Non-certified aircraft and known ice?

[icefr8dawg]

You see a lot of instrument rated gliders, do you? Sailplanes certificated for and intended for use in instrument conditions? Ever wonder why there's an instrument rating for rotorcraft, and one for airplanes...but not for gliders? Again, very poor comparison, hardly apples to apples, and serves only to cloud the issue.



There are a few cases, and only with respect to navigational ability...that handheld doesn't keep you upright, and doesn't even give you a heading...a course, perhaps, a direction to go...but little else. It does nothing for orientation in the axes.



I'm not thinking that at all. I'm thinking of exactly what I will do when it DOES fail, because it's been planned, calculated, and I'm prepared for it. If I have to hope and guess, then I'm grounded, because I'm not going. What an utterly unprofessional concept, hoping that everything is okay. Flying is not a game of chance, nor should it be treated as such.



Your backup, your plan, is that when things come apart you'll limp along in an unfamiliar emergency condition and hope you make it? You spend a lot of time flying partial panel in real world conditions? Everybody has done it for a few hours in training, often with a hood...but how often after that...and not on a nice calm day with an instructor sitting nearby, but in real, embedded, instrument weather? Lots of bravado about "all I need is needle, ball, and airspeed," but that's been claptrap since the 30's. Attitude instrumentation has been standard in cockpits for a great many decades, not as a matter of frivolity or luxurious excess.



No...working parachute systems and sport parachute systems use single parachutes...dual parachute systems are standard for civil and military applications (excepting some very specialized uses). Single parachute failure, it can quite possibly be cleared. If unable, reserve parachute use. If you're trying to make a comparison to base jumping...that might be more on par with single engine IFR...or more on par with instrument aerobatics.

I don't fly single engine IMC, nor do I base jump. Those who elect to do so may well be of the same mindset.

You're a Pu$$Y

 

[avbug]

And you're clearly an intellectual giant. Well done.

 

[icefr8dawg]

Actually, I've got a good mass of education and what folks might call intellect but that's beside the point, I've long been accused of being crude, that's just me.

Please, single engine IFR unsafe? You gotta be kidding. And for crossing the mountains in a single, if you're properly equipped, it is what it is. Slightly more risk but it's done all day long and completely acceptable. Maybe not with the entire family aboard...

 

[avbug]

Slightly more risk but it's done all day long and completely acceptable. Maybe not with the entire family aboard...

You are an intellectual! It's okay, so long as your family isn't aboard. So it's safe, or it isn't...one or the other. You'll do it, but it's too big a risk to take your family...so it isn't really that safe after all. Think it through a little more.

You aren't one of those thrill seekers too, are you?

 

[icefr8dawg]

No, I get my thrills elsewhere but I've been doin this flying thing for a while now and know how to manage risk...bugger...I mean avbug

 

[pilotpat]

don't mind him...I think its that time of the month....

 

[Cat Driver]

I thought I'd bump this up again.

"
We all form our own safety and or comfort limits when it comes to what, when or where we fly.

Mine are that I do not fly single engine aircraft at night x/country, over water beyond gliding distance of land or IFR in IMC.

Also I do not fly single pilot IFR..

Now here is my question, does all the above make me an unskilled or poor decision making pilot? "

So far this has worked for me, and I would rather be a live chicken than a dead duck.

 

[JAFI]

Why is it that it's pretty much only the comparatively inexperienced pilots out there that condone the practice of single-engine IFR or night X-C flying?

'Sled

Lead, Interesting observation.

Avbug, you are beating a dead horse here. "They" have measured the risk (cough) and "know" what they are doing. They will learn (or die trying) as others have, as we had to.

--- I think the General said it best:
"... More pilots have been killed by arrogance than by faulty equipment."
CHUCK YEAGER, Gen. U.S.A.F. Ret.

