Mountain Flying, and Flight Training

[sky's the limit]

It seems we need a thread on this particular subject, and it is a subject very close to my heart and where the vast majority of my experience lies in both FW and helicopters. So, if we can manage to keep this civil, let's have a sorely needed discussion on mtn ops and the transfer of knowledge.

stl

[Big Pistons Forever]

Sadly 2 people just died in a mountain flying training flight that went badly wrong.

After all the obligatory posts about what a great guy the instructor was the fact remains that there was mangled wreckage with dead people at the bottom of a narrow rising valley and as uncomfortable and cruel it is to say it is important to point out that the instructor is responsible for the welfare of his/her student and in this case god did not smite them out of the sky, the Instructors decisions as to routing and altitudes must ultimately have contributed to the accident.

Us instructors and CFI can bury our head in the sand and ignore the distinct probability that the ultimately the instructor killed his student, or we can recognize this as a the wake up call that it is and ask some hard questions like

- What should be the training outcomes of a "mountain flying course"

- What is the best way to teach them, and

- What competencies should be required of instructors who are doing the in air portion of the course

[sky's the limit]

I guess I will start, unless someone beats me to it.

Flying and working in the mountains in any aircraft is inherently more complex than operating said aircraft in the flatlands. It's a three dimensional problem with a great many variables that must be worked out, and depending on your level of exposure (IFR being the least, moving on down through VFR airport to airport ops, float ops, off-strip work, and finally the various helicopter applications), you will need a corresponding level of knowledge to safely complete your tasking.

Let me state right off the top that the fixed wing industry is generally extremely lacking in effective mountain training, and the number of pilots who are working intimately within the mountain environment on a daily basis is very, very, small - therefore the general level of understanding of this environment is low as is the transfer of that knowledge to new students. There are a few exceptions of course, but the operative word is "few," with most learning taking place on the job. Even in the helicopter world where we are much more closely involved with the environment there is a large difference between pilots operating in applications down low and those engaged in altitude work in the high mountains and ice fields. * Disclaimer complete.

The Basics:

Wind - it is the single biggest factor in the mountains, and one of the most complex to understand. There are a number of types of wind ranging from Prevailing, to Valley Winds, Boundary Layer Winds, Katabatic and Adabatic Winds, to localized phenomenon caused by CB's and the like. They all play a huge factor in how a given flight is to be carried out, and depending on your level of intimacy with the physical environment, you absolutely must understand them and more importantly, how to find them.

Altitude - plays a large role as related to aircraft performance. As you go up, your relative performance capabilities come down. This is simple enough to understand, and pretty much any aircraft I have ever flown addresses this with performance charts yet, it is remarkable how often this factor is not understood or allowed for when planning loads.

Terrain - can vary from the spectacularly glaciated rugged peaks, cirques, and high altitude ranges, to the more mundane rolling hills of the Okanogan or the Alberta Foothills. I would submit more pilots have come to grief in the latter than the former. At risk of stating the obvious, terrain is what exaggerates the effects of the wind and altitude. Landing on a high lake tucked in a tight valley, or on a glacier, or a poorly constructed "strip" put in by some miner or outfitter comes with some hazard. Terrain comes in all forms, but there are some predictable types of terrain that we operate in which will give the pilot clues as to what he/she should be looking for in terms of the wind. In the helicopter world this is taken to a degree far in excess of what FW pilots deal with, yet many thousands of hour are flown annually in these places in abject safety... how is it done?



Training - as mentioned off the top, it is a sorely lacking sector of aviation, particularly in the fixed wing side of the industry. It is very difficult to fly enough hours in these places to build a base of knowledge, and once a pilot may have attained a reasonable level of proficiency, he or she is extremely unlikely to go back into instructing (in fixed wing). Fortunately things are much better in the helicopter side of the shop with high time pilots being paid very well to instruct and conduct annual re-currency and proper mountain courses which at 20hrs min, are just a starting point to the new mountain pilot's learning.

I'll leave it here for now, but I do feel this is an enormous issue that our industry faces, and every year we see a number of completely preventable accidents occurring. Transport, as with most things, is totally absent on this issue, and outside a few of the hardcore off-strip outfits the average fixed-wing pilot has little chance to be exposed to proper teaching from experienced pilots.

