Flying IFR in IMC with a Single Engine Piston
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 1
From: In the boot of my car!
I flew the Citation to Jersey yesterday. Starting the descent Jersey were giving broken at 100 feet 1200 m vis.
Guernsey was giving 400 feet but that quickly changed to 700 M RVR and 100 feet.
I got the lights at minima and landed. The return flight to my home airfield was also down to minima.
Regards to Mad Jock as missed you again.
Would I like to have been in a piston single NO way
I think it is a good idea to only fly a piston single IMC if there is enough clear air under the clouds to comfortably manouvre for a forced landing incase the donkey stops and do watch icing.
A few weeks back again in the Citation I was picking up an inch every 6 minutes at one point decending into the IOM.
BTW the Americans have better lungs than us as they are good to 12500 feet continuous and 14000 feet for 30 minutes. You dont have to put the poor old PAX on oxygen till 15000 feet
What Next you were lucky as I had three break off (shafts) In a 100 hr old Seneca at 200 feet in the climb.
The Aircraft was at grosse and I kept the unit going one hand poised on the prop lever as it was still producing some power which got me to 800 feet before I levelled at shut it down.
Continental replaced the whole unit without fuss the reason incorrect torque at manufacture. : Would not like to experience that again
Pace
Guernsey was giving 400 feet but that quickly changed to 700 M RVR and 100 feet.
I got the lights at minima and landed. The return flight to my home airfield was also down to minima.
Regards to Mad Jock as missed you again.
Would I like to have been in a piston single NO way
I think it is a good idea to only fly a piston single IMC if there is enough clear air under the clouds to comfortably manouvre for a forced landing incase the donkey stops and do watch icing.
A few weeks back again in the Citation I was picking up an inch every 6 minutes at one point decending into the IOM.
BTW the Americans have better lungs than us as they are good to 12500 feet continuous and 14000 feet for 30 minutes. You dont have to put the poor old PAX on oxygen till 15000 feet
2nd: A valve rocker arm broke in a Seneca during climb above level 100 leaving the inlet valve stuck open. The engine continued to run on five cylinders, but the turbochrger output escaped through the open valve. Impossible to maintain altitude, managed to hold 6000ft on 1 1/2 engines on the way back
The Aircraft was at grosse and I kept the unit going one hand poised on the prop lever as it was still producing some power which got me to 800 feet before I levelled at shut it down.
Continental replaced the whole unit without fuss the reason incorrect torque at manufacture. : Would not like to experience that again
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 25th January 2012 at 20:23.
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
From: UK,Twighlight Zone
You still did not answer my question Peter, how often have you flown IFR, minima to minima for an entire flight?
You are quick to turn to personal insult and bul!!!!e when asked an awkward question.
By your own admission you only ever fly when you can get VFR on top and not having an autopilot is an emergency......
So regal us with the stories of how often you fly minia to minima?
You are quick to turn to personal insult and bul!!!!e when asked an awkward question.
By your own admission you only ever fly when you can get VFR on top and not having an autopilot is an emergency......
So regal us with the stories of how often you fly minia to minima?
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,460
Likes: 0
Starting the descent Jersey were giving broken at 100 feet 1200 m vis.
Guernsey was giving 400 feet but that quickly changed to 700 M RVR and 100 feet.
I got the lights at minima and landed. The return flight to my home airfield was also down to minima.
Guernsey was giving 400 feet but that quickly changed to 700 M RVR and 100 feet.
I got the lights at minima and landed. The return flight to my home airfield was also down to minima.
I would not have done the flight in the first place, SE or ME.
You dont have to put the poor old PAX on oxygen till 15000 feet
how often have you flown IFR, minima to minima for an entire flight?
It is doable in UK Class G type IFR but on a Eurocontrol IFR flight this by implication exposes you to structural icing conditions during the whole enroute section, which is not smart unless you have appropriate hardware, which I don't.
not having an autopilot is an emergency
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
From: UK,Twighlight Zone
So in fact we agree. You just felt the urge to get into a childish fight. I thought the binning of the IO540 persona was an attempt to distance yourself from that behaviour.
