you guys think?

Edit:
He won't go up when the ceilings are less then 2500, which is rare in the winter.

You should see at least some actual to see what it's all about but insisting on doing your training in IMC is unnecessary.

You can transition into IMC flying very quickly even with only simulated experience. First time it's weird, then it become second nature.

 

[A150K]

Honestly, 2500 feet as minimums doesn't even require an instrument approach. I'm with you Boris, the OP needs to find a guy who isn't afraid to teach what breaking out at or near minimums is all about. Afterall, you will absolutely find yourself in that situation at some point. Or hell, you might find yourself in a situation where you just DON'T break out and then you have to fly the published missed... Some instructors don't even teach that, they just have you fly the VFR missed and get vectored around by approach.

If he has a 2500 feet minimum, there's a big chance this instructor isn't even comfortable in actual, so you should probably not be learning anything related to actual from him.

With that said, maybe the guy is experienced in that region of the country and maybe he's found that the icing layer has certain aspects when the ceiling is 2500+ or maybe he's always experienced ice in IMC in that area. Who knows.

I would just give a shoutout to another II in the area and see what they feel should be done. In that situation icing is the only thing that would worry me.

hope I didn't spark too many fires, I was just trying to give my opinion without getting people riled up

Are there instructors who don't teach the published missed?? wow....
One thing about the field I train at (SAF, a non-radar class D) is the fact that you have to fly the full approach everytime. Sometimes we go to ABQ or AEG to get vectors to the final approach course and then we fly the alternate missed given by ATC, but imo any instructor not exposing the student to both sides of the coin is not giving the student what e/she is paying for.

 

[tiredcfi]

Are there instructors who don't teach the published missed?? wow....

Yes... There are! Occasionally we get some terrorists on contract from another flight school (for multi training) and they only know how to shoot the same three approaches at their home airport!

 

[A150K]

Yes... There are! Occasionally we get some terrorists on contract from another flight school (for multi training) and they only know how to shoot the same three approaches at their home airport!

:drool:anic:And these are the people we are sharing the sky with? I need a shot....

 

[tiredcfi]

:drool:anic:And these are the people we are sharing the sky with? I need a shot....

Beat ya to it!
:beer:

 

[A150K]

Beat ya to it!
:beer:

My IR lesson got cancelled today and I'm off from work, so I'm already 3 in, I'll stop there though.

 

[Winglet]

I flew a good 3 hours in solid IMC today ferrying a seneca II from CA to Guatemala..

I took off from KCMA to KCGZ and I was in the soup pretty much the whole way. Its very important to not only look out for ice, but to know how to behave when you have it.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N7816C

Thats my departure and return to KCGZ due to picking up ice on my way to Pecos... now I am stuck in Pheonix for the night, possibly two.

My best advice about flying IMC in winter is to know when to NOT mess with it.

 

[A150K]

I flew a good 3 hours in solid IMC today ferrying a seneca II from CA to Guatemala..

I took off from KCMA to KCGZ and I was in the soup pretty much the whole way. Its very important to not only look out for ice, but to know how to behave when you have it.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N7816C

Thats my departure and return to KCGZ due to picking up ice on my way to Pecos... now I am stuck in Pheonix for the night, possibly two.

My best advice about flying IMC in winter is to know when to NOT mess with it.

Definately. Or anytime for that matter. Imbedded T-Storms can be even worse than ice in some cases.

Yep, NM was a mess today (atleast SAF). A huge system moved in from the west at about 10 this morning and it's had us socked in for most of the day.

 

[elmetal]

Definately. Or anytime for that matter. Imbedded T-Storms can be even worse than ice in some cases.

Yep, NM was a mess today (atleast SAF). A huge system moved in from the west at about 10 this morning and it's had us socked in for most of the day.

all this stuff better clear out! I'm coming over to california from South Florida on Monday and I reallllly don't wanna get delayed!

 

[Winglet]

all this stuff better clear out! I'm coming over to california from South Florida on Monday and I reallllly don't wanna get delayed!

I'm still sitting it out... (ready to jump in the plane at the first sign of clearing)

its supposed to move out of here by tomorrow morning.

