VFR Over the Top

[dstclair]

So if you get a whole wide trend of METARs near your destination (updated pretty much realtime on Stratus) and have plenty of fuel?

METARS are updated hourly unless there is a significant change in the weather at the reporting station. Changing cloud cover would not trigger an update unless flight rules changed from IFR<->VFR. It is certainly plausible that a given area would change from broken to solid between reports so you could easily find yourself on top of a layer that has closed around you.

Fuel is a very good thing which, of course, buys you time to get out the mess you've gotten yourself into.

Don't get me wrong -- I have no issues with flying on top of a layer but one just needs to consider the capability of the pilot and plane when planning to do so.

For instance, I recall flying a leg from Angel Fire, NM to the DFW area where I was crossing a frontal boundary. Forecast was for clear skies before and after the boundary with 3K ceilings broken to solid for the ~100nm of the clouds in the middle. This was a zero-risk scenario for me since I could bail out backwards, continue forward or cut through into VFR conditions.

[designrs]

Perhaps the bottom line is to have a "Solid Gold Out"?

[SportPilot]

.......

[designrs]

Part of the answer is not only metars and TAF's but knowing and understanding what the weather is doing and why.

Working on that. Now reading "Understanding the Sky by Dennis Pagen"

[FastEddieB]

Sorry I'm late to the party and I apologize if some of the below has already been covered...

Flying on top of an overcast always carries some additional risk - but that risk can range from minuscule to substantial.

"Minuscule" would be a pilot on top of a high overcast and appropriately trained to maintain control in IMC. With an engine failure, a minute or two descending through that cloud layer to VFR conditions below would give plenty of time to find a place to land in VFR conditions after breaking out. The only minuscule risk would be meeting an IFR plane in the clouds, but as long as one's emergency status was promptly relayed to an ATC facility, that risk goes to nearly infinitesimal.

"Substantial" would be a pilot with inadequate training flying on top of any overcast, but especially a low one, with no outs in any direction - and I'd say less than 1,000' would qualify as low here - giving not a whole lot of time to find a landing spot on breaking out. And that's IF the pilot could maintain control while IMC - hardly a given.

The key is in both training and "outs". Ideally if one had VFR conditions in gliding range, one would be pretty safe.

Years ago we had to piece together the extent of an overcast from METARS as we flew along. My 496 now can show me a satellite view, which is an incredible real-time tool.

Finally, I would recommend that any pilot planning to fly on top of overcasts have a least basic instrument training. The first 5-10 hours of an IFR course is mostly basic attitude instrument flying, and a block that size with some recurrent training would give a pilot a decent chance of surviving an IMC descent through a layer in an emergency. It's money well spent - better spent IMHO than another cockpit gadget.

For those who feel they already could safely descend through a layer given the tiny bit of instrument training they've received, be aware that spatial disorientation routinely claims high time and experienced instrument pilots. For a low time Sport of Private pilot to assume he could handle even a brief encounter may be a false, and often fatal, assumption.

[designrs]

Good insight. Thanks Eddie.

[designrs]

Of course training, recurrent training, and having safe outs are the key... over electronic gadgets.
Just curious though, what would your opinion be of using an auto-pilot descent thru IMC in an emergency?

[FastEddieB]

Of course training, recurrent training, and having safe outs are the key... over electronic gadgets.
Just curious though, what would your opinion be of using an auto-pilot descent thru IMC in an emergency?

That would be the safest way, I think.

But spatial disorientation is powerful. You have the autopilot set for a wings level descent, you look down for a frequency and lookup and "OMIGOD! In spite of what the instruments say, I've entered a climbing turn to the left! I've got to do SOMETHING! Get the nose down and now what????...."

But with iron discipline, it might just work.

Before autopilots were so common, the survival trick was to go to a heading of east or west, trim for a descent, and then keep your hands off the stick at all costs and just use rudder to stop any turn on the compass.

Some even promoted setting up a spin, in planes so certified, and then recovering from the spin when clear of the clouds. Seems scary and extreme, but in a spin the plane is stalled and stable and cannot enter a graveyard spiral.