Back to my original point, the average GA IFR pilot never flies in minima. Even commercially we rarely or even never see it as there are other factors such as icing level and aircraft capability that come into play.
Back to my original point, the average GA IFR pilot never flies in minima. Even commercially we rarely or even never see it as there are other factors such as icing level and aircraft capability that come into play.
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,320
Likes: 102
From: IRS NAV ONLY
Originally Posted by 172_driver
The G1000 AHRS is not immune to failure either, have had it happen. That was because of poor installation. But if one maintenance shop can get it wrong, I am sure others can too.
I've flown SE IFR to IR minima, night routes over quite high terrain and it's not something I'd like to do every day, but sometimes all the other choices are much worse, for example: fly at night (VMC) or wait until morning and when the front reaches your intended route? As it's been said - SE IFR isn't for the faint-hearted ones, there are many risks involved - engine, instrument failure, ICING - but all those risks can be reduced as much as they can possibly be by proper preflight planning and inflight monitoring.
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,460
Likes: 0
On the other hand, if you have KI-256 attitude indicator and it packs up, the autopilot is more or less useless
Joined: Jan 2006
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 1,410
Likes: 46
From: Between a rock and a hard place
The G1000 is usually much more reliable than "steam" gauges, especially with "old" and non-integrated KAP140, which doesn't require AHRS. If the AHRS quits, you just engage autopilot in roll-hold mode (since it uses separate hidden turn-coordinator), and if the ADC is alive, it will even hold altitude.
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,320
Likes: 102
From: IRS NAV ONLY
Originally Posted by 172_driver
On the other hand, I am not the one that would trust my life to the KAP-140, it has played tricks on me before.
Or making a sudden 15° heading change at 300ft AGL in approach mode, which was obviously not required Autopilots - they really reduce the workload...
Joined: Jan 2006
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 1,410
Likes: 46
From: Between a rock and a hard place
Oh, you mean like localizer capture when you're at 30° angle to the airfield with full CDI deflection? Or making a sudden 15° heading change at 300ft AGL in approach mode, which was obviously not required
Or making a sudden 15° heading change at 300ft AGL in approach mode, which was obviously not required
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,460
Likes: 0
An autopilot is a brilliant thing to have in a plane. It reduces pilot workload by a good 10x.
The problem in GA is that most people run their planes into the ground to save money, which means there are very few autopilot specialists here in Europe. A lot of shops will tinker with them but without any understanding of what they are doing, and also the shops will not spend money on the test fixtures. It is much better in the USA, where there are several really good autopilot repair shops.
The old autopilots were also designed by chimps who used components which are known to be long term unreliable, like electrolytic capacitors used for the control loop time constants. There is very little design expertise in the avionics manufacturing business anyway... it seems that after Apollo finished in 1972 the really good engineers at say King left for new pastures
The modern autopilots are digital and are much better. They sometimes have issues in other departments (like the infamous KFC225 and its smoking servos) but having one there 99.9% of the time is well worth having.
The problem in GA is that most people run their planes into the ground to save money, which means there are very few autopilot specialists here in Europe. A lot of shops will tinker with them but without any understanding of what they are doing, and also the shops will not spend money on the test fixtures. It is much better in the USA, where there are several really good autopilot repair shops.
The old autopilots were also designed by chimps who used components which are known to be long term unreliable, like electrolytic capacitors used for the control loop time constants. There is very little design expertise in the avionics manufacturing business anyway... it seems that after Apollo finished in 1972 the really good engineers at say King left for new pastures
The modern autopilots are digital and are much better. They sometimes have issues in other departments (like the infamous KFC225 and its smoking servos) but having one there 99.9% of the time is well worth having.
Last edited by peterh337; 26th January 2012 at 09:43.
