Poor weather options
There is a 500' rule isn't there? ok if you're miles from anyone/thing, but to be flying around with a 200' cloudbase in degraded viz in a single/piston etc = recipe for disaster. 
Ask any offshore pilot how he likes flying around offshore, down to minima, (200') with poor viz/fog/mist, and I bet they'll all say they'd rather be anywhere else. If not then I suggest they get counselling!
Ask any offshore pilot how he likes flying around offshore, down to minima, (200') with poor viz/fog/mist, and I bet they'll all say they'd rather be anywhere else. If not then I suggest they get counselling!
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
chopjock,
I'll give you 48 seconds @60kts to allow you to consider your limitations!
The problem is, the 1500m is THE limit. A lot of people think that because it is in print, it is safe. Many of us can tell you that it isn't!
You are clearly someone who has never experienced 1500m/300ft or been asked to fly, when it is.
Quote as many rules as you like, but it's not who is right, but who is left.
SS
I'll give you 48 seconds @60kts to allow you to consider your limitations!
The problem is, the 1500m is THE limit. A lot of people think that because it is in print, it is safe. Many of us can tell you that it isn't!
You are clearly someone who has never experienced 1500m/300ft or been asked to fly, when it is.
Quote as many rules as you like, but it's not who is right, but who is left.
SS
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 425 Likes
on
224 Posts
Hmmm...isn't there something that says, thou shall not descend below 1000' on an approach if the airfield is below your minimums?
But only if the RVR is below the minima specified for the approach.
There is no prohibition on making a descent / approach if the cloudbase is below the published minima, only a prohibition on continuing below descent minima unless the prescribed visual references are obtained.
Note that this is/was specified for Public Transport aircraft; as far I recall these rules have never applied for private flights.
This is why I questioned Crab's assertion that the pilot of the second helicopter was doing something illegal. He probably wasn't.
The approach ban (2.6.3.2) is with reference to the RVR (or converted visibility) but there are numerous ICAO Standards which address weather below limits (from ICAO Annex 6, Part III, Section III - GA):
As these limits are contained in all Annexes 6, expect to see them in EASA OPS.
Jim
2.6.1 Flight in accordance with VFR
A flight, except one of purely local character in visual meteorological conditions, to be conducted in accordance with VFR shall not be commenced unless available current meteorological reports, or a combination of current reports and forecasts, indicate that the meteorological conditions along the route, or that part of the route to be flown under VFR, will, at the appropriate time, be such as to render compliance with these rules possible.
2.6.2 Flight in accordance IFR
2.6.2.1 When an alternate is required. A flight to be conducted in accordance with IFR shall not be commenced unless the available information indicates that conditions, at the heliport of intended landing and at least one alternate heliport will, at the estimated time of arrival, be at or above the heliport operating minima.
2.6.3 Heliport operating minima
2.6.3.1 A flight shall not be continued towards the heliport of intended landing unless the latest available meteorological information indicates that conditions at that heliport, or at least one alternate heliport, will, at the estimated time of arrival, be at or above the specified heliport operating minima.
2.6.3.2 An instrument approach shall not be continued beyond the outer marker fix in case of precision approach, or below 300 m (1 000 ft) above the heliport in case of non-precision approach, unless the reported visibility or controlling RVR is above the specified minimum.
2.6.3.3 If, after passing the outer marker fix in case of precision approach, or after descending below 300 m (1 000 ft) above the heliport in case of non-precision approach, the reported visibility or controlling RVR falls below the specified minimum, the approach may be continued to DA/H or MDA/H. In any case, a helicopter shall not continue its approach to land beyond a point at which the limits of the heliport operating minima would be infringed.
A flight, except one of purely local character in visual meteorological conditions, to be conducted in accordance with VFR shall not be commenced unless available current meteorological reports, or a combination of current reports and forecasts, indicate that the meteorological conditions along the route, or that part of the route to be flown under VFR, will, at the appropriate time, be such as to render compliance with these rules possible.
2.6.2 Flight in accordance IFR
2.6.2.1 When an alternate is required. A flight to be conducted in accordance with IFR shall not be commenced unless the available information indicates that conditions, at the heliport of intended landing and at least one alternate heliport will, at the estimated time of arrival, be at or above the heliport operating minima.
2.6.3 Heliport operating minima
2.6.3.1 A flight shall not be continued towards the heliport of intended landing unless the latest available meteorological information indicates that conditions at that heliport, or at least one alternate heliport, will, at the estimated time of arrival, be at or above the specified heliport operating minima.