All that said, instrument instruction in basic attitude instrument flying is the way to go. Barring that, borrow a hood and find an appropriately rated safety pilot and go practice some basic instrument stuff.

[designrs]

Thanks Eddie. I will do some hood time training.

[CharlieTango]

what would your opinion be of using an auto-pilot descent thru IMC in an emergency?

Terrain avoidance and a minimum altitude need to be considered too.

[3Dreaming]

Of course training, recurrent training, and having safe outs are the key... over electronic gadgets.
Just curious though, what would your opinion be of using an auto-pilot descent thru IMC in an emergency?

Some may not agree, but one thing I try and teach my students is hands off the stick or wheel and steer with the rudder. You can make a 180° turn or reduce power and descend through a cloud layer using this method. Simply watch your heading and or rate of turn, I teach standard rate or less in this situation. I have yet to demonstrate this in an airplane where it wouldn't work. It may not be the smoothest method for flying the airplane, but everyone I have showed it to found it easier than trying to fly the airplane using all the controls. For those who have not tried flying the airplane like this go out and practice this sometime and see what you think.

[designrs]

Some may not agree, but one thing I try and teach my students is hands off the stick or wheel and steer with the rudder. You can make a 180° turn or reduce power and descend through a cloud layer using this method. Simply watch your heading and or rate of turn, I teach standard rate or less in this situation. I have yet to demonstrate this in an airplane where it wouldn't work. It may not be the smoothest method for flying the airplane, but everyone I have showed it to found it easier than trying to fly the airplane using all the controls. For those who have not tried flying the airplane like this go out and practice this sometime and see what you think.

I did a lesson like that. It was most interesting. The plane I fly requires very little rudder correction, so it was very worthwhile to actually use the rudders more. In addition to the "hands off turning practice" it was also useful to control "hands off" altitude by the adjustment of power alone. Reduce the power, correct with rudders for heading, descend, add power at desired altitude… and the plane just kind of bobs a little as it settles into finding a new altitude. Very useful in the event of a partial control failure. Small corrections and lots of time could get the job done!

[AJChenMPH]

Unfortunately, no useful input from me this time around, but a few comments/questions...

Reference: http://flighttraining.aopa.org/magazine ... e_Top.html

Video Reference: http://youtu.be/RBFN---_ZGM

1. Thanks for the video! I'm planning at some point to go out and say hi to the Professor, so being able to actually see what the approach looks like was helpful...especially to see the terrain in the vicinity of the airfield.

2. Is there a way to turn off "Sally" when you know she'll be chirping away like that and not being particularly helpful?

3. I was sorely tempted to try VFR over the top last week on my cross country from KTTN to KOWD and back, but decided discretion was the better part of valor in my instance, particularly since it was literally my first flight since passing my checkride. In hindsight, though, I could have made it -- clouds were broken enough at both ends that I would have found holes big enough to descend through.

4. I actually flew into KUKT about two or three weeks ago when practicing simulated power failures with my instructor...shoulda looked you up!

5. I've always sort of envisioned myself flying from the right seat like that...puts the control stick in my right hand and the throttle in my left. Flew a Citabria back in early October, and really liked how the setup felt. (I'm a frustrated fighter pilot anyways...)

Reduce the power, correct with rudders for heading, descend, add power at desired altitude… and the plane just kind of bobs a little as it settles into finding a new altitude. Very useful in the event of a partial control failure. Small corrections and lots of time could get the job done!

While United 232 lost all its hydraulics and suffered total control failure (and could only be marginally controlled by the engines on the wings), it more or less accomplished what you're describing:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_232

[deltafox]

So far, I've yet to find a way to shut Sally up.

[designrs]

So far, I've yet to find a way to shut Sally up.

I think I did Dave!
Press the CLR button on the Garmin 696.
It seemed to disable the current threat warning.

The first time I flew into Lock Haven she wouldn't stop screaming at me:
"Terrain… uhhh… terrain… uhhh…. pull up… Pull Up!!"
In her firm but affectionate way.