Help with MSA please.......

[buggingout]

if you'd be so kind to help please...

scenario: VFR flight north-eastwards over a tall obstacle - alt. 2452ft (Winterhill in fact!); MEF on chart for that block is 25, Class A airspace is at 3500ft.

The track takes you within 5 miles of Winterhill.

What would you set as your MSA assuming you're being examined for inadvertantly entering cloud just as you're reaching that area?

Pilot has no IR or IMC rating etc. and you're not allowed to alter track.

Hopefully not missed any major info out here but it wouldn't be the first time.....

Thanks very much in advance

[fullrich]

I would climb to MSA = 3452 and get out of the cloud . MSA= 1000FT above highest obstacle. The MEF has a a margin for unknown obstacles above the highest known objstacle and is a safe altitude for VFR only. Enen though you are VFR you apply the MSA IFR rule and get out ...Open to criticism!

[fmgc]

Pilot has no IR or IMC rating etc. and you're not allowed to alter track

The question is fundamentally flawed, why would you not be allowed to change track on a VFR flight?

If you enter cloud, rule 1 is to turn through 180 degrees and go back to where you know there is no cloud.

[World of Tweed]

If I inadvertantly entered cloud and was uncertain of my position then I think I would climd to the MSA = 3500Ft (as I'm not very good at flying level at 3452FT).

If I've now gone IMC then I'm in trouble so I'd be declaring a MAYDAY and contacting ATC, the Manch or Warton Radar if necessary and getting vectors out of there.

[buggingout]

cheers for replies.....

fullrich: The chances of me not hitting 3500ft and therefore CAS is damn unlikely! It's all getting a bit tight on accuarcy now

fmgc: I agree, but I'm looking for a definative solution without changing track.....if there is one! Starting to think that altering track is the best way and taking the penalty of it not being the most commercially viable track.

World of Tweed: yeah, that was my first thought (climb to 3400ft and ask for help). Being absolutely precise, still not 1000ft above. I know you said 3500 but that's bloody Class A again!! :eek:


Thanks again :ugh:

[Keygrip]

Bugging - I agree with Tweeds response - you are in serious trouble. 180° level turn (away from the mast), climb or descend as appropriate to MSA (which is only an IFR thing - but you've just gone IFR by definition of being in IMC). MSA (according to the CAA) doesn't exist in the VFR world. If still in IMC declare an emergency on the R/T.

Take that one step further - in the event of an emergency the pilot may take any action deemed necessary to deal with that emergency. If that includes entering Class A airspace then go do it....but tell somebody when you get chance (Aviate, Navigate, Communicate).

I'm actually equally inclined to agree with fmgc's account. If you've gone IMC without a suitable rating (experience, clearance or currency) then it's a 180° turn.

If your scenario is for a flight test, YOU are the (assumed) Captain of the aircraft for the test profile. If an examiner suggests anything other than the 180° turn then remind them, in writing (with a copy to [email protected]), of "Regulation 6".

The examiner is probably, however, looking for you to over rule them, take "command" of the situation and do the turn. "Commercially viable" goes out the window when you encounter emergencies or break the law (as you are not allowed to enter cloud without that rating, clearance or currency).

[Tarq57]

In the original scenario, I think the keyword is VFR.
I always thought the height requirements for same were not below 500' AGL, including the highest obstacle within 2000' horizontal distance of the flightpath.
Aren't the references to MSA and 5NM a bit red herringy? They would certainly apply to IFR flight. If the hill was in an area of desicnated mountainous terrain, the MSA would be 2000' (IFR).
Or am I misunderstanding something here?

