GA Pilot Behaviours in the face of adverse wx

[giveitsome]

Below is the link for a study on the above topic and while the data relates to plankies the theme and the concepts are equally as important to RW aviation. This is particularly topical when considering EMS and NVFR.

Have a look. User friendly and easy to read.

GIS.



www.atsb.gov.au/aviation/research/adverse_weather.pdf

[moosp]

Many thanks for the link, this is just the sort of thing we need. Trying to prepare safety lectures and good source documents are always useful.

I'm not one, but I'll blow the trumpet for the Ozzies who so often prepare excellent safety training reports. Good on ya.

[Simon853]

I just read "The Killing Zone - How and Why Pilots Die" by Paul A. Craig. (ISBN 0-07-136269-X), and there's a large section in it about IMC. A sobering read, for sure.

Si

[giveitsome]

Well done guys. You are the only dudes that have replied to the post. Either all the other viewers have followed the link read the article and left it at that OR saw that the post meant clicking on a link and then reading a report which was too hard and not as juicy as BLOGGS vs BLOGGS in some cyber bif.

The report talks in depth about VFR or limited VMC into IMC conditions while initially not operating IFR. A topic that RW pilots operating VFR and getting caught out ( consider EMS and NVFR) should potentially be interested in. This event has claimed many good aviators GA and Milso it is a topic that I follow closely.

Food for thought.

GIS.

[Whirlygig]

OK giveitsome; I'll reply!

Thank you very much for the link. Yes, I read it. I'm sure a lot of people will read it but there isn't much to post. I don't have anything to add.

Cheers

Whirls

[6Z3]

I may have missed a point in this paper, but it seems to me that a very significant influencing factor in the outcome of an adverse weather encounter must be the pilot's experience in flying IFR on instruments. I can't see where the study has restricted itself to sampling only those people who can't fly on instruments under IFR.

In encountering unexpected deteriorating weather a pilot with suitable instrument skills, training and qualifications may well decide (having planned and briefed himself beforehand) that it is safe(r) to go ugly early and get on instruments, climb to above safety altitude, calling ATC, pick an appropriate level and either continue the planned flight under IFR, divert to an alternate airfield or seek ATC assistance in some other way to gain VMC.

Forgive my rambling if there is reference to the study only looking at weather encounters by pilots with no instrument skills at all. Even very basic instrument flying training would favourably influence both the decision-making process and the eventual outcome of a VFR into IMC. Varying levels of Instrument training experience may influence (skew) the results quite significantly.

[giveitsome]

6Z3


Totally Agreeeeeeeeee.....with your comments. In fact go ugly early is another option(works in the pub too) along with turn back, pre-cautionary LDG etc. Point is a descision has been made at this point to combat the deterioation in weather and mitigate the risk. Pressing on as per the study (trying to stay VFR in limited VMC/IMC) resulted 80% of the time in a fatality.

Again post was made for background in Pilot Descision making, and NO I don't work for BASI or DFS or some Uni selling a flying degree.

IMHO

GIS.

[moosp]

There is another angle to the IMC experience of the pilot who is flying in VMC. If you have a fixed wing IR, you are not phased by cloud, so you press on regardless, albeit illegally.

Robinson has a string of accident reports, mostly R44, on the same lines. IR rated plank drivers getting out of control in IMC or night.

So no knowlege, a little knowledge and lots of knowledge can all kill you - if it does not apply to your particular machine.