Warrior with 2 on board fails to arrive in Kamloops

[cncpc]

Flying from Lethbridge to Kamloops. Last seen when stopped for fuel at Cranbrook.

http://vancouversun.com/news/local-news ... n-kamloops

[mato]

Heard a SAR chopper broadcasting on 21.5 yesterday was hoping for better news than this. Hope they are ok just waiting to be found.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-c ... -1.4154956

[cncpc]

Heard a SAR chopper broadcasting on 21.5 yesterday was hoping for better news than this. Hope they are ok just waiting to be found.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-c ... -1.4154956

Can anybody do that weather look back for the route?

[CpnCrunch]

METAR CYXC 082300Z VRB08KT 20SM -TSRA FEW025 BKN065CB BKN100
OVC180 14/12 A2969 RMK CF1CB4AC2AC1 LTGCG HVYR
SH S+NW CB MVNG NE SLP053 DENSITY ALT 4000FT=

METAR CYXC 082200Z 25011G29KT 15SM -TSRA BKN065CB OVC100
18/12 A2968 RMK CB5AC3 LTGCG S HVYR SH S-W MVNG
E VIS 8 PRESRR SLP043 DENSITY ALT 4400FT=

SPECI CYXC 082143Z 28013G21KT 210V310 20SM -TSRA BKN065CB
OVC095 21/13 A2966 RMK CB5AC3 WSHFT 2119 HVYR
SH SW-NW VIS 10 PRESRR SLP033 DENSITY ALT 4800FT=

SPECI CYXC 082126Z 28010KT 240V320 20SM -SHRA SCT065CB BKN090
OVC180 22/13 A2962 RMK CB4AC3AC1 HVYR SH S-SW
SLP018 DENSITY ALT 5000FT=

GFA:

http://gfaarchive.info/gfaDisplay.php?r ... Offset=000

[cncpc]

METAR CYXC 082300Z VRB08KT 20SM -TSRA FEW025 BKN065CB BKN100
OVC180 14/12 A2969 RMK CF1CB4AC2AC1 LTGCG HVYR
SH S+NW CB MVNG NE SLP053 DENSITY ALT 4000FT=

METAR CYXC 082200Z 25011G29KT 15SM -TSRA BKN065CB OVC100
18/12 A2968 RMK CB5AC3 LTGCG S HVYR SH S-W MVNG
E VIS 8 PRESRR SLP043 DENSITY ALT 4400FT=

SPECI CYXC 082143Z 28013G21KT 210V310 20SM -TSRA BKN065CB
OVC095 21/13 A2966 RMK CB5AC3 WSHFT 2119 HVYR
SH SW-NW VIS 10 PRESRR SLP033 DENSITY ALT 4800FT=

SPECI CYXC 082126Z 28010KT 240V320 20SM -SHRA SCT065CB BKN090
OVC180 22/13 A2962 RMK CB4AC3AC1 HVYR SH S-SW
SLP018 DENSITY ALT 5000FT=

Thanks.

CBs, 6500 ceiling, surface winds gusting to 29? Unless there's been some radio contact farther along, I'd say St. Mary's Pass is the primary search area.

Can you get the 6000 and 9000 winds aloft, Cpn?

[CpnCrunch]

Can you get the 6000 and 9000 winds aloft, Cpn?

Sorry, no idea where there would be an archive of those.

[patter]

http://gfaarchive.info/gfaArchive.php?region=gfacn31

[rookiepilot]

Regardless of other factors, doesn't sound too neighbourly for weather, crossing rocks in that type of aircraft, unless those were really isolated.

[cncpc]

http://gfaarchive.info/gfaArchive.php?region=gfacn31

Very difficult conditions even for an experienced mountain pilot.

What do you think, IFlyforPie?

Patter can you access the winds aloft somewhere?

[ahramin]

http://gfaarchive.info/gfaArchive.php?region=gfacn31

Very difficult conditions even for an experienced mountain pilot.

What do you think, IFlyforPie?

Patter can you access the winds aloft somewhere?

That's a forecast, not actual weather.

[cncpc]

http://gfaarchive.info/gfaArchive.php?region=gfacn31

Very difficult conditions even for an experienced mountain pilot.

What do you think, IFlyforPie?

Patter can you access the winds aloft somewhere?

That's a forecast, not actual weather.

Yes, I know that. That's why it says GFA.

The actual weather at Cranbrook at least, combined with the forecast, would say that this pilot was going to face some challenges before he made it to Kootenay Lake. I think one hourly called it 5/8 CBs in the area. The line of flight would have to have penetrated a cold front, if the forecast materialized.

[CpnCrunch]

If the GFA is issued 30 mins before the validity time, surely it's pretty much actual weather is it not?

[photofly]

Unless you think Environment Canada has weather monitors stationed at all altitudes on a 1km grid across the country reporting and recording instant weather conditions everywhere - then no, even the most recent GFA is still only a "present time" forecast from the computer models.

