Discussion:
Trip report: UK to Zaragoza, Spain
(too old to reply)
Peter
2007-11-05 20:09:02 UTC
Permalink
http://www.peter2000.co.uk/aviation/zaragoza/
Alt Beer
2007-11-06 10:00:31 UTC
Permalink
Peter, a very interesting read.
Post by Peter
http://www.peter2000.co.uk/aviation/zaragoza/
Captain Bimble
2007-11-09 01:51:41 UTC
Permalink
Great write up on you travels
Interesting as EGKA my home airfield
Hate the landing fee though.
Post by Alt Beer
Peter, a very interesting read.
Post by Peter
http://www.peter2000.co.uk/aviation/zaragoza/
NoSpam
2007-11-06 15:57:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter
http://www.peter2000.co.uk/aviation/zaragoza/
Peter,

That's an excellent write-up. Have you thought about submitting a
tidied-up version of your "IFR flying in Europe" to one of the mags,
maybe the PPLIR Europe "Instrument Pilot"?

Dave
Peter
2007-11-06 18:26:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by NoSpam
That's an excellent write-up. Have you thought about submitting a
tidied-up version of your "IFR flying in Europe" to one of the mags,
maybe the PPLIR Europe "Instrument Pilot"?
Yes, they did run that one a year or two ago.
Barney Rubble
2007-11-07 14:58:56 UTC
Permalink
Peter,
As usual, a great write up and very informative. Oh how easy we have it here
in the US (says a former UK guy!).

Regards

Barney
Post by Peter
http://www.peter2000.co.uk/aviation/zaragoza/
D
2007-11-10 21:44:44 UTC
Permalink
Nice one Peter./

A great hole in my own flying is longer range IFR trips in light aircraft.
plenty of jet time, plenty of GA time but only one private flight of note
(warrior from USA to UK via northern route) and years worth of Trislander
flying into europe, but all with an Ops centre to help. I'm hoping to fill
the hole sooner rather than later and your write-up makes it all the more
exciting.

You're a fortunate guy! We must meet up again sometime, it's been a while.

david
Peter
2007-11-12 07:48:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by D
Nice one Peter./
A great hole in my own flying is longer range IFR trips in light aircraft.
plenty of jet time, plenty of GA time but only one private flight of note
(warrior from USA to UK via northern route) and years worth of Trislander
flying into europe, but all with an Ops centre to help. I'm hoping to fill
the hole sooner rather than later and your write-up makes it all the more
exciting.
You're a fortunate guy! We must meet up again sometime, it's been a while.
david
Thank you David and others for the feedback.

Paradoxically, I find when writing up IFR trip reports that so many of
them could have been done under VFR **on the day**. This one was a
handy exception.
D
2007-11-12 19:14:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter
Paradoxically, I find when writing up IFR trip reports that so many of
them could have been done under VFR **on the day**.
That is very telling

D
Ric
2007-11-13 06:55:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by D
Post by Peter
Paradoxically, I find when writing up IFR trip reports that so many of
them could have been done under VFR **on the day**.
That is very telling
I've been doing quite a few delivery flights delivering Diamonds from the
factory to various buyers around Europe and North Africa over the past few
months. None of them could have been done VFR - all have been SIDs in IMC,
then VMC on top for most of journey, then IMC procedure on arrival. |On the
other hand, a friend who was trying to deliver a VFR DA40 to Denmark waited
for two weeks before weather was possibly suitable, then ended up diverting
and scud-running for the entire flight. Also, flying VFR, he felt obliged to
take a second pilot.

Thanks for the tip about Zaragoza though, I think I may have a stop there
next delivery to Morocco.
Peter
2007-11-13 07:27:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ric
I've been doing quite a few delivery flights delivering Diamonds from the
factory to various buyers around Europe and North Africa over the past few
months. None of them could have been done VFR - all have been SIDs in IMC,
then VMC on top for most of journey, then IMC procedure on arrival. |On the
other hand, a friend who was trying to deliver a VFR DA40 to Denmark waited
for two weeks before weather was possibly suitable, then ended up diverting
and scud-running for the entire flight. Also, flying VFR, he felt obliged to
take a second pilot.
That's true also.

When I say "could have been done under VFR" I am saying that either a
scud run, or VMC on top with a hole at the destination, would have
been possible on the day, in the conditions actually found during the
IFR flight.

In practice, one would not bother to do the flight under VFR because
the weather forecasts are usually nowhere near good enough to assure
these things even a day or two ahead, and few people are able to just
sit around every day for weeks, bags packed, and jump in the aeroplane
on the morning of the day when the METARs are just right. There is a
very small band of retired travellers who do that.

I've done long legs across Europe under VFR back when I could fly IFR
only in UK airspace; the Crete one was the longest. I won't comment
whether all (or indeed any) of these flights were 100% clear of cloud
:) Paradoxically, one can do much more under VFR if one is instrument
capable. But it still works only in southern Europe. North of the Alps
one can just manage short hops here and there.

One simply cannot beat IFR. It's a shame that it is so much work
getting the privileges.
Thomas Borchert
2007-11-13 19:12:30 UTC
Permalink
Ric,

Would you happen to know if Diamond is looking for pilots doing such
flights in (Northern) Europe? Would you know who to contact?