Working a flying machine in the mountains to me is the most enjoyable aspect of aviation, but it must be respected, and one cannot assume a half baked "mountain checkout" is going to cut the mustard. It can be hugely rewarding, but it take time and motivation to learn how to solve the puzzle.
stl

[iflyforpie]

There's no real way to gain experience in the mountains without exposure, and for a flight instructor in the Lower Mainland or Calgary (two large flight training areas around or close to mountains) the only time they are going into the mountains is for a mountain checkout. 150 NM PPL cross countries often stick to the Fraser Valley or the Flatlands, and 300 NM CPL cross countries are done solo. The Fraser Valley might as well be flatlands right to its edges excepting Sumas and Chilliwack mountains, two monoliths that are easily bypassed.

I have not many more hours than the instructor who recently perished, but more than 50% of my time is hard mountain time less than 1000 ft from terrain--all of it hands on. I've learned lots of things over the years, most of which weren't in books.

The biggest one is energy awareness, which is primarily a seat of the pants and feel thing, but can be somewhat quantified by maintaining a constant airspeed and observing the VSI. I will treat the aircraft quite differently with an energy surplus. If I am in lift I will use it to my advantage (often necessary flying underpowered aircraft). If I am in an energy deficit, I am looking for ways to get that back and in the mean time I am heading towards lower terrain.

Always have lower terrain to escape to.

But for me to convey this knowledge is very difficult. We aren't an FTU, and though we rent our aircraft out and do 'mountain checks' it is only to a select few as we don't make money off rental and instruction and aren't really set up for formal 'mountain training'.

What I do is break down mountain flying into three subjects: 1) Over the top. 2) Ridge flying. 3) Valley flying. and then explain the methods, risks, and considerations of each.

Always have lower terrain to escape to.

Then I go into what kills people into the mountains. The biggest one that can happen on the most severe clear of days is overestimating climb performance while underestimating turning performance. The scenario often starts with a shallowly climbing valley following a direct route, the plane sinks lower but the pilot thinks he will still make it. By the time he realizes he can't make it, there either is no room to turn around or he thinks there is no room to turn around when there really is (scrape that wingtip then giver hell in the opposite direction). But he plunges ahead anyways because he is committed. Sometimes you can make it, sometimes you don't.

Always have lower terrain to escape to.

Next is winds and turbulence. I remember telling somebody that I flew a C150 in the mountains and they thought I was nuts. But unless you have the excess thrust of an F-18, you will not out climb downdrafts or rising terrain. Know where the wind is coming from (cloud shadows, the direction the Cus are building, drift) and imagine if it were water how it would tumble over the mountain. Try to avoid those 'tumbly' areas and if you have no choice but to proceed through....

Always have lower terrain to escape to.

Next is bad weather. Low ceilings, precipitation, etc. I always plan for weather to get worse and I have my escape route planned for each new area I go into. I don't let by back door close until I have a place to go. The mountains often divide areas with significantly different weather, so make sure you can make it through before committing. You know what I am going to say next?

Never go into any place you can't turn around and get out of.

But also...

Always have lower terrain to escape to.

Here is a trip I did this spring I did a time lapse of that illustrates these two basic principles. When I was 'on top', I had the wide open Columbia Valley behind me to go back to. When I realized the next valley had no holes I went back. The 'sucker hole' I went through I first flew parallel to to observe the very familiar valley beyond to make sure there was good visibility and no low clouds.

[Cat Driver]

This is a very important subject and probably one of the least understood area of flying in aviation.

So far the comments are very valid, hopefully this thread will stay on topic.

Unfortunately few instructors have the background to teach this subject, I personally do not believe there is ever going to be an answer to this problem.....because the industry is completely focused on who can do it the cheapest.

[iflyforpie]

Oh, forgot to add. Upper wind charts. If I had to make a choice between having the upper winds and an area forecast, I'd choose upper winds. First thing I look at, first thing I look for. More often than not, it is the winds that scrub a flight for me.

