SEIFR Safety

[ESCAT]

It seems there is alot of bad feelings towards flying SE aircraft in IMC, and while I admit to having done it, I only do it under the conditions laid out below. Please take the time to fully read the post before commenting, i'm wondering if I'm missing something.

Take the following scenario for example.
A flight between Point A and Point B
Visability 3sM and Ceilings 1500' AGL.
The choice of whether to file VFR or IFR.

Now, obviosuly there are pro's and con's no matter which way you file. Things to consider (efficency, vs. flying low with obstacles around), but for the purposes of discussing saftey, let's assume that both are practical efficent ways to complete the flight.

VFR
If your VFR you are flying at 500' below cloud, making your indicated altitude 1000' AGL. Assume an engine failure at this point. You have 1000' of Altitude to sucessfully configure the a/c, choose and plan your forced approach, complete your cause check, pax briefing, mayday call, and finally shutdown.

IFR
Now imagine the same scenario, under the same wx conditions only this time you chose to file IFR at 6000'. As above, you initially configure the a/c at best glide, complete cause checks, pax briefing, mayday call, and shutdown. Then at 1500' AGL, when you break out of clouds you can choose a field and land.

Note as well the portion of time spent with the ability to fly in VMC is actually greater whilst flying IFR (VFR, you'll be cruising 500' below the cloud base, as opposed to just busting out of the bottoms), and in the VFR case you'll spend a good portion of the 1000' glide completing checks, but when flying IFR, the checks you've done in cloud, and the 1500' glide portion is spent soley on gliding the a/c.

To summarize my point:
With somewhat marginal conditions of VFR, the single engine aircraft that encounters an engine failure in IFR, is no worse off then the VFR aircraft that is flying in the exact same conditions, a few thousand feet below.

Clearly this would not work if the ceilings were 200' OVC, but in times when you have marginal VFR, IMHO you'd be just as safe (with respect to engine failures) regardless of the type of flight plan you were on. With this in mind, my personal policy is that for SEIFR, VFR ceilings be forecast throughout the entire route of the flight. By all means, fly the aircraft in IMC, but if the worst happens, you'll still be no worse off than if you were VFR below.

My final question:
If a pilot flies a single engine aircraft in IMC, but with VMC prevailing below the cloud bases, would you consider him reckless or insane? Is this the kind of SEIFR people are so against?

I'll open up the floor to discussion. Please people, no pointless bashing.

[cyyz]

If a pilot flies a single engine aircraft in IMC, but with VMC prevailing below the cloud bases, would you consider him reckless or insane? Is this the kind of SEIFR people are so against?.

"Terminal can I get 5000 feet?"

"- No remain 8000"

"Can I get 5000 feet now"

" - No remain 8000"

- Crash

" where did you go?"

[BTD]

Hey ESCAT,

Thats not all bad in the old 242 with the eletically powered AI and HSI, but it may not be as fun when in an aircraft with a vacuum powered AI and HSI now you may be partial panel as well.

Oh well, I'm with you on this one. Giver sh*t

BTD

P.S. How is it back up there. Lovin it?

[captain_v1.0]

I would rather fly a well maintained single in IMC than any twin with gremlins waiting to pop out of the radios and gyros.

Having an extra 1-7 engines might be nice but unless have the experience, mindset or stones to continue flying with one or more engines out in IMC then fly an approach, miss because you F'd-up, and try it again or go to your alternate, those other engines can become a death scentence.

If you lose that egine in a single, you're sCrEwEd regardless, drift down and pick the lesser of all evils to land/crash on once you drop below the deck.

It's a matter of knowing your personal limits and to add a fudge factor when operating a single in IMC so you have some extra time to select a suitable landing site. And if you have the option fly a single with an electric standby AI or second vacuum pump.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Question to a old and bold airline pilot: Why will you only bid 4 engine airplanes(i.e Airbus A 340).

Answer: Because no one is building a 5 engine airliner !

[cyyz]

????

He asked, Why a pilot not go to VMC, ie "out of IMC." and I pointed it out, the pilot doesn't usually have a choice.

[greenwich]

"Terminal can I get 5000 feet?"

"- No remain 8000"

"Can I get 5000 feet now"

" - No remain 8000"

- Crash

" where did you go?"

Sorry dude, me too!

???????????????

[greenwich]

IFR Scenario:
6,000' AGL
Descending @ 500'/minute = 12 minutes to do your thing.
(essentially 10 minutes IFR then 2 minutes VFR)

VFR Scenario:
1,000' AGL
Descending @ 500'/minute = 2 minutes to do your thing.