Thanks a lot!
--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)
jan olieslagers
2007-11-23 16:27:50 UTC
Permalink
Ric schreef:
a friend who was trying to deliver a VFR
DA40 to Denmark waited for two weeks before weather was possibly
suitable, then ended up diverting and scud-running for the entire
flight.
Ric (and others)
As I'm not a native English speaker,
I am lost with this term "scud-running".
Anyone kindly explain to a bloody stupid continental?
Karel.
john hawkins
2007-11-23 17:14:03 UTC
Permalink
from wikipedia
In general aviation, scud running is a practice in which pilots lower their
altitude in order to avoid clouds or Instrument meteorological conditions
(IMC). The goal of scud running is to stay clear of weather in order to
continue flying with visual, rather than instrument, references. This
practice is widely accepted to be dangerous, and has led to death in many
cases from pilots flying into radio towers and high tension wires; however,
even instrument-rated pilots sometimes elect to take the risk to avoid icing
or embedded thunderstorms in cloud, or in situations where the minimum
instrument altitudes are too high for their aircraft.

Scud running is occasionally referred to as "maintaining visual contact with
the ground while avoiding physical contact with it" or "if the weather's too
bad to go IFR, we'll go VFR."

The term gets its name from "scud," which is used to describe low, detached
clouds.
Post by Ric
a friend who was trying to deliver a VFR
DA40 to Denmark waited for two weeks before weather was possibly
suitable, then ended up diverting and scud-running for the entire flight.
Ric (and others)
As I'm not a native English speaker,
I am lost with this term "scud-running".
Anyone kindly explain to a bloody stupid continental?
Karel.
Peter
2007-11-23 21:32:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by john hawkins
In general aviation, scud running is a practice in which pilots lower their
altitude in order to avoid clouds or Instrument meteorological conditions
(IMC).
True; however there is no clear definition. Flying between ground
which is at say 1000ft altitude, and cloudbase which is at say 2000ft
altitude, is fine and normal practice. The gap is 1000ft. Flying with
a 300ft gap would definitely be "scud running" :)
jan olieslagers
2007-11-23 22:24:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter
Post by john hawkins
In general aviation, scud running is a practice in which pilots lower their
altitude in order to avoid clouds or Instrument meteorological conditions
(IMC).
True; however there is no clear definition. Flying between ground
which is at say 1000ft altitude, and cloudbase which is at say 2000ft
altitude, is fine and normal practice. The gap is 1000ft. Flying with
a 300ft gap would definitely be "scud running" :)
Thanks for explaining!
Captain Bimble
2007-11-24 19:53:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by jan olieslagers
Post by Peter
Post by john hawkins
In general aviation, scud running is a practice in which pilots lower their
altitude in order to avoid clouds or Instrument meteorological conditions
(IMC).
True; however there is no clear definition. Flying between ground
which is at say 1000ft altitude, and cloudbase which is at say 2000ft
altitude, is fine and normal practice. The gap is 1000ft. Flying with
a 300ft gap would definitely be "scud running" :)
Thanks for explaining!
When I was learning I had a scud running exercise where the tail fin
was just skimming the cloud base at 1100 feet. I was banking the plane
left , right all over the place to try to get through the highest gaps
as we were heading back to the home airport. My instructor told me
that I could mark that one down as the low flying exercise :))
Peter
2007-11-24 21:42:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Captain Bimble
When I was learning I had a scud running exercise where the tail fin
was just skimming the cloud base at 1100 feet. I was banking the plane
left , right all over the place to try to get through the highest gaps
as we were heading back to the home airport. My instructor told me
that I could mark that one down as the low flying exercise :))
Nothing wrong with that... the question is how far down was the
ground?

If you are doing this and the terrain rises up to meet you, the only
way is UP but then you can't see anything, and if the terrain rises
faster than your aircraft's climb rate (which is perfectly possible)
you fly into a hill. It happens a lot.

There isn't a good solution however. You can stick to VFR flight on
very good days, or plan and do every flight as IFR.
Everett M. Greene
2007-11-25 16:45:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter
Post by Captain Bimble
When I was learning I had a scud running exercise where the tail fin
was just skimming the cloud base at 1100 feet. I was banking the plane
left , right all over the place to try to get through the highest gaps
as we were heading back to the home airport. My instructor told me
that I could mark that one down as the low flying exercise :))
Nothing wrong with that... the question is how far down was the
ground?
If you are doing this and the terrain rises up to meet you, the only
way is UP but then you can't see anything, and if the terrain rises
faster than your aircraft's climb rate (which is perfectly possible)
you fly into a hill. It happens a lot.
He said he did this around his home airport, so presumably he
knew about the terrain in the area. Just as importantly, did
he know that nobody else was doing the same thing at the same
time?
Post by Peter
There isn't a good solution however. You can stick to VFR flight on
very good days, or plan and do every flight as IFR.
Not too bad an idea if you're instrument rated... Otherwise,
you stay on the ground except for "very good days"?

Loading...