[Grantmac]

I don't have a lot of experience, but I was fortunate enough to make a 1300nm cross country from Arizona to Washington last summer. Most of which was mountain flying with a few high plains thrown it. My "co-pilot" was an experienced pilot with time in those same mountains.
We were near gross, it was hot and the plane was running a cruise prop. Perfect for learning about energy conservation. Oddly enough learning to soar was the closest thing I'd experienced to it before.
Fast and easy:
If you have to climb over something, start climbing now. It doesn't matter how far away it is, if its on your current leg and you've got the ceiling then get up there!
Unless you can't, stay on the windward side of any ridge.
Approach ridges at 45 degrees: if you have to turn away it takes a lot less time.
If there is no or little wind stay on the sunny side of ridges, you will generally find a small thermal or some anabatic wind.
Slow down and climb in lift, speed up and cruise in sink.
If the valley you are in is starting to narrow and you aren't completely certain that it continues through then circle to altitude where you have room. It takes time but its faster then crashing.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. It was only 10 hrs of instruction, but I guess that is still 2x as long as your normal FTU mountain course.

-Grant

P.S. I'm going back to Idaho for labour day so I need to get these things in my head; good time for the topic.

[patter]

And sadly, the man who wrote our mountain flying Bible, died in a crash in the mountains.
Not to long ago.

[old_man]

I was lucky enough to take a 25hr mountain flying course taught by some very experienced individuals. What an eye opener. It by no means made me an expert or taught me everything I needed to know but it did show me some basics and when to turn around and go home. If any one has the chance to take the course I strongly recommend it.

[CpnCrunch]

In my opinion, mountain training is fundamentally flawed, as simply encourages people with insufficient experience to get into dangerous situations.

99% of the time (at least for recreational flyers) there is simply no need to squeak over ridges, do right canyon turns or fly less than 1000 feet above a valley. Unless you know what you are doing, you are simply risking your life (and even if you DO know what you are doing, it seems as if you're even MORE likely to kill yourself - see Steve Fossett, Sparky Imeson and others).

The main problems seem to arise when people just get too close to the rocks. As long as you give them sufficient clearance and don't fly in crappy weather (high upper winds or low visibility), mountain flying can be very safe.

From Steven Coonts: "Never, ever climb into a canyon toward a pass: Get your altitude before you enter. This rule is written in blood."

The problem seems to be that people just get too cocky.

[AJV]

In my opinion, mountain training is fundamentally flawed, as simply encourages people with insufficient experience to get into dangerous situations.

99% of the time (at least for recreational flyers) there is simply no need to squeak over ridges, do right canyon turns or fly less than 1000 feet above a valley. Unless you know what you are doing, you are simply risking your life (and even if you DO know what you are doing, it seems as if you're even MORE likely to kill yourself - see Steve Fossett, Sparky Imeson and others).

The main problems seem to arise when people just get too close to the rocks. As long as you give them sufficient clearance and don't fly in crappy weather (high upper winds or low visibility), mountain flying can be very safe.

From Steven Coonts: "Never, ever climb into a canyon toward a pass: Get your altitude before you enter. This rule is written in blood."

The problem seems to be that people just get too cocky.

+1!!

I agree totally, we offer a 15hour bush and mountain course, it mearly gives you the basics and there is no good reason to fly low, you give yourself no outs, I don't care how good you think you are. Even at 1000' AGL you have tops a minute and a a half to find a spot to crash and I say crash because unless you are lined up or right at a good spot you are crashing. Cocky?? oh yes, very easy to become overconfident in your abilities and put yourself into a bad spot. Ask yourself this Mr. Cocky, at 500, 750 or even 1000 hours do you think your flying is that much better than the day you took your CPL flight test? or is it that you just feel more comfortable and it makes you think you are better.......

[cessna]

A distant friend and his wife were tragically both killed a few weeks ago, when the Piper Twin Commanche he owned and was flying accidentally flew into Mount Agel not far from Monaco, they think due to low cloud.Jim was a very experienced u.k I.F.R rated pilot and not one to take risks. It really made me realise how thinks can go tragically wrong in a few seconds for any of us.
The mountains we have in Wales ,Scotland and Ireland are not that high compared to what you have in North America,but they still cause a few tragic fatal accidents per year, due to fog or cloud, seemingly appearing suddenly obscuring visibility with tragic consequences.

[robertsailor1]

Interesting subject for sure. There is no way to spend a couple of hours with a student and give him a "mountain check" when most of the instructors themselves have very little practical experience. I remember years ago when the Edmonton Flying Club decided to give mountain check rides, they loaded up a Piper Arrow with 4 pilots and crashed into a mountain lake on a day with marginal VFR weather killing all aboard. When you check the number of hours the instructor had flying mountains it was very little. The typical mountain check ride sold by the local clubs could be best described as better than nothing. Often young instructors who have spent most of their time doing circuits becoming experts in a type of flying that has a reputation of being some of the toughest flying there is on the bad days. My advise to pilots is to be really picky about weather as this is often the culprit in most accidents and in the mountains weather can change around the next corner. Years ago I did quite a bit of mountain training and in the end all you can do is impart some very basic knowledge and hope the pilot uses lots of common sense. Its something that often can only be learned by doing after you have some basic training and unfortunately the pilots that have the mountain flying time and experience are seldom doing the teaching.

