Flight planning challenge

Keith Smith
Posts: 9942
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 8:38 pm
Location: Pompton Plains, NJ
Contact:

Re: Flight planning challenge

Post by Keith Smith »

I got within 15 miles of the outer shelf and asked to go through the bravo at 8.5, over the airport then direct Nabbs VOR, to avoid some special use airspace, he approved it, then later said I could go direct nabbs vor. I then asked if the SUA was hot, he said no, so I said I would go direct destination instead.
Keith Smith
Posts: 9942
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 8:38 pm
Location: Pompton Plains, NJ
Contact:

Re: Flight planning challenge

Post by Keith Smith »

finished the trip today... small change, went Savannah back to N07 non stop. will post the debrief later!
Keith Smith
Posts: 9942
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 8:38 pm
Location: Pompton Plains, NJ
Contact:

Re: Flight planning challenge

Post by Keith Smith »

Fuel at KSAV wasn't too bad, especially with the weekend discount. They also waive the $22 ramp fee with 10 gallons bought. Since I only needed 15 gallons to fill up from the 90 minute leg that got me there, the numbers worked out better if I filled up at SAV. It was also much more convenient since I was already there.

The FBO was great, I used the crew lounge to brief, the conference room to work and the onsite rental cars to get around for the 2 days I was there.

The flight home was great. I coerced all 4 cylinders to run lean of peak and was rewarded with 380 degree chts and below, which is saying something for that airplane in warm conditions. Fuel flow dropped to around 9 gallons per hour, which changed this from a max range flight to a no brainer.

With half of the gov weather sites being down, getting tops reports was a challenge, but I went with the area forecast and did ok. Most of the flight had 5-6k tops so I was good at 9k, but I did evetually hit some stratus layers at 9. It was smooth, but required me to kill the ram air and apply carb heat, which robbed me of some performance, so I got a 9 to 9.5 block.

Eventually that wasn't high enough either so I asked for 10. 9k was the top of the contoller's sector so he told me to pick 9 or 11. I went with 11 and was shipped to center. Shortly after it was clear that 9 would work but I stayed at 11 since the engine was very happy, and LOP operations were working out.

Some nice IMC at 3-5k then a visual into the home drone. Rwy 1 was in use, not my favorite, but it worked out great.

What a trip.
Aleks. L.
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 12:41 pm
Location: KDAB

Re: Flight planning challenge

Post by Aleks. L. »

Nice! Did you stop at Sheltair?
Keith Smith
Posts: 9942
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 8:38 pm
Location: Pompton Plains, NJ
Contact:

Re: Flight planning challenge

Post by Keith Smith »

I normally do in Savannah, but this time I used Signature. Cheaper fuel, cheaper ramp rate, rental cars on site, quicker drive to the 2 clients I needed to see. I think I'll be using Signature there each time (not something I find myself saying very often).
Ryan B
Posts: 856
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 2:37 pm

Re: Flight planning challenge

Post by Ryan B »

Great read Keith. Interesting about that VFR On Top comment. It really got me thinking. We have an MOA in our airspace and I'm not really a bug fan of providing traffic advisories to someone in it but it's a service. As far as VFR on top.... the way we work it here, you'd be able to get away with an on top in the MOA.

Duluth is a little different than a lot of places. Since we have the Cirrus factory here, (and crap wx a lot), we just devised a plan to use VFR on top for planes that intend to leave DLH, and when they get to VFR on top, their IFR is cancelled. In order to RTB they have to ask for an IFR clearance again. This is a big argument at our facility. A lot of the older guys say a clearance limit can be just that, VFR on Top. Some of us new dudes say you need a fix like DLH etc.

The way we read a clearance now would be... pilot calls up with "Duluth ground, cirrus 12345 looking for vfr on top NE bound." We say "cirrus 12345, dlh ground, climb to and report reaching vfr on top, if not on top by 6000 maintain 6000 and advise" And that's it. When they get on top I say maintain VFR. Some people say "maintain vfr on top."

Traditionally as you probably know, pilots have an IFR clearance from point A to B. Enroute they decide they want to be VFR on top, controllers issue the climb, and even though ATC is providing VFR separation, you're still IFR. When you're ready to come down we just descend you to whatever altitude, and cleared approach etc, or you cancel IFR.

I think we're the only facility like this... but with a lot of planes testing equipment in poor weather we get VFR on tops and SVFR's very often.
PE ID: 29
FAA ATCS
FAA PPL ASEL
Keith Smith
Posts: 9942
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 8:38 pm
Location: Pompton Plains, NJ
Contact:

Re: Flight planning challenge

Post by Keith Smith »

Ryan, that's interesting that you guys allow it. 7110.65 9-3-3. VFR-ON-TOP actually prohibits it (which explains why I wasn't allowed to do it on my flight), unless you give altitude restrictions which keep them above/outside the MOA, or routing around it (which, operationally, is the same thing is not allowing them in it while VOT) :)
Keith Smith
Posts: 9942
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 8:38 pm
Location: Pompton Plains, NJ
Contact:

Re: Flight planning challenge

Post by Keith Smith »

Ryan, on the VOT clearance from the ground, I can see how that would get adopted as a local procedure fairly easily. The .65 references that phraseology for aircraft that are "on an IFR flight plan". That's probably why most facilities and SOP's issue short range clearance limits for climbs to VFR on top, to get them on an IFR flight plan. If it's being done on a daily basis, though, I can see how you might wanna shorten/simplify that :)

The automatic cancellation upon reaching that altitude is interesting. That first struck me as odd, but since you're not issuing a clearance limit, I can follow the logic...just barely!

I was flying near the CAE VOR on a VFR trip a while ago and cold called approach looking for a climb to VFR on top. There was a long pause, then he issued an IFR clnc with a clearance limit of a radial/dme FIX on the CAE VOR (about 40nm ahead of me) with the VFR on top alt restrictions. I got through the layer, then cancelled. Your version was a lot quicker. :)
Keith Smith
Posts: 9942
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 8:38 pm
Location: Pompton Plains, NJ
Contact:

Re: Flight planning challenge

Post by Keith Smith »

sirenbrian wrote:Which Church tracks/albums did you listen to?
Didn't mean to leave you hanging, bro! (yes, sirenbrian is actually my brother. *whispers* He's kind of a big fan of The Church)

Untitled #23
Uninvited Like The Clouds
Hologram of Baal
El Momento Descuidado (yeah, had to look that one up)
Sometime Anywhere

I downloaded it all the day before through Google Play and listened to it on the phone. There's only one album they're missing that I really wanted....and I couldn't remember the title until I just looked it up on wikipedia just now...Back with Two Beasts. "Night Sequence" is a track I really need to have again for the airplane, especially during approach.
Keith Smith
Posts: 9942
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 8:38 pm
Location: Pompton Plains, NJ
Contact:

Re: Flight planning challenge

Post by Keith Smith »

Here's Night Sequence by The Church. It's hard to explain, but it's better with headphones (I used to listen to it a lot on bike rides). Once you know the tune and the story line, it's neat having it playing during the approach phase:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQgnJM9lzis

For enroute, I'm a lot less picky :)
Post Reply