I think a key reason to be instrument rated is being trained and authorised to fly in a way such that you don’t have to scud run. Flying below low cloud through rising terrain is statistically a very bad place to be.
Flying below low cloud through rising terrain is statistically a very bad place to be.
Flying through any terrain, rising or not, is a very bad place to be regardless of statistics 
Lots of people get killed doing this but IMHO – apart from canyon type scenarios – nobody does a CFIT in VMC, even bad VMC like 3km. The CFITs happen because people enter cloud, probably in a late-decision climb, and the terrain outclimbs them.
I think from Jason’s perspective it is absolutely right what he says. OTOH: if you keep a safety margin and always have a way out it can be fun to explore these limits. And there wouldn’t be much bush flying in Alaska or Canada if 1000 ft was the limit …
200 ft is crazy, Michal :-) Especially today with the many windmills.
Adam: i would not dare to try it in a Twin like the ones you fly!
…nobody does a CFIT in VMC, even bad VMC like 3km.
Lots of people do, unfortunately. The last spectacular occurrence in my part of the world was a Citation X on approach to Egelsbach in marginal VMC at night. Not even their EGPWS screaming at them could save them, since obviously they knew better than their machine.
Flyer59 wrote:
200 ft is crazy, Michal :-) Especially today with the many windmills.
definitely agree, that´s exactly what I have in mind when I mention I would not had departed if on the ground. I am comfortable with 400 or 500 ft AGL but not below. Windmils are easy to see, power ropes are worse…
Flyer59 wrote:
And there wouldn’t be much bush flying in Alaska or Canada if 1000 ft was the limit …
Sure, but a lot of pilots in Alaska are killed each year. We all have to make our own decisions, and there is risk in everything. Just pointing out that this sort of flying is much riskier than normal VFR flying let alone IFR.
it feels less " natural" now than it did when i was still VFR only
I think your brain is trying to tell you something!
My home base is VFR only and my minima to return there is 700ft cloudbase and 1500m visibility.
There is no terrain and I know the area quite well. I do the cloudbreak over a nearby lake.
I always ask Radar if there’s any traffic in the vicinity. If I’m not visual at 700ft I climb back to the MRVA and divert.
If your destination is in flat terrain I would create a DIY approach. It need to have a decision altitude and a missed approach :-)
@Flyer59 let me rephrase to clarify the semantics. After the stall due to pulling-up too sharply, the rest of the manoeuver went exactly like a “box canyon turn” eg. unload the plane to zero G, bank and turn around to reciprocal heading. Unfortunately due to compass precession the flight didn’t glide back along the valley walls but into the ridge.
Sorry, but that’s not correct.
(from the report)
“…… wurde die HB-RCW steil hochgezogen und verschwand in den Wolken. Ca. 20 Sekunden später schlug die Mustang knapp unter der Wolkenuntergrenze an einem steilen Waldstück auf.”
Translation: … HB-RCW was pulled up steeply and disappeared in the clouds. About 20 seconds later the Mustang impacted a steep (forst) slope just benath the ceiling.
He pulled up into a turn and into the clouds where he stalled the aircraft. That has little to do with the “Box Canyon Turn” which is flown at minimum speed, very close to the stall speed, and with full flaps.
And after the stall what happened? Engine idle, stick forward to unload wing (which stalls the engine), turn to reciprocal. Other than stalling the engine it is exactly the BCT – minimum speed, zero or negative G, turn to reciprocal.