[CpnCrunch]

Unless you think Environment Canada has weather monitors stationed at all altitudes on a 1km grid across the country reporting and recording instant weather conditions everywhere - then no, even the most recent GFA is still only a "present time" forecast from the computer models.

Well, I'm not a met expert, but I don't think you need a 1km grid of weather stations to plot the approximate position of a low pressure system and associated fronts covering a whole province, and the average cloud bases over a wide area. You seem to be implying that the current-time GFA is pulled out of the forecaster's ass, which I don't think is a fair assumption. (The 12 hr, perhaps).

[photofly]

Unless you think Environment Canada has weather monitors stationed at all altitudes on a 1km grid across the country reporting and recording instant weather conditions everywhere - then no, even the most recent GFA is still only a "present time" forecast from the computer models.

Well, I'm not a met expert, but I don't think you need a 1km grid of weather stations to plot the approximate position of a low pressure system and associated fronts covering a whole province, and the average cloud bases over a wide area. You seem to be implying that the current-time GFA is pulled out of the forecaster's ass, which I don't think is a fair assumption. (The 12 hr, perhaps).

There's a lot more information that that on a GFA. It's pulled out of the computer model results, just like the 6 and 12 hour panels. The computer models are updated to include local observations, but observations are tiny point samples of a small subset of model data.

Given the variability of weather in both time and space I don't think you should consider the zero time GFA as "actual weather" either at any particular time or in any particular place. It's simply the best available forecast.

[praveen4143]

Given the variability of weather in both time and space I don't think you should consider the zero time GFA as "actual weather" either at any particular time or in any particular place. It's simply the best available forecast.

From my interactions with specialists at the local FIC here, I believe the GFA even for the so-called zero hour is made roughly an hour before it's published, so it is truly a forecast. Even the issue time is usually about 20-30 minutes before it's validity period.

[JayVee]

Where's Kasper? He aced his MET.

[CpnCrunch]

Well in terms of accuracy of GFAs, it's usually just the location of precipitation from a front that they can't accurately model, especially if it's near the coastline. In this particular case it was showing a very large weather system, with widespread precipitation and instability, and the forecast didn't really change too much between the -12hr and 0hr forecasts for that particular time (apart from the warm front moved further south, nearer the pilot's route).

I just realised that it was 2100, not 2200 when they were in Cranbrook (forgot it's mountain time in some places in BC), so the weather was fine at that time but deteriorated just after:

Code: Select all

SPECI CYXC 082143Z 28013G21KT 210V310 20SM -TSRA BKN065CB
           OVC095 21/13 A2966 RMK CB5AC3 WSHFT 2119 HVYR
           SH SW-NW VIS 10 PRESRR SLP033 DENSITY ALT 4800FT=
SPECI CYXC 082126Z 28010KT 240V320 20SM -SHRA SCT065CB BKN090
           OVC180 22/13 A2962 RMK CB4AC3AC1 HVYR SH S-SW
           SLP018 DENSITY ALT 5000FT=	
METAR CYXC 082100Z VRB02KT 25SM SCT065CB BKN100 OVC150 23/13
           A2963 RMK CB3AC4AC1 SH DIST S-SW SLP018 DENSITY
           ALT 5100FT=

[Diadem]

I flew through the Purcells in June a few summers ago, a little to the north of Cranbrook. The Columbia/Kootenay valley was SKC, but there were isolated CBs over the mountains at 12000. I thought it would be no problem to weave my way through them, but the combination of peaks and clouds made it impossible, so I ended up returning to the valley to follow the highway. Those mountains are high enough that a 10000' ceiling would make them impassable, let alone CBs at 6500'.

[cncpc]

Well in terms of accuracy of GFAs, it's usually just the location of precipitation from a front that they can't accurately model, especially if it's near the coastline. In this particular case it was showing a very large weather system, with widespread precipitation and instability, and the forecast didn't really change too much between the -12hr and 0hr forecasts for that particular time (apart from the warm front moved further south, nearer the pilot's route).

I just realised that it was 2100, not 2200 when they were in Cranbrook (forgot it's mountain time in some places in BC), so the weather was fine at that time but deteriorated just after:

Code: Select all

SPECI CYXC 082143Z 28013G21KT 210V310 20SM -TSRA BKN065CB
           OVC095 21/13 A2966 RMK CB5AC3 WSHFT 2119 HVYR
           SH SW-NW VIS 10 PRESRR SLP033 DENSITY ALT 4800FT=
SPECI CYXC 082126Z 28010KT 240V320 20SM -SHRA SCT065CB BKN090
           OVC180 22/13 A2962 RMK CB4AC3AC1 HVYR SH S-SW
           SLP018 DENSITY ALT 5000FT=	
METAR CYXC 082100Z VRB02KT 25SM SCT065CB BKN100 OVC150 23/13
           A2963 RMK CB3AC4AC1 SH DIST S-SW SLP018 DENSITY
           ALT 5100FT=

This aircraft was travelling into where it was deteriorating. Yes, it was great at takeoff, but a different story for the rest of the trip, starting with getting over Gray's Pass.