 

[elmetal]

I hear that... let's hope for the best

 

[CoffeeIcePapers]

I agree with this statement. Yes don't play in ice, when in doubt cancel, but trace and light rime can be managed in the right environment. I am not saying go chase ice, but I am saying for someone who is planning a career. The experience of actual IMC in not so perfect conditions will help you get an idea of what you can and can't do. This will allow you to evaluate your weather conditions better as well as far as making go/no-go decisions in the future. ALWAYS make sure you have an out though. Being able to develop some solid minimums and good understanding of the weather, will allow you to survive when flying up north in the winter time, especially when weather changes from what is forecast midair (which happens a lot here).

In most trainers, the only way to "manage" icing is to get out of it. That is the problem with this thread, IMO. If there are known or forecast icing conditions, there is really no reason to do a training flight. The only experience you will get is scaring the crap out of yourself. I am pretty sure trace amounts of ice can build up pretty quickly into heavy amounts of ice.

I'm in awe of the number of pilots here that not only admit to but brag about exceeding aircraft limitations. If you're an instructor and you're doing this: shame on you!

+1

 

[greaper007]

In most trainers, the only way to "manage" icing is to get out of it. That is the problem with this thread, IMO. If there are known or forecast icing conditions, there is really no reason to do a training flight. The only experience you will get is scaring the crap out of yourself. I am pretty sure trace amounts of ice can build up pretty quickly into heavy amounts of ice.


+1

I'm with you. I got a little actual when training for my instrument ticket, but didn't really get into it till I was doing xc's for my commercial. I did all this down in Florida in a duchess. Which means when I did hit IFR it was generally thunderstorm related. At the time it scared me, but I still did it. Now that I've been a captain in a Saab, I wouldn't touch that sort of flying with a 10 ft pole. I think you're asking for trouble flying a non-radar equipped aircraft near thunderstorms. Just like your asking for trouble flying a plane that doesn't even have boots in actual in the winter.

I got plenty of experience with icing and thunderstorms as an FO flying out of Rochester NY. What I learned was, even in an aircraft like the Saab if it's at all possible to avoid the icing (even if the ride is a little rougher) do it. I've hit unforecasted freezing rain that put nearly an inch of ice on the entire airframe even though I was only in the conditions for a short time. That was in a plane that had a lot more available power than a 172 does, and I definitely used it on landing. Don't tempt fate with mother nature.

 

[elmetal]

In most trainers, the only way to "manage" icing is to get out of it. That is the problem with this thread, IMO. If there are known or forecast icing conditions, there is really no reason to do a training flight. The only experience you will get is scaring the crap out of yourself. I am pretty sure trace amounts of ice can build up pretty quickly into heavy amounts of ice.


+1

I'd say there is no reason to do ANY flying

maybe I'm a little too conservative though

 

[A150K]

I'd say there is no reason to do ANY flying

maybe I'm a little too conservative though

Depends on the airplane...But definately never a good idea in your typical light aircraft.

 

[elmetal]

Depends on the airplane...But definately never a good idea in your typical light aircraft.

I was going to add any non FIKI aircraft but even then, in FIKI I would still get right up out of icing whereas in nonFIKI I'd probably treat it much more seriously.

no matter how awesome the plane is under icing, I'd still feel uncomfortable... FIKI or not.

No reason flying into icing knowingly if there's another way to do things. I'm sure there are times where you absolutely have to, but to fly nonFIKI straight into icing knowingly is not very smart in my mind.

 

[jrh]

I'm in awe of the number of pilots here that not only admit to but brag about exceeding aircraft limitations. If you're an instructor and you're doing this: shame on you!

I'm in awe of the number of pilots here who don't really understand what their airplanes are capable of and make overly conservative blanket rules like, "Never fly in IMC in the winter." If you're an instructor and you're doing this, shame on you!

I'd encourage everyone in this thread to read, or re-read, the FAA's official interpretation of "known icing conditions" and how to deal with them:

http://download.aopa.org/epilot/2009/090126icing.pdf

I'd also like to point out a line from the final paragraph that summarizes the FAA's stance quite nicely:

If ice is detected or observed along the route of flight, the pilot should have a viable exit strategy and immediately implement that strategy so that the flight may safely continue to its intended destination or terminate at an alternate landing facility.