[fullrich]

Well Well .All my training CPL/MULTI/IR training meant nothing if I believe all this. The first thing you do if you enter cloud on a vfr flight is climb to the MSA. Not much point in turning thru 180 degrees if you run into a hill. You may then proceed to call ATC or declare an emegency.ATC are not always aware of exact terrain values but if you fly at MSA then vectors are fine.Yes MSA is a safe IFR altitude and not a reference for normal VFR flight but if you enter cloud then you must climb to a safe altitude. Wheather that is 3452 which I think is technically correct or 3500 is open for debate. Most if not all uncontrolled airspace has a margin over terrain of 1000FT regardless of height of terrain for this purpose.

[High Wing Drifter]

If you enter cloud then you must climb to a safe altitude
Agree!

However, I too am a tad confused over the question. For the ATPLs the question use the Jepp VFR chart for which the printed MEF (or the equivelent) will be pre-calculated to add 1000'/2000' to the highest obstacle depending of terrain height, that is obviously not what you are using here, but this doesn't seem to be a JAA PPL style question either - what exam is this for? The way the MEF is shown in the question suggests a CAA chart (no idea about US sectionals). I shall assume UK.

If you are in cloud, inadvertently, regardless of your lack of ratings you are IFR. If so then the MSA is the higher of 1000' above the highest obstacle or 1300' above the highest ground within 5nm of your track (1300' because of the 300' allowance for uncharted obstacles). Which in this case should be 3800' not 3500'. I too would judge the Class A to be the lesser of the two (we)evils and the rules of the air specifically provides a clause which permits the breaking of any rule should maintining it expose the flight to an unacceptable level of risk.

[EGCC4284]

If I inadvertantly entered cloud and was uncertain of my position then I think I would climd to the MSA = 3500Ft (as I'm not very good at flying level at 3452FT).

Wheather that is 3452 which I think is technically correct or 3500 is open for debate.

And if you forget to set 1013, ( which is a good call on the 2nd if you have 2 altmeters ) you may be a lot higher into class A when you think you are still at 3452 agl

[JohnnyPharm]

Quite easy to say climb to MSA and request vectors, if you are a vfr pilot entering cloud is disorientating and panic inducing things you can do. Even with an ATC vectoring you and trying to calm you down I would imagine you would be totally panic stricken if you remained in IMC for more than about 10mins and one's ability to keep wings level and maintain speed would rapidly diminish. I think the natural tendancy would be to descend and get out of the cloud, if you kept climbing you could be in there for ages, alttough climbing is the more sensible option.

Maybe I'm an nervous pilot, but the thought of it sends shivers down my back.:(

[Piltdown Man]

The most worrying thing about this question is that there is somebody out potentially teaching dangerous manouveres. A new PPL is unlikely to maintain control for their aircraft in cloud for long enough for the question to have any meaning. You don't just enter cloud when flying VFR by accident - it's painted white so that you can see it. So you either do a 180 and descend out of cloud or change schools!

[scroggs]

As I recall, the calculation of MSA is the height of the highest ground rounded up to the nearest 100ft, plus 100ft to account for man-made obstacles on top of the hill, plus 1000ft (for ground below 3000ft - 2000ft for higher ground). On a planned route, all ground within a certain distance of track should be accounted for, depending on the speed you are flying, and the company/authority rules you are flying under.

As a theoretical question, the MSA in this case would be 3600ft and thus you would not be allowed to go IMC (and thus have to fly at or above MSA) as you would not be in the open FIR. You would have to declare IFR with the controlling authority and fly under their control until you could regain VMC.

If you are flying VFR in the first place, you must remain 500ft clear of the ground, and clear of cloud (again, speed is a factor here). While you remain VFR, your hill is not a factor unless you decide to fly over the top of it. If the weather is such that there is a reasonable risk that you could go IMC while attempting to stay above your 500ft minimum, and thus have to climb to MSA - thus penetrating controlled airspace - you must not fly there unless you have pre-arranged your contingency plan with the controlling authority.*

If your flying experience is such that you have no IF capability, you must not put yourself into a situation where cloud penetration is a possibility, whether or not MSA and controlled airspace are factors. You could very well kill yourself and others - it has happened several times.