[Posthumane]

I'm glad that this topic was started, as I recently had my first venture into the rocks from the prairies. I tried a couple of times to do a "mountain checkout" and got weathered out. Finally I managed to do a short flight with a very experienced instructor out of springbank (CFI of fly right). The plan was to go Golden, maybe Invermere, and back to springbank but we had to turn around and head back around Lake Louise.

I have to say that, while it was a good learning experience in the short time we had, I would consider it as more of an intro flight rather than a full checkout and definitely feel like I need to spend more time out there with an instructor. Both the briefing and the flying were not as comprehensive as I would have liked. I had hoped to be able to do a flight out to Kelowna last weekend, but opted out of it due to high upper winds forecast, as well as my inexperience. In hind sight I'm glad that I didn't go, even though I'd love to fly down there one of these days.

Iflyforpie - thanks for the informative post. I've been reading what I can about mountain flying and it all seems to say very similar things, but it's good to have it repeated. You said your outfit does some sporadic training - I assume in Invermere?

[Cat Driver]

and unfortunately the pilots that have the mountain flying time and experience are seldom doing the teaching.

True and those of us who have retired from aviation are reluctant to get involved in such training for many reasons.

One of the most frustrating for me is observing the low level of understanding of even the basics in flying so prevalent in the PPL' s we sometimes get to fly with and talk to. Seems that a lot of PPL's just can not grasp the fact that some flight instructors have very limited knowledge and experience and would rather believe their instructors than us because we do not hold a valid instructors rating.

STL stated that winds are one of the most important factors in deciding when and where you fly in the mountains...........

............so here is a question.........you are flying one thousand feet above the mountain ridges and you suddenly get in a four thousand feet a minute down current of air, how long will it be before you may be dead?

[old_man]

............so here is a question.........you are flying one thousand feet above the mountain ridges and you suddenly get in a four thousand feet a minute down current of air, how long will it be before you may be dead?

Hopefully never. Hopefully you were paying attention to the winds the entire time and where they coming from. Hopefully you realize where the downflow air is coming and you quickly go back to where there was good air or even upflow air.

That's.....hopefully

And now I am going to stop being a smart ass.

[Cat Driver]

Hopefully never. Hopefully you were paying attention to the winds the entire time and where they coming from.

In a perfect world one would never get caught in a sudden change of air currents in the mountains.

But the reality is it can and does happen, even when you are fairly certain the conditions did not exist before you started your trip.

After thirty years of ferrying aircraft all over the world I never lose sight of the fact that things can and do change rapidly....especially when you are flying in an area of the world where in depth weather briefings and access to weather reports are hard to get.

Just last week I was checking the weather and saw a change in the radar picture near Revelstoke....so I went to the METAR's and checked the temperature spread and my inner instincts kicked in so I waited about a half hour and checked the radar pictures again and then I was sure there was something real serious going on so I called the weather briefer and asked him if he had noticed what I was seeing.

To make a long story short he agreed with me that it was a real change that had all the signs of a serious weather build up.

I cancelled my plan to fly at 10:30 A.M.

At 13:30 the system hit Calgary and was so intense it toppled trees on parked cars....so my instincts were correct.

Once again my decision not to fly did not kill us.

[Old Dog Flying]

As a "Flat Lander" in 1959, my first experience in flying the Rocks was out of Comox in a 65 hp Champ..and it was interesting to say the least. Very little briefing, kick the tires, light the fires and let's go to Tofino for the Crab Feed Fly-In. We got there and back some how and I wanted to learn a lot more about the art of mountain flying before I tried that again.

A ton of reading, hours of discussion with guys smarter than me and plenty of practice but with an under-powered Champ I set my limits very high. Fast forward 1980 and instructing in the Lower Mainland. i finally brushed up on my previous Low level of skkills and started doing some mountain training with , again guys with more knowledge of mountain flying. Over the next 25 years I did a number of mountain check-outs with newly licinced pilots and a few grizzly old farts as well.