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 1
From: In the boot of my car!
You got lucky
I would not have done the flight in the first place, SE or ME.
I would not have done the flight in the first place, SE or ME.
There is nothing wrong with going to an airport giving broken 100 vis 1200 metres.
Obviously if the weather is suspect carry plenty of reserves for a possible diversion and make sure the diversions are not borderline too.
On the TAFS the weather we had was a prob 30 and the actual OK and above minima when we left.
You can usually tell on frequency listening to other approaches as to whether they are getting in, stuck in the hold, or diverting.
I dont like holding waiting for better things as to me that is using fuel to go no where
The motto " have fuel can travel " !We have one quite nervous Pax on this ship and when she is onboard I am more aware of turbulence, extending airbrakes or go arounds in cloud although thankfully they dont happen often.
Pace
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,460
Likes: 0
Sure; I know that cloudbase (or ceiling ) are not a ban on "going down and having a look" and that the RVR/vis approach ban applies only if it is operative at 1000ft, but for me much would depend on whether I actually wanted to be at the destination versus wanting to be at any of the alternates.
I find that in most cases the alternates are highly inconvenient dumps, so if the wx was marginal I would stay at home. The only exception which immediately comes to mind would be a holiday in Croatia where you have a pick of several nice destinations down the Adriatic, each with an airport with customs and avgas etc. In N Europe the alternates are rarely desirable. OTOH if I was being paid for the flying, by the hour or whatever, I would "have a go" because there is always a chance of getting in, and I would still be getting paid (and put up in a hotel etc) if I diverted.
If one flies for business, the decision is not that different to private flying because in most cases anything but the destination is a total waste of time - because a weather alternate is not likely to be too near.
It's not that one could not fly to minima every time. Going down the ILS on the autopilot and going around is a piece of cake. But if you are non-deiced then a cloudbase of say 300ft probably means heavy warm front wx with fine icing conditions high up, so the cancellation is not done on the basis of surface wx but is done on the basis of high altitude wx.
) are not a ban on "going down and having a look" and that the RVR/vis approach ban applies only if it is operative at 1000ft, but for me much would depend on whether I actually wanted to be at the destination versus wanting to be at any of the alternates.I find that in most cases the alternates are highly inconvenient dumps, so if the wx was marginal I would stay at home. The only exception which immediately comes to mind would be a holiday in Croatia where you have a pick of several nice destinations down the Adriatic, each with an airport with customs and avgas etc. In N Europe the alternates are rarely desirable. OTOH if I was being paid for the flying, by the hour or whatever, I would "have a go" because there is always a chance of getting in, and I would still be getting paid (and put up in a hotel etc) if I diverted.
If one flies for business, the decision is not that different to private flying because in most cases anything but the destination is a total waste of time - because a weather alternate is not likely to be too near.
It's not that one could not fly to minima every time. Going down the ILS on the autopilot and going around is a piece of cake. But if you are non-deiced then a cloudbase of say 300ft probably means heavy warm front wx with fine icing conditions high up, so the cancellation is not done on the basis of surface wx but is done on the basis of high altitude wx.
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
From: Sydney
My personal experience - last year I flew for fun a 2008 Cessna 172 from California to Sydney, Australia. The flight took 75 hours in 5 legs between 5-25 hours; of this 30hours were night flying. Approx 19hours were in IMC - cloud and rain (no icing conditions); some landings and take offs were in IMC or at night. Almost a third of the IMC hours were at night.
I also flew the same plane before leaving for Australia from Grand Rapids to California with many flights in IMC. The most solid IMC weather was between Santa Barbara to Long Beach via Catalina Island; I landed on the ILS with cloud at minima, heavy rain and crosswind.
The plane performed very well. That doesn't mean that there is no risk and I had my hairy moments on the shortest 5 hour leg. It all depends how comfortable you feel to do this.
