Why would a scheduled air service be flying VFR in this weather?

[dogfood]

As if this guy went to the CP.

He kinda sounds like an instructor I'd put money on that

[dpm]

OK with freight; not OK (morally, at least) with non-pilot pax. They're not capable of understanding the significantly-elevated risk of a flight like this vs other kinds of scheduled operations, even if it will usually turn out OK. A non-crew pilot passenger can evaluate for herself, and give informed consent to going along.

Makes no difference to me what is behind the cockpit.

The most valuable thing on board, is me.

Fly the same way, to the same limits, everytime.

That's what I mean by informed consent. You understand the risks (even if this were actually legal .. running) well enough to decide not to do it. Another pilot might make a different decision.

But non-pilot pax can't make the decision, because they can't evaluate the risks. They just assume a certain level of safety/risk from scheduled air service (probably making allowances for "little planes"), then it's the PIC's responsibility to meet that threshold or cancel the flight.

[shimmydampner]

Let me ensure that I am understanding this correctly. The departure aerodrome weather was 4sm visibility and 1500’ ceiling. The destination weather was 5400’ ceiling (visibility unspecified.) The en route time was 11 minutes. Based on the information provided, this is a no-brainer to go VFR. I’m at greater risk of having a stroke due to the ridiculousness of this being questioned than there was to the crew and passengers involved in the actual flight.

[CpnCrunch]

Let me ensure that I am understanding this correctly. The departure aerodrome weather was 4sm visibility and 1500’ ceiling. The destination weather was 5400’ ceiling (visibility unspecified.) The en route time was 11 minutes. Based on the information provided, this is a no-brainer to go VFR. I’m at greater risk of having a stroke due to the ridiculousness of this being questioned than there was to the crew and passengers involved in the actual flight.

No, it was scattered to overcast at 700ft and the plane was in and out of cloud below the tops of hills obscured by cloud.

Anyway, I guess the response here is somewhat predictable.

[AuxBatOn]

CpnCrunch,

From your prespective (ground) he was in and out of clouds. From the ground, it may seem like an airplane is in and out of clouds when in fact, it is above and your sight of the aircraft is obscured by small, non-dense clouds below the aircraft's altitude.

I would really just let it go...

[CpnCrunch]

From your prespective (ground) he was in and out of clouds. From the ground, it may seem like an airplane is in and out of clouds when in fact, it is above and your sight of the aircraft is obscured by small, non-dense clouds below the aircraft's altitude.

I was at similar elevation (a few hundred feet lower) half a mile away. It's possible they were in a narrow corridor between the clouds, but it didn't look like that was the case.

I would really just let it go...

I already did...see my comments above. It's done and finished. I didn't realise so many people would get butthurt about it.

[C.W.E.]

This is one of the most weird threads ever posted on Avcanada.

[CpnCrunch]

This is one of the most weird threads ever posted on Avcanada.

Thanks. Probably my fault for ranting about a WTF moment this morning, without giving all the pertinent information at the start.

[C.W.E.]

Don't sweat it, it gives everyone the chance to participate.

[dlongo]

Which airline was this? FLY GTA?

[CpnCrunch]

Which airline was this? FLY GTA?

No. I will just say that the owner has an interesting history and the CP has a very good reputation.

Probably a good idea to look up the owner's name on TATC before applying for a job.

[fish4life]

He should have leveled off at 300’ instead I guess to stay legal... CPN I’ve flown into places where the weather was too low to conduct an IFR approach so we’d have to go VFR all the way or IFR to somewhere close that could get lower eg 300’ and then .. it over VFR. You do realize VFR mins with the ops spec is 1sm and 300’ right?

[TeePeeCreeper]

Even with that its still vfr I fly 300-1 all the time it ain't that bad

Ah I don’t miss “those days” slugging it out on the 3-1 op spec.

Might be “legal” but do you really feel safe doing so?

All the best,
TPC

(Dosent miss having his nose pressed to the front wind screen, while murking about in the mist doing point to point Nav)

[Heliian]

[/quote]

^That
[/quote]

What do you even mean by this? Are you admonishing or praising his statement?

I know you're more eloquent than that.

[Maynard]

What got everyone so wound up, is your judgement on another’s decisions, from the ground. You weren’t in the plane, in the room checking weather and loads, you didn’t even know how far the flight was. I haven’t met many pilots yet who don’t have some sort of pride in the job they do, safety being part of that. So to have someone staring from the ground, start yabbering about “what the hell are these guys doing? I have to talk to the CP”, of course it’s going to piss people off. It’s as bad as a passenger calling the flight attendant because there’s a hydraulic leak (oops it’s type 1 fluid). CpnCrunch, do you fly? If so, who for? Seems you don’t have much experience flying nort of TO.....

[SuperchargedRS]

^That

What do you even mean by this? Are you admonishing or praising his statement?

I know you're more eloquent than that.

I mean I agree with his statement, flying cargo, people, puppies, nuns, axe killers, doesn't make a bit of difference, the flight is safe and prudent or it's not, what's in the cabin does not change a damn thing.

[CpnCrunch]

CpnCrunch, do you fly? If so, who for? Seems you don’t have much experience flying nort of TO.....

I fly from this airport all the time. VFR, IFR, floats, wheels, and I have a pretty good idea of what safe and legal looks like for all of those.

Regarding 300-1 (from previous posts): 300-1 isn't exactly my idea of safe for a scheduled air service between airports equipped with instrument approaches.

[Redneck_pilot86]

Even with that its still vfr I fly 300-1 all the time it ain't that bad

By definition it's not VFR if you're actually in the clouds.

I notice there was a SPECI just after takeoff. Here is the wx:

SPECI .... 071545Z VRB02KT 1 1/2SM BR VCFG OVC007 06/06 A3032
RMK SF8 CIG RAG SLP269=
METAR .... 071500Z 00000KT 4SM BR VCFG SCT008 BKN015 OVC050
06/06 A3032 RMK SF3SC2SC3 SLP269=

Takeoff was at 1533, and conditions were similar to the SPECI. Looks like they had a look at the METAR, thought it looked ok, and didn't realise conditions had deteriorated.

A SPECI should be triggered if either the vis dropped below 3SM or the ceiling dropped below 1000', right? I can't believe it took more than a few minutes to issue the SPECI after that criteria was met.

This thread says the flight took 11 minutes. You say departure was at 1533, therefore landing was 1544, a minute before the SPECI for deteriorated conditions was issued. Sounds to me like he timed things perfectly.

[CpnCrunch]

A SPECI should be triggered if either the vis dropped below 3SM or the ceiling dropped below 1000', right? I can't believe it took more than a few minutes to issue the SPECI after that criteria was met.

This thread says the flight took 11 minutes. You say departure was at 1533, therefore landing was 1544, a minute before the SPECI for deteriorated conditions was issued. Sounds to me like he timed things perfectly.

SCT means half the sky is covered. In this case it was in the direction of takeoff, and that could be seen from the airport.

[A346Dude]

Regarding 300-1 (from previous posts): 300-1 isn't exactly my idea of safe for a scheduled air service between airports equipped with instrument approaches.

So it's safe if the airports aren't equipped with instrument approaches and going VFR is the only option?

SCT means half the sky is covered. In this case it was in the direction of takeoff, and that could be seen from the airport.

SCT means 3-4 oktas covered. It could be a half at most, or it could be barely over a quarter.