jrh
Well-Known Member
I've got a question about 91.7(b):
"The pilot in command of a civil aircraft is responsible for determining whether that aircraft is in condition for safe flight. The pilot in command shall discontinue the flight when unairworthy mechanical, electrical, or structural conditions occur."
First, let me offer a true situation that happened to a couple friends of mine the other night, at about 22:00 local.
They were coming home from a 200 nm cross country trip in a Piper Arrow, were IFR, level at 9,000, and in clear skies, over mountains, but almost past the mountains and into a large basin of farmland and towns. Their alternator failed and they didn't catch the drop on the loadmeter right away, so the battery ran down. By the time they caught it, they had very little power left. They lost contact with Center, but were able to relay a message through an airliner that they were having electrical problems and were going to descend for landing. At the time, they were about 100 nm away from the aircraft home base, their destination.
They had just enough power to pump the gear down, run the nav lights/tail beacon, use the Com 1 radio, and flip on the landing light on short final. They landed safely, called for somebody to pick them up, and left the plane at the airport overnight, to be picked up and returned to the home base later.
Now, here's my thought: Would it have been safe and/or legal to cancel IFR, then continue to the aircraft home base with the electrical system shut down, even though that destination was still more than 100 nm away?
I know this is a bit of Monday morning quarterbacking, so I'm not wanting to be harsh on these pilots for landing immediately. I might have done the same thing, had I been over the mountains, completely in the dark. I would never criticize somebody for making a safe landing after encountering an unusual situation. Better safe than sorry.
That being said, it might have saved them a lot of hassle to bring the aircraft back to the home base. From a safety standpoint, I wouldn't especially like the idea of running totally in the dark without a beacon or nav lights for 45 minutes, but otherwise, the weather was clear and I know both pilots knew the route well enough to navigate safely.
From a legal standpoint, obviously there was an unairworthy electrical problem. The regs say to "discontinue" the flight. But when is that required? Immediately? As soon as possible? As soon as practical? Every flight will be discontinued sooner or later. So what urgency does this reg stress?
"The pilot in command of a civil aircraft is responsible for determining whether that aircraft is in condition for safe flight. The pilot in command shall discontinue the flight when unairworthy mechanical, electrical, or structural conditions occur."
First, let me offer a true situation that happened to a couple friends of mine the other night, at about 22:00 local.
They were coming home from a 200 nm cross country trip in a Piper Arrow, were IFR, level at 9,000, and in clear skies, over mountains, but almost past the mountains and into a large basin of farmland and towns. Their alternator failed and they didn't catch the drop on the loadmeter right away, so the battery ran down. By the time they caught it, they had very little power left. They lost contact with Center, but were able to relay a message through an airliner that they were having electrical problems and were going to descend for landing. At the time, they were about 100 nm away from the aircraft home base, their destination.
They had just enough power to pump the gear down, run the nav lights/tail beacon, use the Com 1 radio, and flip on the landing light on short final. They landed safely, called for somebody to pick them up, and left the plane at the airport overnight, to be picked up and returned to the home base later.
Now, here's my thought: Would it have been safe and/or legal to cancel IFR, then continue to the aircraft home base with the electrical system shut down, even though that destination was still more than 100 nm away?
I know this is a bit of Monday morning quarterbacking, so I'm not wanting to be harsh on these pilots for landing immediately. I might have done the same thing, had I been over the mountains, completely in the dark. I would never criticize somebody for making a safe landing after encountering an unusual situation. Better safe than sorry.
That being said, it might have saved them a lot of hassle to bring the aircraft back to the home base. From a safety standpoint, I wouldn't especially like the idea of running totally in the dark without a beacon or nav lights for 45 minutes, but otherwise, the weather was clear and I know both pilots knew the route well enough to navigate safely.
From a legal standpoint, obviously there was an unairworthy electrical problem. The regs say to "discontinue" the flight. But when is that required? Immediately? As soon as possible? As soon as practical? Every flight will be discontinued sooner or later. So what urgency does this reg stress?