I also flew the same plane before leaving for Australia from Grand Rapids to California with many flights in IMC. The most solid IMC weather was between Santa Barbara to Long Beach via Catalina Island; I landed on the ILS with cloud at minima, heavy rain and crosswind.
The plane performed very well. That doesn't mean that there is no risk and I had my hairy moments on the shortest 5 hour leg. It all depends how comfortable you feel to do this.
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
From: dk
I fly with the KAP140. I have understood this is rate based and rely soly on information from the turn coordinator.
Without vaccum the AI will loose track but nothing will happen to the eletric turn coordinator and thus to the KAP140.
On the other hand a KFC225 is attitude based and will be affected at a vaccum failure.
Even though the KAP140 is not so advanced I think it is quite stable and I plan to use this to help me decent in a vacuum failure situation.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Without vaccum the AI will loose track but nothing will happen to the eletric turn coordinator and thus to the KAP140.
On the other hand a KFC225 is attitude based and will be affected at a vaccum failure.
Even though the KAP140 is not so advanced I think it is quite stable and I plan to use this to help me decent in a vacuum failure situation.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,460
Likes: 0
That's about correct.
The KFC225 does deliver superb accuracy and can cope with a lot of turbulence, and it can fly the various VNAV modes like constant VS, and track an ILS all the way down, but the KI256 is one weak link and the vac pump driving the KI256 is another weak link.
One can back up the vac pump with an electric vac pump but one can't back up the KI256 itself, which is a pretty unreliable instrument. On the plus side, it is very rare for a KI256 to pack up during flight.
There is an instrument which is an exact replica of the KI256 but has an electric gyro, and is actually made by the same company (Castleberry) which at one time used to make the KI256 for Honeywell, but the paperwork to do a switchover arrangement would be pretty substantial under FAA, and quite possibly impossible under EASA. And you cannot use it alone because (to cut a long story short, like a 2nd alternator just for an electric AI) an aircraft with a single electrical supply must have a vac driven AI to be certifiable. I have some notes on this here (sorry for the long article; search for KI256 or KI-256 ).
The KFC225 does deliver superb accuracy and can cope with a lot of turbulence, and it can fly the various VNAV modes like constant VS, and track an ILS all the way down, but the KI256 is one weak link and the vac pump driving the KI256 is another weak link.
One can back up the vac pump with an electric vac pump but one can't back up the KI256 itself, which is a pretty unreliable instrument. On the plus side, it is very rare for a KI256 to pack up during flight.
There is an instrument which is an exact replica of the KI256 but has an electric gyro, and is actually made by the same company (Castleberry) which at one time used to make the KI256 for Honeywell, but the paperwork to do a switchover arrangement would be pretty substantial under FAA, and quite possibly impossible under EASA. And you cannot use it alone because (to cut a long story short, like a 2nd alternator just for an electric AI) an aircraft with a single electrical supply must have a vac driven AI to be certifiable. I have some notes on this here (sorry for the long article; search for KI256 or KI-256
).
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
From: Rennes
Australian flight
Oflorica -- I hope you write up that flight some time. A lot of people, myself included, would be interested in reading it.
I too took a C172 from the east coast of the U.S. to California and back again -- a lot of it at night over very rugged terrain (you wouldn't believe just how far away most of New Mexico and Nevada are from anything human) -- without thinking very much about it. Then some years later I had a total engine failure in the cruise in a C152, fortunately in day VMC. I haven't given up night single-engine flying entirely, but nowadays it's basically in CAVU conditions, as high as I can reasonably go and with a lighted field always within reach. The illusion of invulnerability no longer applies.
I too took a C172 from the east coast of the U.S. to California and back again -- a lot of it at night over very rugged terrain (you wouldn't believe just how far away most of New Mexico and Nevada are from anything human) -- without thinking very much about it. Then some years later I had a total engine failure in the cruise in a C152, fortunately in day VMC. I haven't given up night single-engine flying entirely, but nowadays it's basically in CAVU conditions, as high as I can reasonably go and with a lighted field always within reach. The illusion of invulnerability no longer applies.