2.6.3.2 An instrument approach shall not be continued beyond the outer marker fix in case of precision approach, or below 300 m (1 000 ft) above the heliport in case of non-precision approach, unless the reported visibility or controlling RVR is above the specified minimum.
2.6.3.3 If, after passing the outer marker fix in case of precision approach, or after descending below 300 m (1 000 ft) above the heliport in case of non-precision approach, the reported visibility or controlling RVR falls below the specified minimum, the approach may be continued to DA/H or MDA/H. In any case, a helicopter shall not continue its approach to land beyond a point at which the limits of the heliport operating minima would be infringed.
Jim
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Age: 66
Posts: 919
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MightyGem
Come now, when I look at my instruments, even for a second, I do not pull back on the stick! Does any one here do that?
SilsoSid
How would you know? I've been there, done that many a time. The legal minima for VFR helicopters is I believe to remain clear of cloud and in sight of the surface.
True, but at 1500m/200ft in mist, you've only got to glance at the ASI/altimeter/whatever for a second and you're in it, and in unexpected IMC in those conditions, you're as good as dead.
SilsoSid
You are clearly someone who has never experienced 1500m/300ft or been asked to fly, when it is.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 72
Posts: 4,156
Likes: 0
Received 29 Likes
on
14 Posts
" in sight of the surface"
A general point - I believe this has been changed to "surface in sight", mainly to preclude people VMC on top saying they can see something like Mt Snowdon miles away and still being within the definition. Quite how it makes a difference I don't know but maybe someone can clarify it?
phil
A general point - I believe this has been changed to "surface in sight", mainly to preclude people VMC on top saying they can see something like Mt Snowdon miles away and still being within the definition. Quite how it makes a difference I don't know but maybe someone can clarify it?
phil
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Norway
Age: 44
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The legal minima for VFR helicopters is I believe to remain clear of cloud and in sight of the surface. 
VFR minimas in Norway is 500', 1500m vis, but for helicopters you are allowed to fly with 800m vis if you reduce speed and can maintain separation.
Over populated areas it is 1000' within a radius of 600m over the tallest building, and you need to be able to make a safe autorotation.
I believe "clear of clouds and in sight of the surface" applies for class G-airspace, but the rules above are on top of that.
Different rules apply if you are performing "aerial work", but then you're operating locally, and without any passengers. E.g long-line operations.
And what's the point of pushing beyond the rules anyway? It only takes a lot of time to get from A to B, and is the weather good enough to get any work done if you finally get there?
I think many pilots get pushed from employers or customers, but remember that if the **** hits the fan, only the PIC gets the blame. And if you push it and get the job done, the customer doesn't give you a medal eighter. And you make it difficult for the next pilot when the weather is bad, and the customer/employer tells him "the other pilot always fly in this weather".
It's about being loyal to your colleagues also...
Thread Starter
Chopjock - flying in ovc @ 200' with 1500m isn't technically illegal but very foolhardy in a non-stabilised, non-IFR capable helicopter - and one without floats as you have to be over the water to follow the cliffs.
The cloudbase in these sort of conditions varies up and, more importantly, down along with the visibility and inadvertant IMC is a real and ever-present danger. Where are your options? Revert to IFR - no kit, no IR, no training!!
Given the geography of the area, 2-300' cliffs with little beach, where would he have put down if the weather had deteriorated further (as it did periodically when we were operating)? His option for a 180 turn was very limited as it would have meant turning away from the cliff and out to sea where the horizon was non-existent and the sky and sea were the same uniform grey eg in actual conditions and no longer VMC - you cannot tell whether you are in cloud or not and the surface is indistiguishable from the sky - not exactly COCISOS is it?
Plenty of pilots have thought they knew better when it came to grovelling around in skoshie weather and lots get away with it (like you) right up until their luck runs out and they end up as an AAIB statistic.
Does anyone have a published GPS approach for Pembrey so we can see the MDH and limiting vis for it?
The cloudbase in these sort of conditions varies up and, more importantly, down along with the visibility and inadvertant IMC is a real and ever-present danger. Where are your options? Revert to IFR - no kit, no IR, no training!!
Given the geography of the area, 2-300' cliffs with little beach, where would he have put down if the weather had deteriorated further (as it did periodically when we were operating)? His option for a 180 turn was very limited as it would have meant turning away from the cliff and out to sea where the horizon was non-existent and the sky and sea were the same uniform grey eg in actual conditions and no longer VMC - you cannot tell whether you are in cloud or not and the surface is indistiguishable from the sky - not exactly COCISOS is it?
