[Flightgear-devel] Trip Report and Pictures: CYOW-CYAM; CYAM-CYYB; CYYB-CYOW
This week, I flew my longest cross-countryyet. On Wednesday, I flew non-stop from Ottawa (CYOW) to Sault Ste. Marie (CYAM), just about 400 nm. Conditions were a little hazy, but the ceiling was high, and I was able to manage 6,500 feet the whole way. I stayed overnight at my grandmother's cottage not far from the airport fence (on Pointe-aux-Pins), then tried to fly home on Thursday. Unfortunately, the ceiling came down lower than forecast about an hour out of the Sault; I managed to establish myself at a low-but-comfortable 1500 feet AGL, 500 feet clear of clouds and well above all obstacles except for a big smokestack in Sudbury that I could see from 15 miles away (there was good visibility underneath), and managed to keep flying as far as North Bay (CYYB) with the expectation of continuing to Ottawa. Just as I was coming to the east end of Lake Nipissing, the ceiling started coming down, and a helicopter coming from the east said it was bad that way as well. Normally in that situation, the smartest thing would have been to turn 180 degrees and head back to Sudbury, about 45 minutes behind me. Fortunately, however, at precisely that moment the North Bay airport was less than three miles off my left wing and I was already talking to the FSS, so I flew in and landed. By the time I touched down, the reported ceiling had plummited to 600 ft (about 1200 ft above surrounding terrain; CYYB is on a high hill). I spent the afternoon standing in the terminal staring at the sky, wondering how far out the low ceiling went, etc. I was frightened at how tempting it was to try to find a way out (especially since Ottawa was starting to report a lot of TCU and CB anyway), but I finally did the right thing in the end and took a motel room. The next morning (Friday), the weather was great, so I left at 7:15 local (no morning fog on the high hill) and flew the last 1:30 home at 5500 feet, ducking under an overcast layer just a few minutes out of Ottawa. Flying even an 800 nm round-trip cross-country is worth a lot more than dozens of short cross-countries around the same airspace; I'm planning longer ones soon. It's a lot of fun, but I feel even more motivated to finish my IFR rating (though it wouldn't have helped on Thursday with the embedded CB and TCU). Here are some pictures. The quality's not great because of a combination of a cheap camera, dirty windows, hazy air, and a need to concentrate on flying the plane (I didn't usually look through the viewfinder): http://www.megginson.com/private/2003-05-28-soo-trip/ All the best, David -- David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Trip Report and Pictures: CYOW-CYAM;CYAM-CYYB; CYYB-CYOW
On Sat, 2003-05-31 at 06:12, David Megginson wrote: > This week, I flew my longest cross-countryyet. On Wednesday, I flew > non-stop from Ottawa (CYOW) to Sault Ste. Marie (CYAM), just about 400 > nm. Conditions were a little hazy, but the ceiling was high, and I > was able to manage 6,500 feet the whole way. I stayed overnight at my > grandmother's cottage not far from the airport fence (on > Pointe-aux-Pins), then tried to fly home on Thursday. Unfortunately, > the ceiling came down lower than forecast about an hour out of the > Sault; I managed to establish myself at a low-but-comfortable 1500 > feet AGL, 500 feet clear of clouds and well above all obstacles except > for a big smokestack in Sudbury that I could see from 15 miles away > (there was good visibility underneath), and managed to keep flying as > far as North Bay (CYYB) with the expectation of continuing to Ottawa. > > Just as I was coming to the east end of Lake Nipissing, the ceiling > started coming down, and a helicopter coming from the east said it was > bad that way as well. Normally in that situation, the smartest thing > would have been to turn 180 degrees and head back to Sudbury, about 45 > minutes behind me. Fortunately, however, at precisely that moment the > North Bay airport was less than three miles off my left wing and I was > already talking to the FSS, so I flew in and landed. By the time I > touched down, the reported ceiling had plummited to 600 ft (about 1200 > ft above surrounding terrain; CYYB is on a high hill). I spent the > afternoon standing in the terminal staring at the sky, wondering how > far out the low ceiling went, etc. I was frightened at how tempting > it was to try to find a way out (especially since Ottawa was starting > to report a lot of TCU and CB anyway), but I finally did the right > thing in the end and took a motel room. The next morning (Friday), > the weather was great, so I left at 7:15 local (no morning fog on the > high hill) and flew the last 1:30 home at 5500 feet, ducking under an > overcast layer just a few minutes out of Ottawa. > > Flying even an 800 nm round-trip cross-country is worth a lot more > than dozens of short cross-countries around the same airspace; I'm > planning longer ones soon. It's a lot of fun, but I feel even more > motivated to finish my IFR rating (though it wouldn't have helped on > Thursday with the embedded CB and TCU). What do you mean by CB and TCU? > > Here are some pictures. The quality's not great because of a > combination of a cheap camera, dirty windows, hazy air, and a need to > concentrate on flying the plane (I didn't usually look through the > viewfinder): > > http://www.megginson.com/private/2003-05-28-soo-trip/ > > > All the best, > > > David -- Tony Peden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Trip Report and Pictures: CYOW-CYAM;CYAM-CYYB; CYYB-CYOW
David Megginson wrote: Here are some pictures. The quality's not great because of a combination of a cheap camera, dirty windows, hazy air, and a need to concentrate on flying the plane (I didn't usually look through the viewfinder): http://www.megginson.com/private/2003-05-28-soo-trip/ Nice visual system! Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Trip Report and Pictures: CYOW-CYAM;CYAM-CYYB; CYYB-CYOW
Tony Peden writes: > What do you mean by CB and TCU? Sorry -- those are the standard weather abbreviations for cumulonimbus and towering cumulus. You can see and avoid both when you're VFR -- if you're on top, they stick out high above the surrounding clouds (CB often goes right to the stratosphere, where it spreads out into an anvil), and if you're underneath, you can see the heavy rain showers and possibly lightning. When you're IFR in IMC, you can fly into one with no warning and possibly tear your plane to pieces. All the best, David -- David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Trip Report and Pictures: CYOW-CYAM;CYAM-CYYB; CYYB-CYOW
Erik Hofman writes: > Nice visual system! We'll get there. All the best, David -- David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Trip Report and Pictures: CYOW-CYAM;CYAM-CYYB; CYYB-CYOW
> David Megginson wrote: > > > Here are some pictures. The quality's not great because of a > > combination of a cheap camera, dirty windows, hazy air, and a need to > > concentrate on flying the plane (I didn't usually look through the > > viewfinder): > > > > http://www.megginson.com/private/2003-05-28-soo-trip/ > > Nice visual system! > Isn't that poly count just astonishing? :) I'm glad you decided to stay over night there David, I'd hate to read about you in the news as lost. g. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Trip Report and Pictures: CYOW-CYAM;CYAM-CYYB; CYYB-CYOW
Wow! Just brings home how small the UK is compared to Canada and the USA. From my home airfield, 800nm in almost any direction by my reckoning would land you in another country. Although a C-152 would have ran out of fuel after 600nm probably. Did you see much variation in weather over the distance? I'm interested, since Canada is a much larger land mass than the UK. I've heard many people say that our 'variable weather'* is partly to do with being an island... I'm off to fly excercise 6, straight and level flight tomorrow. One day, I'll fly to Dublin for a pint of Guinness (and stop over!). If I chicken out I'll probably make it fish and chips in Blackpool! Take care, Matt. * s/variable/frustrating/g ;-) ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Trip Report and Pictures: CYOW-CYAM;CYAM-CYYB; CYYB-CYOW
matthew Law writes: > Just brings home how small the UK is compared to Canada and the USA. > From my home airfield, 800nm in almost any direction by my reckoning > would land you in another country. That was 800nm round trip (i.e. 400nm out and 400nm back), but it is true that 800nm straight west from Ottawa probably wouldn't be enough to get me over the provincial border into Manitoba border. One of my nearer-term goals is to visit all three coasts. From Ottawa, it's 515nm east to Halifax on the Atlantic Ocean, 1917nm west to Vancouver on the Pacific Ocean, and 1682nm northwest to Cambridge Bay on the Arctic Ocean. > Although a C-152 would have ran out of fuel after 600nm probably. Probably considerably less. At 75% power, my Warrior could probably manage 600nm and still just barely have the required 30-minute fuel reserve, but I'm not tempted to try. > Did you see much variation in weather over the distance? Yes, even over 400nm, the changes were quite dramatic. All the best, David -- David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Trip Report and Pictures: CYOW-CYAM;CYAM-CYYB; CYYB-CYOW
On Sat, 31 May 2003 19:18:35 -0400, David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > matthew Law writes: > Probably considerably less. At 75% power, my Warrior could probably > manage 600nm and still just barely have the required 30-minute fuel ..that's fuel to destination, then on to alternate, and then 30 minutes, no? (thought it was 45 min reserve) > > Did you see much variation in weather over the distance? > > Yes, even over 400nm, the changes were quite dramatic. ..how much of the haze is window, and camera "tint"? Was this haze inversion and smog just moving away from cities, industry or large powerplants? -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Trip Report and Pictures: CYOW-CYAM;CYAM-CYYB; CYYB-CYOW
Arnt Karlsen writes: > ..that's fuel to destination, then on to alternate, and then 30 > minutes, no? (thought it was 45 min reserve) That's only for IFR; for day VFR, we need 30 minutes' reserve, period (45 minutes at night). > ..how much of the haze is window, and camera "tint"? Was this > haze inversion and smog just moving away from cities, industry > or large powerplants? I'm not sure why the pictures were so washed out, but at Jon's suggestion, I ran them through the Gimp and sharpened them up a bit. The revised versions are now online. All the best, David -- David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] Trip Report and Pictures: CYOW-CYAM;CYAM-CYYB; CYYB-CYOW
I just got back from a 290nm (one way) trip from KDPA to KANE. I left friday night at about 18:30. It was amazing how much the weather changed during that trip.. It started out partly cloudy with winds 12kts gusting to 25kts, with a barometric pressure of 29.36. I took off on an IFR flight plan to KANE, which was forcasting 2500 foot ceilings and winds 15kts gusting to 20kts. I was flying into a headwind of about 35kts, so my ground speed was about 100kts. As I was handed off to Rockford approach control (KRFD), they asked if I had a storm scope (which I did). I looked at it and it was lit up like a Christmas tree in front of me. I asked Rockford approach for a deviation to the west to avoid that storm (I was able to start seeing the storm at that time also). I was still about 45nm from the the storm and there was plenty of room to the west to get around it. While flying westbound I started to encounter some hard updrafts and downdrafts in the 500ft/min range. I asked for a block altitude (5000-6000ft msl) to maintain while dealing with the turbulent air. They granted it and I tried to maintain about 5500 ft. I never went outside of that block although I did come pretty close. After clearing the storm to the west it was again partly cloudy and the sun was shining bright. It looked like it was going to be a much nicer flight the rest of the way. I flew through puffy white clouds the rest of the way up to the Minneapolis area. About 50nm from KANE approach control had me decend from 6000ft to 4000ft. This put me in the clouds and in some moderately turbulent air. I was easily able to maintain altitude and the general heading, but was being bumped around enough that the "gear unsafe" light would come on every time I hit a good bump. At one point, it actually stayed on and I had to slow to about 90kts and extend the gear and then retract the gear to get the light to go out. After about 30 minutes of this approach control decended me to 2700ft which put me about 100ft above the cloud bottoms, I asked for another decent to 2500ft to get me in VMC, which they granted. I then was easily able to spot the airport and started heading in that direction and was preparing to land on runway 36. The winds were reported at 18kts gusting to 34kts from a heading of 350 and a barometric pressure of about 29.86. I was second to land behind a small twin coming from the other direction. I watched him land and was satisified that it would not be a difficult landing. I put it down with about 10kts extra airspeed and made a halfway decent landing. The return trip could not have been any easier.. winds were calm at both airports and aloft, there were no clouds and there was no turbulence the entire flight. Between trimming the aircraft out and putting on the autopilot, I could have easily taken a nap for 2 hours. Instead I spent time playing around with some of the features of the Garmin 430 GPS that the aircraft had along with figuring out which RPM setting got me the best bang for the buck. 2100 RPMs won, because I pay by the tach hour, not the hobbs meter. Ryan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of David Megginson Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2003 6:19 PM To: FlightGear developers discussions Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Trip Report and Pictures: CYOW-CYAM;CYAM-CYYB; CYYB-CYOW matthew Law writes: > Just brings home how small the UK is compared to Canada and the USA. > From my home airfield, 800nm in almost any direction by my reckoning > would land you in another country. That was 800nm round trip (i.e. 400nm out and 400nm back), but it is true that 800nm straight west from Ottawa probably wouldn't be enough to get me over the provincial border into Manitoba border. One of my nearer-term goals is to visit all three coasts. From Ottawa, it's 515nm east to Halifax on the Atlantic Ocean, 1917nm west to Vancouver on the Pacific Ocean, and 1682nm northwest to Cambridge Bay on the Arctic Ocean. > Although a C-152 would have ran out of fuel after 600nm probably. Probably considerably less. At 75% power, my Warrior could probably manage 600nm and still just barely have the required 30-minute fuel reserve, but I'm not tempted to try. > Did you see much variation in weather over the distance? Yes, even over 400nm, the changes were quite dramatic. All the best, David -- David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Trip Report and Pictures: CYOW-CYAM;CYAM-CYYB; CYYB-CYOW
On Sat, 31 May 2003 22:26:54 -0400, David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Arnt Karlsen writes: > > > ..that's fuel to destination, then on to alternate, and then 30 > > minutes, no? (thought it was 45 min reserve) > > That's only for IFR; for day VFR, we need 30 minutes' reserve, > period (45 minutes at night). > > > ..how much of the haze is window, and camera "tint"? Was this > > haze inversion and smog just moving away from cities, industry > > or large powerplants? > > I'm not sure why the pictures were so washed out, but at Jon's ..I would guess camera are set up for "ground shots", the light is pretty different at altitude, for good air shots, you may wanna set up your camera with less light and richer color and sharper contrast. > suggestion, I ran them through the Gimp and sharpened them up a bit. > The revised versions are now online. ..these are closer to what you remember seeing, right? Still _very_ hazy compared to what I see around here, and the south-west _is_ the dirtiest part of Norway haze-wise, as we get some of the tail pipe poop from the EU, especially from the UK. -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