JAFI

 

[mcjohn]

I thought that properly IFR equipped single-engine aircraft were expected to be in hard IMC from time to time. Isn't that what they're engineered for and isn't that what the instrument training is designed around (failures and all)?
Just seems like a shame that a perfectly capable and healthy IFR single-engine plane would just sit on the ground when ever the Wx was below VFR minimums.
I can respect you're point of view avbug. If you're not comfortable with it that's fine, I hear plenty of pilots that talk the same way you do about it and they are usually quite experienced.
But, if everyone were just like you then these planes would all sit on the ground as I stated above. You accuse the large number of people who do fly singles in IMC of stupidity which doesn't seem to make you much of an intellectual giant either.
I honestly think that this is all B.S. and you're putting us on. I'm pretty new here but people seem to have good things to say about your 1000's of posts and knowledge. I don't care how much knowledge you have to offer...If you are putting us on and that's what you do for kicks then you do suck.

 

[avbug]

JAFI,

As always, you're quite right. More than one dead horse, I suppose, but I'm stuck in a hotel on the road, and it's cheaper than a movie.

McJohn, at best the instrumentation in a light airplane is there to get you out of an inadvertant encounter, or get you down an ILS when there's a little fog at your destination. Getting out or quickly through...but staying there, and "hard IFR" (whatever that might be) isn't smart in light single engine piston powered airplanes.

Likewise, your instrument rating is there as a sampling and a license to learn, not t go jump into that "hard IFR." Legally you can go there, just as legally you can do many things that aren't smart. Too many newly certificated pilots make the assumption that they now have the certificate or the rating, and therefore they're empowered. Much like the point of the thread...too many times doctors or attorneys or people who can afford a high performance aircraft will go buy it, and get hurt or killed in it.

Yep, single engine piston powered light airplanes can do many things. They can fly under bridges, fly into "hard IMC" even perform all manner of aerobatics if you know what you're doing. Merely because the aircraft is capable, or even legal...doesn't mean that it's a wise idea.

I'm an instrument rated pilot. ATP, even. A fair amount of experience in mountainous terrain, often at low level, and in what some might consider to be challenging conditions. All kinds of aircraft, from light to big and heavily loaded. An airplane might be able to save time and distance by cutting directly across the hills, but even in terrain I know well, I follow roads, shoot for visual conditions. I fly professionally, take regular training, checks, the works. It doesn't matter. I follow roads, keep landing sites beneath me. I use mountain passes, and don't fly singles cross country at night. I go around bodies of water. I wait out weather in these airplanes...because I know better.

Quiz the champions of single engine IMC, single engine cross country at night, single engine flight over water, and single engine flight through mountainous country about how they feel in ten years, or twenty years...you'll find that most, if not all, of these champions of the inexperienced pilot's cause, will have changed their tunes. No great surprise there.

Physics may say you can, but wisdom often teaches you you should not. Experience teaches you to heed the wise choice...merely because you can, doesn't mean you should.

 

[Cat Driver]

There are no definitive one size fits all rules that we as pilots can say are the only way to do things.

I believe a lot of our opinions and flying habits change over time, what was once of no great concern can in time red flag you to say I don't think I want to do that anymore.

When I was younger I did things that were flat out stupid, as time passes I find myself becoming less willing to accept avoidable risk.

I am in the international airplane ferry business as part of what I and my partners do for a living.

When flying routes such as the North Atlantic and I look at the coastline and the ice berg filled fijords of Greenland I think to myself, how do the guys that ferry single engine stuff deal with what would happen if their only engine quit. I can not imagine what must ocassionally occupy their thoughts during the long hours flying over such unforgiving terrain and water, and am thankful for having more than one engine.

Reading about the hundreds of aircraft that have dissapparred never to be seen again on that route is quite sobering.

So all I am trying to say is we all make our own limits as to our risk management comfort level.

A few months ago someone sent me a picture of my crew and me with a guy who ferries single engine stuff across that north Atlantic, we were all holding for weather in Wick Scotland...the person that sent me the picture said that sadly that guy dissapparred several months later ferrying a single engine somewhere over or off Greenland.

In the final analysis we are individuals as well as pilots sharing the same life style.

Cat

 

[Say Again Over]

by Avbug:If you're trying to make a comparison to base jumping...that might be more on par with single engine IFR...

Absolutely no clue...

