Looks like perfekt VFR weather!
Cheshunt wrote:
Looks like perfekt VFR weather!
Yes 
EDDH 190920Z 29006KT 8000 -DZ FEW003 BKN006 BKN016 15/14 Q1020 BECMG SCT005 BKN011
The only sad thing is that I was not able to take a picture of the runway lights shining through the white stuff in front. It was a beautiful sight.
When someone cancels our aircraft “because of weather”, I sometimes take the opportunity to fly IFR. I like the challenge of flying in marginal WX. It’s very rewarding ;-)
In weather conditions like Stephan had at EDDH (8000 FEW003 BKN006) you will have plenty of time after getting visual.
As long as you take sufficient fuel, plan your alternates and stick to the published minima it’s perfectly safe.
This is OVC004 with about 1500m visibility:
[ dead dropbox link – please drag/drop images if possible because dropbox links are notorious for going dead ]
Sorry about the dropbox link…
This is OVC004 with about 1500m visibility:
I agree with lenthamen. IFR weather flying is part of the “fun”. Some people fly with good weather and enjoy the scenery (which I also do), but it is also great fun to fly IFR and have to deal with the weather.
This is on short final of Lyon Exupery where I did see the high intensity approach lights below me at DA (these approach lights are part of the runway environment) and where the reported RVR was for the first section of the runway 550 meter I believe, although I can’t remember exact figures.
Some weeks ago, I flew into Cologne/Bonn EDDK on a VFR flight from the North that started out really nice with deteriorating weather enroute. It was such that as we were approaching Cologne, I diverted quite a bit to avoid overflying the hills of the “Bergisches Land” region and to overfly flat terrain instead. The cloud base was – if I remember correctly now – around 1500 and the visibility in rain showers was so so.
I briefly considered diverting to e.g. EDLE, where conditions had been better (we saw enroute) but as EDDK was now quite close AND their ATIS sounded really quite good, I moved on.
Now the ATIS until the very end (I rechecked upon landing) kept issuing “visibility 10 km or more”, which is an important factor I based my decision on to keep on going. This was one of the most marginal flights I’ve had (it was actually the second most marginal flight I’ve had, but the most marginal with a passenger who was getting a bit apprehensive about it, too) and my personal impression was that the visibility was somewhere around 1500-3000 meters.
As the conditions reported by ATIS were fine, I didn’t ask for Special VFR. Sure enough, the controller gave me headings until I had the runway insight, nonetheless.
I checked later via the SkyDemon log from which distance I had the runway in sight (that is reasonably possible because you can see a variation in headings up until that point when I was clearly established on final) and that was 5 km.
I found the difference between reported, perceived, and actual visibility enormous. However, I felt happy going on because I reckoned this: By the reported conditions, I was perfectly legal. If the destination had been a small grass field I’m unfamiliar with, I would have cancelled anyway because I would have had a hard time spotting it. But given the added comfort of a control zone, a controller who gives you vectors and who de facto maintains separation to other traffic, I felt okay with the approach. Passenger was really happy to be on the ground, though.
By the reported conditions, I was perfectly legal. If the destination had been a small grass field I’m unfamiliar with, I would have cancelled anyway because I would have had a hard time spotting it. But given the added comfort of a control zone, a controller who gives you vectors and who de facto maintains separation to other traffic, I felt okay with the approach.
I fullfill that table each time I’m not comfortable with a flight, especially with the weather, or fatigue, just to reassure me on the correct decision to take.
@Patrick: I think your example is a very good one, making it evident how much more comfort a simple Enroute-IR could give to VFR pilots. Being stressed by marginal weather can easily make you do very stupid thinks like flying at windmill altitude. Knowing that you have more tools in your toolbox can give you the calm required for good decision making.
Not quite. The poor vis and low ceiling was at and in the vicinity of his arrival aerodrome.
He would still have needed to cancel IFR and descend whilst maintaining VMC. The final bit of the approach would have been the same.
So while the EIR adds (valuable)
skills, it doesn’t legally add weather capability in the above case. Actually, it sounds like this flight was legally possible under VFR, but would have been legally difficult on a mixed flightplan…
But of course, legality and safety are not always the same.
This morning: LDZA 240400 230001KT 6000 MIFG NSC 14/12 Q1014 TEMPO 1500 BR. Of course I arrived when it was “1500 BR” (hand flying because AP againn refused to cooperate) but the lights were visible from 1.2 DME on ILS approach.