Scroggs

*If you ever find yourself inadvertently in this situation, it is an emergency. Get onto 121.5 and call Mayday. Squawk 7700 if you have that capability. If you can't regain VMC, fly at MSA on the most sensible heading you can think of (ie away from higher ground and any lower controlled airspace - this is where pre-flight route study is so important). D&D will auto-triangulate your position and guide you to a safe area to let down, or a diversion airport.

[High Wing Drifter]

Scroggs,
plus 100ft to account for man-made obstacles on top of the hill
Tis 300' allowance for uncharted man made bits and bobs lying on top of hills. This is quite important as, from second hand information, there seems to be a number of 280' wind turbines popping up around the country, obviously most likely on top of a hill! So I reckon the MSA is 3800'.

All,
Been posted before, but it is interesting hearing how quickly IMC panic sets in! http://www.naats.org/docs/flightassist.mp3

[RVR800]

This is a stupid question it presupposes that you are planning to contavene commons sense rules etc...

[buggingout]

Thanks all for your replies, helpful indeed.

Except for RVR800 - the examiner can declare you've inadvertently entered cloud at any time on the route, if they happen to do so right in the locality of that damn mast I want to be a 100% sure of what I should do.....and not just for test purposes.

[scroggs]

HWD thanks for the correction - it's a while since I was tooling around in the weedisphere, looking at cows from below and all that malarky!

Scroggs

[Dick Whittingham]

Many, many years ago a student pilot with a Prentice was found on the Chivenor RLG (Winkliegh?). He had come from Feltwell, in Norfolk.

Just post solo, he had entered cloud on a SW heading, and could do no more than hold s&l on instruments. After some time he worked out that he might run out of land, and tried to do a 180. He lost control and spun out of cloud, where he recovered from the spin and landed at the first airfield he saw.

New batch of pilots - same old problems!

Dick W

[carbheaton]

Guys,
I picked up on bugginout's post by accident and really cant believe some of the replys - infact, without any disrespect to buggingout, I cant believe the question.

There is no, and I mean no, none, nine, nict circumstances under which a VFR rated pilot should ever find themselves in IMC conditions so the question shouldnt even arise. And please dont give me any rubbish about "well it happens so how do I deal with it". It should never never ever happen. If you are not rated for IFR then there are no conditions, failing stupidity, under which it could happen. If it does happen then you have made a big mistake in your pre fight planning. The average life span for a VFR pilot in IMC conditions is seconds - it may be a large number of seconds but it is still seconds, like somewhere between 40 and 100.

Firstly, there is no such thing as MSA in VFR. MSA is an IFR term which has a specific definition. Under VFR rules, ther is a safety altitude which is loosley 1000 ft above the highest obstacle within 5 NM eitherside of track including the start and end point which is often forgotten. It means simply that you draw a 5 nm race track around your intended track and add 1000 ft to your flight planned altitude. This however is a minimum recommendation and flight schools can insist on a 10 or even 15 nm track if the wish.

Secondly, to be non rated in IMC conditions and contemplating a get out strategy once in IMC is unbelivelably reckless. For a start, if you are unfortunate enough (and i'd prefer to say stupid but,,,) to enter IMC from VFR and are not rated, the last thing you should do is to try and perform a 180 degree U turn as your chances of survival are much less. You have no idea.... read "The Killing Zone" if you dont believe me.

The only solution is not to enter IFR without being IFR rated. If the examiner tries to push you into a decision, he is mearly testing your level of stupidity. Will this guy/gal try and press on through adverse wx or will he/she do the sensible thing and turn back or better still not even leave the ground in the first place.

PS
I know this is going to draw a reaction and I assure you all that it is not meant to but....