The weather, winds aloft and temperature all played a part in the flight no matter what type of aircraft we were operating. Hours of class-room briefing preceeded each flight with emphasis on safety, always wanting to be able to fly another day...and always leaving a way out.

Sadly one of my trainees pushed the weather and his luck on day late in October with a flight from Penticton to Boundary..under a low ceiling and approaching dark. He planted the aircraft into the rocks west of Manning Park...ignoring all of the advice that I had given him. This happened after 35+ trips over the same route over a 4 month period.

I haven't done a mountain check-out since.

[robertsailor1]

I had exactly the same experience and I sat for hours hanging out that plexiglass bubble looking for him as the military flew contour lines. Years later some hunters found the engine on one side of the ridge and they sent some folks in and found him and the plane on the other side. He missed clearing the ridge by just a few feet.

[LousyFisherman]

Low time amateur here, 170 hours, 55 of which are in the mountains (in a C150). I have lived in the mountains since I was eight years old, so I do have a good understanding of the weather.

As other people have mentioned PDM is critical in the mountains, do not push it, ever. Stay high, always have an out, keep watch on the weather.

Some things I do to make it enjoyable, these may not apply to flying as a business:
Before you go:
- practice steep turns until you can do them without thinking
- buy 1:250,000 topo maps, they show much more detail than VNC's
- don't worry about "canyon turns", if you need to do one your PDM was wrong
- Read Sparky Imeson's book until you recognize the 2 glaring mistakes (for amateurs at least)
- Take every opportunity you can to fly with others who have big rock experience.

On the trip
- for your first trip make it a short one with a single ridge crossing, you will be exhausted at the end
- if you cannot see the tips of the mountains do not go, if the cloud drops you are in trouble
- if the valley beside you is full of cloud, get out! It can move into your valley in 15 minutes. or not
- if the upper winds are over 20 consider not going, if over 30 do not go
- take a flight in a low, wide valley when upper winds are over 20 for the experience
- before entering the mountains, fly both sides of ridges or foothills to detect up and down drafts

In another thread ifp mentioned never climbing at less than Vr due to being behind the power curve. My question is that implies climbing at Vx is behind the power curve. Is that true?

For Cat's question
<flippant>
A 4000 foot/minute downdraft will have a huge cushion of air above the trees so you will never hit the ground
</flippant>

My worst was the opposite, a 1500 foot/minute updraft, struggling to stay under 11,000 feet, nose down 30 degrees, over maneuvering speed, approaching max speed.

And on the same Sunday Cat aborted, I also aborted, but I thought it was a fairly obvious decision based on the GFA. It was an ugly front

And I won't discuss my mountain checkout done to rent a 4 seater. Lets just say I would not let the person in question fly my C150 in the mountains, they would scare themselves at the very least.

YMMV
LF

[FlightSolutions]

Never go down a valley that requires more that 30 degrees of bank to turn around in. Unless you work in the mountains, there is no need to go into tight valley's or use steep turns. Avoid going past the point where you can't dive while turning around, AKA the point of no return.

There is no need to practice the Valley/Canyon Turn in an actual scenario, IMHO. Practice in a wide safe vally that has a road or a river/creek to use as reference for your turn radius. Practice this in different configurations taking note of your turn radius each time. With some experience using this exercise as reference, you can eyeball what configuration you will need that will give you the appropriate turn radius for the valley with a 30 degree bank turn before you enter. If you require more than 30 degrees to turn around you probably should not be in there. The other option is to gain more altitude to give you more room to turn.

[Shiny Side Up]

The thing I dislike the most about mountain flying or training or whatever you want to call it is many figure a bit of experience is suddenly carte blanche to do whatever they please in the Rocks. I dislike the idea of a mountain "check out" as realistically there's a lot of experience to be gained more than any "course" can provide. People go there often hideously unprepared - its not someplace to venture on a whim, whether that be in an airplane or not.

Incidentally, one should mention that as soon as one has a PPL or an RPP, you're free to head straight for those hills - and people often do. No one seems to care that those rocks kill at least one pilot per year - or more - and have been for as long as I've been flying airplanes, as short as that may seem to some people. I know of at least half a dozen times when I was supposed to make a trip through there and chose not to for whatever reason, but someone else did chose to go and they're dead now.

But the reality is it can and does happen, even when you are fairly certain the conditions did not exist before you started your trip.