12 minutes is a long time...2 minutes 'aint very long!

G

[cyyz]

"Terminal can I get 5000 feet?"

"- No remain 8000"

"Can I get 5000 feet now"

" - No remain 8000"

- Crash

" where did you go?"

Sorry dude, me too!

???????????????

My final question:
If a pilot flies a single engine aircraft in IMC, but with VMC prevailing below the cloud bases, would you consider him reckless or insane?

To paraphrase, It's IMC In Cloud, CLEAR BELOW, WHY DOES HE STAY AT FLXXX --- See above for reason, why Pilot stays in Clouds and doesn't go BELOW

[oldtimer]

I did SEIFR for years with a privatley owned Cessna T206 and a 206. One has to be very very careful in winter in regards to iing and I never flew IFR unless I could get on top and stay on top but in the summer, I used CAP limits.
Remember that as far as safety is concerned, most light twins are a single engine airplane with the powerplants split into 2 portions. De-icing equipment excepted.
Properly done, it is statistically as safe if not actually safer than with a light twin (less then 6000 MTOW).
Vacuum pump failure was a concern so I maintained partial panel proficiency.
I had an attitude indicator failure single pilot in a Cheyenne and rather that look crosspanel at the co-pilots AI, I felt more at home partial panel, all because of the previous experience.
Did an ILS to 300 ft (simulated with a safety pilot) at night partial panel. Hard work but it can be done. Practice practice practice.

[Airtids]

In our part of the world, SEIFR Safety is an oxymoron. Jumbo Shrimp for any of the folks practicing Military Intelligence, anyone?

[marktheone]

Myself I'd rather do it VFR (haven't flown VFR in a long time though) because I would just make sure that I stayed visual. I'd rather do that in a single engine engine than pop out on an airway with an MEA of 5000' and no engine. You're just begging to drive it into a mountain. Single engine piston I'm always VFR even if I've filed IFR to stay legal. True IMC in a piston with Vacuum inst. makes me nervous. I've seen pumps quit more than once.

[xsbank]

I guess all you guys are flatlanders?

[ZBB118.10]

SE IFR...what about other types of emergency?

I.e. electrical failure in IMC? One engine often means one set of systems = one alternator. How to navigate all of a sudden..?

You would have to be deranged to fly SEIFR at night, and come to think of it, SE VFR is almost as sketchy in some respects...

[rd1331]

Caravan's have a Generator and an Alternator. Dual system, one fails use the other. Power lever fails, have a standby, etc etc etc. Lots of dual systems have been put into place on SEIFR aircraft.

I'd rather be at 8000' IMC have a failure, be able to try and relight, get radio calls out, get myself and my passengers ready. Than be at 500', saying wholy shit watch this!

Just because your at say even 1000' flying VMC doesn't mean you have time to get the aircraft/passengers ready for what is about to happen. Same senario but start at 8000' IMC you are still gonna get to 1000' and go VMC but now you've had time to get everyone ready, get calls out, etc.

Now SEIFR in the mountains, i think is just crazy, but thats my personal thought.

Just my 2 cents.

[VSF]

ESCAT i agree with you completely.. but i want to add that for me, whether i go SEIFR depends on the terrain underneath me, and what aircraft i'm in. like rd1331 said, my caravan has all sorts of backups. this makes me feel a little more comfortable when i'm in IMC on an airway with an MEA of 15000.. like has happened already. but i would certainly not do it in a little '72.

good post buddy. made me think a little bit!

k

[just clearing the trees]

Just because your at say even 1000' flying VMC doesn't mean you have time to get the aircraft/passengers ready for what is about to happen. Same senario but start at 8000' IMC you are still gonna get to 1000' and go VMC but now you've had time to get everyone ready, get calls out, etc.

True, and that stuff is nice to do, especially getting a mayday call out from a higher altitude, but unfortunately it doesn't leave you any more time to take care of the hardest and most critical part, getting on the ground as safely as possible. When you're IMC you have no real situational awareness with respect to the terrain underneath you. As someone already pointed out, when you're underneath, you have a constant picture of the terrain and possible landing areas right in front of you, which in reality would probably leave you more time to take care of the important part since you should always be looking for and already have picked out a "go to" spot. But hey, I'm used to buzzing around alot lower in ceilings alot lower than 1500, so what do I know.

Pax briefings are all well and good, but they won't save your life. Let's not forget that flying the thing is job #1.
My 2 cents.