I personally think, and I use the posts on this topic as justification for my opinion (and it is just my opinion), that the CAA IMC rating encourages pilots to think that they can get through wx that they really should have run a mile from five minutes agao. My aviation authority, like many others in europe dont recoginise the IMC rating and as a result, not as many non CAA license holders get into the difficulties that this poster has asked advice on. I go back to when spin training was taught on the PPL. There were many fatal accidents and as a result the authorities in their wisdom removed it from the syallabus. Fatalaties as a result dropped sharply. Why, well I'd like to think that we were taught that the spin envelope was somewhere to be avoided so we didnt go there. The analagy is similar but opposite. By teaching a 'taster' for IFR which the IMC programme does, it gives a false sence of security and leaves pilots with an IMC thinking that they can cope with what is the most demanding of all flying skills - IFR. Please STOP the IMC qualification I say, but then again, who am I!!

Thanks n safe flying to all

[BEagle]

1. MEF figures already allow for the 'unknown object' if there isn't a more significant one (such as a tall TV mast) already in the block.

2. If there is a known tall obstacle, the MEF is still correct as it is assumed that the 'unknown object' won't be placed on top of it!

Climbing to Safety Altitude is strictly only relevant in IMC. This was a VFR flight; the mast should be considered as a 'structure' - hence observe Rule 5 separation. I doubt whether Winter Hill is in a 'congested area', so the 500 ft rule applies if it's in an isolated location.

If you think you might enter cloud, 180 deg level turn and RTB.

[High Wing Drifter]

carbheaton,
The question is valid as the JAA CPL specifically includes this in the skills test.

Also, it is my opinion that considering the possibility reduces the risk of it ever occuring for obvious reasons.

[carbheaton]

HWD

The question is valid as the JAA CPL specifically includes this in the skills test.

The poster, Buggingout dosent mention which Skills Test he is preparing for so I assumed PPL.


Also, it is my opinion that considering the possibility reduces the risk of it ever occuring for obvious reasons.


and in my opinion, preparing for the possibility ensures that it will happen.

[fullrich]

It appeaars obvious to me that there is a difference in thinking here between PPLs and CPL's. As a ppl student I never quite understood the MSA/MEF thing and I was given 5 hours Intrument instruction on how to do a 180 if I entered cloud. AT CPL level Instrument flying becomes more of a factor and part of the test criteria includes a simulated cloud entry(screens up) and the first thing you do is CLIMB TO MSA.You then must find a fix using what ever instruments are available to you and get out. You do not need a IR to hold a CPL and hense its not true to say any VFR pilot should never enter cloud and leave it like that. The facts are they do and how to get out of it is very important.
MEF= Highest known obstacle+ 300ft rounded up to nearest 100(used for VFR)
MSA=Highest terrain +1000ft within 5nm( used as safe altiude for IFR or if you enter cloud) this becomes +2000ft in mountains.

[High Wing Drifter]

carbheaton,
and in my opinion, preparing for the possibility ensures that it will happen.
I suspect that largely mis-adventure befalls the ignorant. If I believe it is easy to miss assumptions, make a bad decision and end up in IMC as one of the possible outcomes, then surely I am more likely to look for reasons why it might happen and better prepared to plan to avoid.

However, one of the sensible thoughts I would have is, what should I do if I enter IMC. Here is an example where the weather forecast was for VFR, but it wasn't to be so, and there was no way out for the helpless pilot: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/4906670.stm

[carbheaton]

Fullrich and HWD

I couldnt agree more with both of you. If you are trained to deal with IFR conditions, even to a very basic degree, then by all means use that training and execute a 180 and get of of there.

However, the original post by buggingout states that the pilot has no IR or IMC and as a result I think that there are no circumstances under which IMC conditions should be entered. Without training, the odds of survival are massively stacked against you.

There dosent have to be bad wx to produce the accident the link above refers to. Last summer, two experiences pilots left EIWT for home in Wales and never made it. It was a beautiful summers day and it is suspected that they entered a fog bank near the Welsh coast and didnt survive. Pilot flying had an IMC rating.

[homeguard]

Beagle says all there is to say. VFR and Rule 5 and thats it.