Very true, and I can attest to that. The main problem here being I feel where when stuff does change, people press on in spite of their own misgivings. I got no qualms about turning back, and I'm here today because I did a few times. One of the things I dislike about some mountain "checkouts" I've seen is an excessive emphassis placed upon the "mountain turn" and about a dozen different ways to do it, but not as much about how not to put yourself in that place where you need it. If you get in a place where you determine you need that manuever, you made about ten wrong steps up to that point. Take DeNiro's advice in Ronin, never enter a place you don't already know how you're going to exit from. Demonstrations of skill can almost never make up for poor planning. Iflyforpie makes some very good points about knowing where your out is. It can't be overstated. The thing I guess I really dislike about the empassis on the turn manouver is that it gives some the false sense of security in feeling that if they make an oops they have a ticket out.

A 4000 foot/minute downdraft will have a huge cushion of air above the trees so you will never hit the ground

I'll assume you're joking here, but you'd be suprised at how many people do actually think the above is true. Newton's laws would disagree with the above idea.

[iflyforpie]

For an 'inexperienced' pilot, Lousy Fisherman makes some very good points.

A 4000 foot/minute downdraft will have a huge cushion of air above the trees so you will never hit the ground

I'll assume you're joking here, but you'd be suprised at how many people do actually think the above is true. Newton's laws would disagree with the above idea.

In my experience, a 4000 FPM downdraft will be moderated by flat ground close to terrain. The air simply has nowhere to go an must go horizontal.

The problem is though, that often the terrain we are being pushed towards isn't flat (like the ridge ahead of us) and when the wind changes direction you can get some massive wind shear.



I do most of my flying with topo maps. VNCs are just too small, poorly labeled, and don't show as much detail. They are good enough for the flying most of us 'should' be doing in the mountains, but if I am trapped in the middle ranges of the Rockies by weather, I want to find the Kootenay River or the Bull River or some other specific major drainage that will take me out.

One caveat... meters not feeters. Don't trust them for elevations.

For Vx being on the back side of the power curve, yes it is.. just. It is Vy that is on the top, not Vr.

As your aircraft gets closer to its absolute ceiling, Vx increases and Vy decreases, until they meet at your aircraft's absolute ceiling. Vy gives your aircraft the most excess energy, which is what we need to climb.

Like others say that you should not count on fancy steep turns and canyon turns to get you out of trouble (a very very big +1.. I can fly most of the mountains with a Rate 1 turn, even going around in what some would call 'narrow valleys'), neither should you count on Vx to clear obstacles. Vx is for takeoff when you are lifting off on the back side of the power curve and you need to essentially 'ride the clutch' to get yourself over the nearby and short obstacle with no other room to maneuver.

But if you have room, stay at Vy and maneuver to gain altitude and then proceed when you have a safe clearing altitude.

If you are going into an area where your spidey senses start to tingle, right away slow the aircraft to Vy. This will give you more time to think, reduce the radius of any turn you might do, and give you the most excess energy available to either climb or to reduce your descent rate if you are in a downdraft.

After reading all of this, I am more reluctant that ever to check people out in the mountains. Even that video I posted here should come with a big huge warning that it was flown by an experienced pilot who if he had known the weather was going to be that way he wouldn't have even attempted it.

Nothing broken below peaks is an excellent limit, but even then there can be tricky valleys and ridges to cross.

People are downright frightened of the Eastern mountains and Coast mountains, but far more seducing are the rolling foothills and the low valleys in the BC interior with high plateaus surrounding. I can fly a wingspan away from terrain here and even if my wings fell off I would still have thousands of feet of clear air in which to fall. In the Interior, the hills and valleys are very short--enough to trick you into taking a direct course when climbing out--but will slowly rise faster than your aircraft. Very little in the way of orographic lift to help you out either.


I know this is all rambling, but I am just writing as I think of things. If you want (or need) to find lift in the mountains, get directly over a ridgeline if possible. Pretty well doesn't matter which way the wind is blowing or sun is shining, you will get lift either from ridge lift, thermal, or convergence.

Fly safe and treat any training or experience you have as a license to learn. I was in 30 knot winds flying at 5000ft in the valley to the west yesterday... never seen that before--142 knots ground speed in a 172.

[sky's the limit]

Interesting comments so far.

There are two types of pilots in the mountains: those who transit them, and those who work in them. Many pilots who live and fly in the mountains fall into the former group however, and do not require the same level of knowledge or understanding of the mountain environment as the latter group which is considerably smaller.