Plenty of pilots have thought they knew better when it came to grovelling around in skoshie weather and lots get away with it (like you) right up until their luck runs out and they end up as an AAIB statistic.
Does anyone have a published GPS approach for Pembrey so we can see the MDH and limiting vis for it?
Poor weather options
Dear chopjock and others who see things his way. Please take heed of those on this thread who advocate caution in reduced visibility and cloudbase, if you want a long and relatively fright-free flying career. They are right and you seemingly wish to challenge the safe limits established over decades, without enough variety of personal experience.
I'll be even more patronising and liken your attitudes to children building a campfire in a drought-stricken forest, or swimming in shark-infested waters. Eventually the luck runs out. The difficuty remains for those who have enough experience, how to convey to others the reality of the risks. Another analogy is the parent v teenager dilemma; "Don't drink and drive. Don't speed. Don't smoke. Don't do drugs. Don't do this. Don't do that."
Like anyone else, I sometimes came close to killing myself in my early flying career so how can I preach? Well, I'll just preach anyway, because it behoves the survivors of personal ignorance and stupidity at least to try passing on the lessons. Today's lesson: The rules and limits are evolved from the experiences of countless others who survived their own idiotic bad judgements. A smallish safety margin gets incorporated into the limits, which it is unwise to erode. Here endeth the lesson.
My 42 years,18500 hours professional flying include 10 years military f/w and heli involving a war, lapsed cpl f/w, current ppl f/w, atpl/h, 3 decades North Sea heavy heli (still at it) and recreational light f/w. I don't care if you think "So effing what!" and spit. I believe I've survived long enough to qualify as a patronising old tw_t.
Helimutt, you're spot-on dear chap. We can do an offshore ARA (airborne radar approach) down to 200' and 3/4 nm from the rig before going around if nothing seen. Even with a 15 degree heading offset and the all-singing, all-dancing height/heading/speed holds engaged, we aren't exactly enjoying the situation. If the rig appears by 3/4 nm (appr 1400 metres), we're working near the limits of skill to manoeuvre visually on to the helideck.
I'll be even more patronising and liken your attitudes to children building a campfire in a drought-stricken forest, or swimming in shark-infested waters. Eventually the luck runs out. The difficuty remains for those who have enough experience, how to convey to others the reality of the risks. Another analogy is the parent v teenager dilemma; "Don't drink and drive. Don't speed. Don't smoke. Don't do drugs. Don't do this. Don't do that."
Like anyone else, I sometimes came close to killing myself in my early flying career so how can I preach? Well, I'll just preach anyway, because it behoves the survivors of personal ignorance and stupidity at least to try passing on the lessons. Today's lesson: The rules and limits are evolved from the experiences of countless others who survived their own idiotic bad judgements. A smallish safety margin gets incorporated into the limits, which it is unwise to erode. Here endeth the lesson.
My 42 years,18500 hours professional flying include 10 years military f/w and heli involving a war, lapsed cpl f/w, current ppl f/w, atpl/h, 3 decades North Sea heavy heli (still at it) and recreational light f/w. I don't care if you think "So effing what!" and spit. I believe I've survived long enough to qualify as a patronising old tw_t.
Helimutt, you're spot-on dear chap. We can do an offshore ARA (airborne radar approach) down to 200' and 3/4 nm from the rig before going around if nothing seen. Even with a 15 degree heading offset and the all-singing, all-dancing height/heading/speed holds engaged, we aren't exactly enjoying the situation. If the rig appears by 3/4 nm (appr 1400 metres), we're working near the limits of skill to manoeuvre visually on to the helideck.
Last edited by Colibri49; 22nd Mar 2010 at 15:01.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
flying in ovc @ 200' with 1500m
No chance in those circumstances, to see and avoid wires, those 299 foot unmarked masts [though there may not be any in that area] not to mention the other more obvious issues.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Age: 66
Posts: 919
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
toptobottom
No not invincible. But I know my limitations and I stay within them. Presumably as did this piston jockey.
Yeah, but no problem for chopjock - he's invincible, don't forget
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: In The Trap, trapped.....
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Madness - CFIT waiting to happen!!!
Looking at the weather reports from around the south west I am surprise to see any aviation being committed in the Bristol channel area. I'd be curious to hear what other (non IR) traffic was around. Crab and co, I assume the currency was required, as i wouldn't fancy an Amber recovery at Chiv. Afternoon watching telly and waiting for the scramble phone to ring me thinks.
As for grovelling around in a puddle jumper! Never mind the weather, was the ppl aware that Crab was at 200' and below ??? probably not, would they have seen him anyway?? Not often ANY traffic down there, never mind when you can't see squat and you probably never trained in those conditions either. I just hope the ppl realises how lucky they were to "get in" and learn from their errors of judgement- unlikely though!