As for carbheaton's analogy of the IMC rating. WRONG on all counts! The IMC rating has proved so successful that the CAA back it completely and fought for its retention and now campaign for its recognition by JAA/EASA. Weather related accidents rarely involve current IMC rated pilots.

Being someone who flys a fair bit on the continent in light aircraft i can vouch for the many incidents of mainland Europe VFR only PPLs becoming lost in poor viz and they do so on a very regular basis.

[IO540]

I personally think, and I use the posts on this topic as justification for my opinion (and it is just my opinion), that the CAA IMC rating encourages pilots to think that they can get through wx that they really should have run a mile from five minutes agao. My aviation authority, like many others in europe dont recoginise the IMC rating and as a result, not as many non CAA license holders get into the difficulties that this poster has asked advice on. ........[snip]..... By teaching a 'taster' for IFR which the IMC programme does, it gives a false sence of security and leaves pilots with an IMC thinking that they can cope with what is the most demanding of all flying skills - IFR. Please STOP the IMC qualification I say, but then again, who am I!!

Sorry to be forthright but the above is complete bolloc*s.

The IMC Rating is a superb privilege. It has enabled many many pilots to get utility out of their aircraft, and to fly safely in what is typical UK weather. Many are aircraft owners who fly 100-200 hours/year and are much more current than somebody who did an IR and is now hanging around waiting for an airline job.

In any instrument flight scenario, you are as good as your currency on the type. Plus a lot of IMC Rated pilots find it hard to get into an airplane that's good enough for real IFR, but that's the UK flight training business for you! Should something be banned because some holders will not keep up their currency?

There is no data supporting the assertion that the IMC Rating reduces safety; in fact the very opposite.

Finally, other countries have no option on its lack of recognition, because its IFR privileges are specifically limited to UK only in the ANO.

[homeguard]

The claim that the CPL skills test conduct prescribes deviating from track is utter rubbish.
Of course the candidate should demonstrate their ability to carry out the flight at minimum expense and time to the customer but NOT at the the cost of safety. Always - it will be legitimate to divert around weather when VMC is required to be maintained. The Minimum Altitude will be in accordance with the school SOP or Pilots Order Book. Should the SOP or POB require 1,000ft clearance above an obstruction then that must be achieved. If not, Rule 5 becomes the minima. The school approval will however require that a minima is clearly stated. Should minima not be achievable by diverting reasonably from track then the test should be terminated by the candidate. Should forcasts not have predicted the weather encounted it is not the fault of the candidate.

[funfly]

Be practical.
Of course you should always avoid cloud but it so happens that there are occasions where you do hit it and it all happens very very quickly.
Full power climb combined with a 180 turn for a PPL without IMC is a recipe for disaster, you loose all sense of balance with the power and 'you are seconds from disaster'. In my early days I was very lucky and many others will admit to the same experience.
Turn by all means and use your compas as a reference not your judgement. Dont alter power settings if you are a basic PPL.
The answer is to fly with a good appreciation of what is around you - even if you don't see the cloud you should be aware from the chart that
you are flying towards a hazard and you should give it a wide berth. You shouldn't have plogged near it in the first place!

[BEagle]

I endorse pretty well everything IO540 says here; the IMC Rating is an excellent tool if used properly.

It is hugely more affordable than the current JAA IR/SPA and the only real differences are that it cannot be used for IFR in Class A airspace - so that's no airways and SVFR only in Class A CTRs.

It is widely anticipated that the IMC Rating will be allowable as the first part of the draft JAA IR/SPA revision. It will also be the objective of a UK aviation group with an international representation to demonstrate the considerable merits of the IMC Rating to the wider world of EASAland; furthermore, should the UK NPPL become the future model for the EASA RPPL, it may well be possible to propose conditions (mainly medical, experience, training and testing) under which an IMC Rating and a night qualification could perhaps be added to the RPPL in the not-so-distant future.......