In my experience working in this environment almost exclusively, there are two ways to approach it:

1) Employing a set of rules, procedures, "thou shall nots," and wx/wind minimums that will hopefully enable you to avoid getting into sticky situations in the first place, but if you do find yourself in Cat's scenario, or many other predictable tight spots, provide you with a procedure to extract yourself from it safely. In this category we have the 45 degree ridge crossing, canyon turns, climbing before entering valleys, etc.

2) Developing a detailed understanding of what is happening and why, and then evaluating each situation separately and using your knowledge to operate safely, use certain wind/terrain processes to your advantage, or cancel the flight.

99% of pilots use method #1, as their exposure to the environment is limited, or the types of operations they are involved in do not require a deeper level of understanding and decision making. There are a number of pilots in airplanes who are very intimately involved with their surroundings, and who require method number two to be applied. Almost all mountain helicopter pilots will use method number two as well, but the difference between them and their flat land counterparts is enormous in this regard.

Over the course of my own career I have gone from listening to other people's rules for mountain flying - which kept me safe through my license and first job - to developing my own set of rules to avoid trouble, and procedures to use once I found it (because once working in certain applications you DO find "trouble" on a fairly regular basis), to developing a thorough understanding of why things happen the way they do once terrain and wx meet each other and most importantly, how to use this to my advantage. This has taken many years and many thousands of hours of exposure, and I still learn something new every year.

When a pilot starts working in the mountains on jobs like low-level game surveys, off-strip flying, float work, or in helicopters, they must transition to method #2 or they will very quickly find grief. Even in helicopters where the flight envelope is so much greater than in fixed wing aircraft, pilots must learn to work with the system, not against it. Often a pilot will find themselves working in places that are absolute "No go" areas in standard mountain training scenarios, and a set of rules will only take you so far because you've broken them just getting to the job site. Learning to read the wind, the terrain, and the weather trends is key to any successful flight in the mountains, but it must be kept in mind that only by having a very thorough understanding of the capabilities of their aircraft coupled with the afore mentioned knowledge, can one actually work safely in them.

I personally believe that most mountain training is very poor - and I am referring to airplanes here - for several reasons, but not least of which are lack of knowledge from the instructor, a lack of operational experience on behalf of the instructor, and a lack of understanding of the machine's absolute capabilities.

Most mountain training I have seen in airplanes focuses on what you cannot, or more accurately, "should not" do. Unfortunately it should be the opposite imho - focusing on what you can do, how to do it safely should be the priority. Just reading these few comments here I get the overwhelming feeling that people are afraid of the mountains, or at least concerned when flying in them, it doesn't have to be that way, even for the average private or commercial VFR pilot.

As . suggests however, it is becoming increasingly difficult for pilots to access good, knowledgable, and EXPERIENCED instruction. Demonstrating what is possible and WHY it's possible, even where the manouver might be far in excess of what any given pilot is ever going to use, serves a valuable purpose in building understanding and then confidence in the new mountain pilot.

Flying in the mountains is not an exclusive skill, but one that builds on many other areas. Aerobatic training very early in my flying career helped me understand what the aircraft is doing in those corners of the flight envelope that happen to coincide with a series of mistakes flying in the mountains - it unquestionably saved my life on a few occasions while working in the bush. I would also encourage people to pay particular attention to flying the aircraft cleanly, and co-ordinated, sounds simple enough, but it's surprising how many pilots fail in this area. You can't begin to understand your aircraft's performance envelope if you cannot fly it properly.

Iflyforpie's last post is a good one, and this is exactly what I have been referring to:

Code: Select all

People are downright frightened of the Eastern mountains and Coast mountains, but far more seducing are the rolling foothills and the low valleys in the BC interior with high plateaus surrounding. I can fly a wingspan away from terrain here and even if my wings fell off I would still have thousands of feet of clear air in which to fall. In the Interior, the hills and valleys are very short--enough to trick you into taking a direct course when climbing out--but will slowly rise faster than your aircraft. 

It just doesn't need to be this way. Your machine can talk to you, tell you everything you need to know about your immediate environment, unfortunately there are so few who know how to listen to it!

stl

[Cat Driver]

Can someone explain to me how I fly VY or VX when my airspeed indicator is jumping up and down like mad due to turbulence and wind shear?