Is there a GPS Letdown published?? There is a NDB/DME. Published approaches are there for a reason! Without GPS mapping, radar and TCAS what is below may not always be what you expect. Isn't the lowest minima for a NonPrecision Approach 250' ??
5,15,1000 is there for a very good reason too.
cociss - use with caution and only if prepared to bang out when it all goes pete tong. 200' and cociss may be "comfortable" for those who train there, but the rest I assume would (if not should) be more than a little apprehensive.
It all may be worth pushing on to get the client there, and on time, but will your wife and kids be happy on that one day when you buy the farm trying to keep the client happy - again unlikely. You won't get return business if you scare the client either!
As Sisloe Sid said, they are THE limits, not targets!
Fly safe and learn from the mistakes of others, don't become another infamous thread on these pages.
pas
As for grovelling around in a puddle jumper! Never mind the weather, was the ppl aware that Crab was at 200' and below ??? probably not, would they have seen him anyway?? Not often ANY traffic down there, never mind when you can't see squat and you probably never trained in those conditions either. I just hope the ppl realises how lucky they were to "get in" and learn from their errors of judgement- unlikely though!
Is there a GPS Letdown published?? There is a NDB/DME. Published approaches are there for a reason! Without GPS mapping, radar and TCAS what is below may not always be what you expect. Isn't the lowest minima for a NonPrecision Approach 250' ??
5,15,1000 is there for a very good reason too.
cociss - use with caution and only if prepared to bang out when it all goes pete tong. 200' and cociss may be "comfortable" for those who train there, but the rest I assume would (if not should) be more than a little apprehensive.
It all may be worth pushing on to get the client there, and on time, but will your wife and kids be happy on that one day when you buy the farm trying to keep the client happy - again unlikely. You won't get return business if you scare the client either!
As Sisloe Sid said, they are THE limits, not targets!
Fly safe and learn from the mistakes of others, don't become another infamous thread on these pages.
pas
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CJ,
Are you the same Devon based UAV pilot who enjoys diving and flying that posted this (28/9/09) too????
HeliTorque Helicopter Portal and Forums Forums-viewtopic-PPLs doing corporate work.
When strangely enough one reply you received then suggested........
Are you the same Devon based UAV pilot who enjoys diving and flying that posted this (28/9/09) too????
HeliTorque Helicopter Portal and Forums Forums-viewtopic-PPLs doing corporate work.
We all had to start somewhere. I hold a PPL with 2000 hrs and fly our company helicopters in a corporate role. I have made some very frightening airmanship decisions in the past and learned from them!
For example having to fly low level in bad weather and nearly hitting a cable, several times. Or crossing the Irish sea and encountering fog half way across.
What should be done about these decisions? Goodness knows but what price do you pay for experience?
For example having to fly low level in bad weather and nearly hitting a cable, several times. Or crossing the Irish sea and encountering fog half way across.
What should be done about these decisions? Goodness knows but what price do you pay for experience?
And I guess experience would remove the word 'having' from this sentence, no one ever has to go flying (in the civvy world) in bad weather trying to stay VMC no matter what excuses they have, they elect to and sometimes go beyond their own limits (which are often above the legal minimums) and make mistakes like that.
One thing is certain and that is, if all the pilots who have been killed in VFR into IMC kinds of accidents hadn't set of in the first place or landed earlier they would not have died where they did, when they did.
One thing is certain and that is, if all the pilots who have been killed in VFR into IMC kinds of accidents hadn't set of in the first place or landed earlier they would not have died where they did, when they did.
Last edited by Flingingwings; 22nd Mar 2010 at 18:51.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Age: 66
Posts: 919
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just curious, but what are your limitations in terms of visibility and cloudbase then?
Have you ever been IMC?
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Age: 66
Posts: 919
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I recall correctly, and I'm sure I'll get barked at if I'm wrong, VFR flight rules for helicopters below 3000 feet is to remain clear of cloud and in sight of the surface.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Age: 66
Posts: 919
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I got a little confused there with the question. Of course the VFR limits below 3000 feet for a helicopter includes a vis of 1500m. My point was that my personal limit is to look out the window and only fly as far as I can see. That could be more or less than 1500m, but how do you measure that?
Don't know, I suppose it depends on the terrain (probably 200 ft.). I have landed on several occasions when it got too bad. Nice of you to ask.
Ps Now what about that height AGL that you're prepared to go down to remain VFR?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: In a control room with no radar...
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts