Lower Won't Work

While we usually train by flying right to minimums and then frequently flying the missed, how often in our actual flying do we miss and do it again, or divert to an alternate? How often do we get caught by surprise when the ceiling were expecting to break out of is lower than we thought (or lower than we need)? For those of us operating under 14 CFR Part 91, how often do we consider or actually find ourselves pushing the looser legal limits of landing under IFR?

Elaine Kauh

Thursday, October 20, 2016 at 12:00 AM ET

Verified

Key Takeaways:

The article highlights the dangers of deviating from instrument flight rules (IFR) published minimums and proper decision-making, especially when real-world conditions differ from textbook procedures.
A tragic Bonanza crash in low instrument meteorological conditions (LIFR) serves as a key illustration of a pilot pushing beyond safe and legal limits.
The pilot's series of poor decisions included filing to a VFR-only airport, repeatedly diverting to airports with weather below approach minimums, and failing to execute proper missed approaches.
This case underscores how deteriorating weather and mounting pressure can lead pilots to exceed their capabilities and regulations, resulting in fatal consequences.

See a mistake? Contact us.

There’s always that difference between a textbook procedure, such as an approach to published minimums, and real-life conditions that are rarely so clear cut.

While we usually train by flying right to minimums and then frequently flying the missed, how often in our actual flying do we miss and do it again, or divert to an alternate? How often do we get caught by surprise when the ceiling we’re expecting to break out of is lower than we thought (or lower than we need)? For those of us operating under 14 CFR Part 91, how often do we consider or actually find ourselves pushing the looser legal limits of landing under IFR?