Basically: Don't be stupid.

I'm not sure why this concept is so hard for some pilots to understand.

There are NUMEROUS ways to safely encounter ice in a non-FIKI aircraft, especially in a training environment. There. I said it.

 

[jrh]

In most trainers, the only way to "manage" icing is to get out of it.

I agree.

That is the problem with this thread, IMO. If there are known or forecast icing conditions, there is really no reason to do a training flight.

What? Of course there is! Aside from teaching the pilot how to safely manage ice in real world scenarios, how about the reason of simply wanting to complete a training flight? There is no reason to scrub a flight if it can be completed safely.

The only experience you will get is scaring the crap out of yourself. I am pretty sure trace amounts of ice can build up pretty quickly into heavy amounts of ice.

Yes and no. I'd be lying if I said I'd never been scared by ice. But you're implying every icing encounter will result in a scary experience. That's totally wrong.

Let me tell a story from one of my own flights a few days ago...

The mission was to train a client on partial panel approaches. Aircraft was a Turbo 182. Only ice equipment was pitot and prop heat. Ceilings were overcast at 1700 AGL. Minimum vectoring altitude was 1800 AGL (3000 MSL). Cloud layer was 1200 feet thick (from 2900 MSL to 4100 MSL). Outside air temp was +1 degree Celsius at the surface, decreasing to -4 degrees C as we climbed, then at 4100 MSL a strong temperature inversion began warming the temp to +6 degrees C at 5000 MSL.

We climbed out, picked up ice in the climb for the two minutes we spent in IMC, got on top, level at 5000, and it melted off. We descended on the approach, picked up ice during the descent, it melted a little during the touch and go, climbed out again, and repeated the process for three approaches. A lightly loaded Turbo 182 has plenty of power for this scenario.

It was a great learning experience for the client. A very productive flight. We talked about how there's no way we would consider taking the flight if we weren't certain we could get on top, what the temps on top would be, how thick the layer is, how quickly we could descend out of the bases, how close to the airport we were, the probability of needing to do a missed approach with ice on the plane, etc. I stressed having multiple "outs" and being certain of them before launching.

A person can't develop judgment if they never experience these scenarios and discuss why they either are, or aren't, acceptably safe.

 

[elmetal]

I'm in awe of the number of pilots here who don't really understand what their airplanes are capable of and make overly conservative blanket rules like, "Never fly in IMC in the winter." If you're an instructor and you're doing this, shame on you!

I'd encourage everyone in this thread to read, or re-read, the FAA's official interpretation of "known icing conditions" and how to deal with them:

http://download.aopa.org/epilot/2009/090126icing.pdf

I'd also like to point out a line from the final paragraph that summarizes the FAA's stance quite nicely:



Basically: Don't be stupid.

I'm not sure why this concept is so hard for some pilots to understand.

There are NUMEROUS ways to safely encounter ice in a non-FIKI aircraft, especially in a training environment. There. I said it.

I'll do it with someone who is experienced in the matter such as yourself, but you bet your ass I ain't flying into knowin icing conditions (aka PIREPS confirming ice) by myself without that experience. I don't think that's conservative of me, I think it's smart of me.

But I do agree with you

 

[averettpilot]

It seems that there are a lot of people out there who would defy stated and known limitations of their aircraft under the guise of training and experience. Let me say that this isn't the 1930's anymore where a lot was unknown about how ice accumulates and its effect on flight. Test pilots often flew into these conditions in the interest of furthering knowledge on this subject and often times the price was either the aircraft or their lives. The risk was calculated and measured before the flight took place and data was collected. The people who currently go up into known icing to gain experience are foolish and reckless. I'm sure those early test pilots would say "What the hell did I take that risk for if pilots are going to continue to take 'measured' risks?" Apparently their efforts have gone unnoticed and seemingly so have the NTSB's in publishing the facts of incidents and accidents involving even minimal icing. In short, read a book about it. There is plenty of information out there to preclude actually going up in a 172 of all damn things to figure out the effects of icing.

I'm also not going to qualify my opinion by any experiences I may or may not have had because it does not bear on this topic. When you read "Flight into known icing conditions prohibited" in the POH it's pretty straight forward.