At the time, he sure was VFR. No info on whether he was planning to change to IFR later on. Likely not. The weather was very good for VFR on that day, but no good for IFR in a small SEP last Sunday.
Arne: wow, where would you know that from?
boscomantico wrote:
Arne: wow, where would you know that from?I realize I wrote very affirmatively, while it is only a conjecture, corrected. It’s the kind of “advice” I have received so many times though. But the red areas in the radar pics are unforgiving.
“be inclined to say I could make it”
While planning you mean?
The value of Metar/Taf goes to zero sometimes as you start flying…
I think it is the kind of localized weather that one can avoid easily while flying VFR and kepping distance but on which you could lose control anytime you get caught nearer (I mean 20nm)
I am really surprised the Cirrus chute was not deployed, I always view it as insurance that I am ready to use for loss of control in severe winter icing or summer turbulences? other than these “flying risks” and “engine risk” for night/terrain/water flying I don’t see the value…
Would the Cirrus chute do anything in a microburst?
Flying directly into the TS. Why? The information is quite at hand.
Would the Cirrus chute do anything in a microburst?
A “microburst” is a fast descending airflow. I think it is 1000-3000fpm so beyond most planes’ ability to outclimb it, especially if one is flying an ILS etc i.e. the engine power setting is close to idle, so it takes some time to get some thrust.
The rate of descent under the chute is, according to the internet, 900-1800fpm, so if you pulled the chute in a descending airflow you would be going down at the combined vertical speed of the two. That could be quite fast, but the descending air isn’t going to be descending all the way to the ground (unless there is a very large and deep hole in the ground 
) so at some point the ROD will show down to just the chute’s ROD.
Whether it will work usefully I have no idea…
Flying directly into the TS. Why? The information is quite at hand.
I know nothing about this pilot but quite a lot of pilots flew straight into a TS+. Some perhaps never got a wx forecast… Not everybody knows about the stuff posted here on EuroGA, like meteox.com etc etc.
Yes, Peter, sad, but true. However, the pics above are measurements, not forecasts. At least the existence of radar pictures is known to every pilot, I’m sure. And they are easily available nowadays. And what he saw after take off or even before was a dark, black wall nearby on his direct course to Hannover. Sometimes even a bare eye is enough to see and avoid a dangerous situation.
@Karl_Acht totally agree with you. But imagine this:
I am not saying this is what happend. It is also not meant to be speculation.
I am just trying to paint an illustrative scenario. I would bet you a decent amount of money this exact scenario has occurred to many pilots flying into LFAT for a lovely weekend day. It has happened to me (at least bullets 1-4).
It is not always as easy as it looks.
Karl_Acht wrote:
Sometimes even a bare eye is enough to see and avoid a dangerous situation.
The whole idea of weather avoiding in small GA aircraft, which is not radar equipped, is in visual avoiding. If you can’t avoid (circumnavigate or overfly) and you don’t have radar (and knowledge and experience) to check severity of the stuff you want to penetrate, it’s better to return and land.
Although some high quality meteo services come at price, basic stuff (sufficient for pretty good understanding of current and forecasted weather, especially hazardous situations) is available for free.