 

[mcjohn]

I'd like to see the statistics on # of singles disappearing on that route to # of multi's. I'm a pretty inexperienced pilot but I don't think having one engine operating on a twin would get you very far across the north atlantic. Of course is depends on what kind of twin and all but come on. I'd take a serious survival kit, with the special cold water suit, raft and all, over that extra engine on "some" twins anyday. I'd probably just go ahead and wear the suit if I had a single around me for the length of the trip.
Place where I instruct has a Piper Arrow from China that was flown from China to Florida (still has Chinese symbols on the side). Now that's some sh!t.

 

[Say Again Over]

Exactly, that's why most people with ferry experience will prefer to fly a light single across water than a light twin, twice the opportunity for something to go wrong.

 

[Hand Commander]

If operating single engine IFR at night, with ice, over water, and all the other possible worst cast scenarios implies a degree of stupidity, I think the customer should at least be given the courtesy of a disclaimer. Something like: " We as a company appreciate your business and hope for your continued patronage, however we feel obligated to inform you that although we've invested millions in the purchase and maintenance of highly reliable modern aircraft and have ensured comprehensive and recurrent training to all our pilots who have vast amounts of experience in complex weather and airspace navigation, the fact that you're trusting your life, your families lives, or your property to the operation of our aircraft's single engine is stupid. In fact you may be mildly retarded. We thank you and hope you and your crap make it there in one piece." This of course would apply to all fed ex feeders, air ambulances and 135 operators who use single engine aircraft.

Me at 500 hours: Worked for VFR 135 operator. Quickly volunteered for any night charters(nice call out fee $$$). This involved single engine Cessna's with a large part of the route over water.
Me at 1200 hours: Highly reliable single engine turbo prop goes T.U. while I'm dropping jumpers at 13500' over the airport on a severe clear day. Glided in OK and no damage (other than the engine).
Me now: Although I still like the single engine turbine airplane, I will never fly it full of passengers for a 135 outfit operating in all weather. I would fly it full of freight because I only want the risk associated to focus on myself and some boxes with only one screw up front.
I wouldn't call anybody who does what I won't do stupid, they just have a different risk management plan.
I get enough uneasy and jittery feelings by drinking very strong black coffee by the pot on an empty stomach.

 

[Cat Driver]

Yes we carry lots of survival stuff including rafts and survival suits as well as backup portable GPS and a Sat phone to name some.

As to flying a twin, that can vary from the 777 under ETOPS to small single engine twins that are minimal in single engine performance.

What we fly will fly on one and for a very long way, a single engine will not get you far if it quits.

As to most ferry pilots preferring a light single over a twin, O.K. I have not found that to be true, yeh I have met a few including the guy I mentioned in my last post however as I have stated we all decide what we feel best with.

By the way just for couriousity "say again over" how many single engine over ocean flights have you done ferrying an airplane?

Cat D.

 

[mcjohn]

Nice addition to your post there Hand Commander. It is a very personal thing and people should respect that.

Cat Driver, You hiring? I could really use a job. Seriously.

 

[PCL_128]

I can't believe this is even a debate. Of course flying a single-engine airplane in solid IMC is dangerous and stupid. To all that disagree, answer me this one question: what are you going to do when your one and only engine fails? Are you just going to pitch for Vg and hope like heck that when you pop out of the clouds at 200 AGL that a runway, road, or large field will be right there? Sorry, not very smart.

 

[Hand Commander]

Sorry, not very smart.

Yes! Yes! Thank you for another perfect addition to the disclaimer. Now we just need to get these "crazy stupid bastards" to write it up:

http://www.airlife.org/html/about.html

http://www.kenmoreair.com/sub_content.php?content_type=23

http://www.flightexpress.com/flight_express_fleet_cessna_210.htm

http://empireairlines.com/index.asp?PageId=976

http://www.caravanshares.com/

 

[FN FAL]

I can't believe this is even a debate. Of course flying a single-engine airplane in solid IMC is dangerous and stupid. To all that disagree, answer me this one question: what are you going to do when your one and only engine fails? Are you just going to pitch for Vg and hope like heck that when you pop out of the clouds at 200 AGL that a runway, road, or large field will be right there? Sorry, not very smart.

Probably more sedate than riding a vmc rollover.