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 1
From: In the boot of my car!
Blind Squirell
I was always taught to never do anything in aviation where you dont have an out!!!! If you do your playing Russian Roulette.
Thinking back I did many flights many moons ago in singles which were not up to the job and in attrocious weather and got away with it. Getting away with it then becomes experience.
Some dont get away with it !!!
Fly within your own and the aircrafts limits! The problem is knowing what your and the aircrafts limits are! In the wrong conditions is not the place to find out.
Being lucky enough to fly high performance aircraft makes a pilot realise how ill equipt some piston singles and even some "twins" are.
As I said in an earlier post in this thread a few weeks ago flying a Citation Jet into the IOM at night I descended into icing where I had an inch buildup every six minutes. The Citation dealt with it well a PA28 would not.
Pace
I was always taught to never do anything in aviation where you dont have an out!!!! If you do your playing Russian Roulette.
Thinking back I did many flights many moons ago in singles which were not up to the job and in attrocious weather and got away with it. Getting away with it then becomes experience.
Some dont get away with it !!!
Fly within your own and the aircrafts limits! The problem is knowing what your and the aircrafts limits are! In the wrong conditions is not the place to find out.
Being lucky enough to fly high performance aircraft makes a pilot realise how ill equipt some piston singles and even some "twins" are.
As I said in an earlier post in this thread a few weeks ago flying a Citation Jet into the IOM at night I descended into icing where I had an inch buildup every six minutes. The Citation dealt with it well a PA28 would not.
Pace
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,460
Likes: 0
With a bit of luck the PA28 pilot would have got the wx and not done the flight.
Or at least that is the more intelligent way to go about it
Can you post (or email) the date/time so I can look up the available wx data, and have a stab at whether the severe icing conditions might have been expected?
Or at least that is the more intelligent way to go about it
Can you post (or email) the date/time so I can look up the available wx data, and have a stab at whether the severe icing conditions might have been expected?
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 6,209
Likes: 2
From: north of barlu
What next
An interesting string of failures by coincidence I know of another Continental TSIO-360 that had a rocker failure, unfortunately it was attached to the front of a PA28 and the outcome was not good.
The C421 exhaust sytstem is the subject of much AD action and your failure has the smell of poor maintenance.
Your Mag failure is of more interest to me, you do not state if you tried to turn off the mags one at a time to isolate the faulty mag or if this was a failure of the drive system to both mags ?
The C421 exhaust sytstem is the subject of much AD action and your failure has the smell of poor maintenance.
Your Mag failure is of more interest to me, you do not state if you tried to turn off the mags one at a time to isolate the faulty mag or if this was a failure of the drive system to both mags ?
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 1
From: In the boot of my car!
Peter
That flight was on Dec 5 out of London at about 1830. Climbed to around FL260, beautiful clear night over London. Frontal weather met south of Manchester, tops around 20K. Front weather West to East and picked up the ice in the descent.
But thats not my point Ok on that night it may have been possible in a light single if you fancy flying at night over water to have stayed down at 3000 feet below the freezing level but do you want to be so low at night over water in a single???
The Question of not doing anything in Aviation without an out!
Knowing your own and the aircraft limitations would mean that a sensible person would not undertake the flight but.........................SOME DO!!!
Pace
That flight was on Dec 5 out of London at about 1830. Climbed to around FL260, beautiful clear night over London. Frontal weather met south of Manchester, tops around 20K. Front weather West to East and picked up the ice in the descent.
But thats not my point
Ok on that night it may have been possible in a light single if you fancy flying at night over water to have stayed down at 3000 feet below the freezing level but do you want to be so low at night over water in a single???The Question of not doing anything in Aviation without an out!
Knowing your own and the aircraft limitations would mean that a sensible person would not undertake the flight but.........................SOME DO!!!
Pace