ForeFlight vs. Garmin Pilot

Given the amount of traffic the comparison of the Garmin GLO and the Dual XGPS150 is getting, it seems like comparative reviews are what people are looking for.  Following that example, I'll be putting ForeFlight up against Garmin Pilot in this post, to give people an idea of what each app is capable of.

Before I dive too deeply into either app, the overview is that they're both capable applications with their own strong points and quirks.  Overall, I tested ease of use from a general aviation, single pilot operation perspective.  That's not to say they can't be used for aviation of a more professional order, but when you're flying a smaller aircraft on your own, the easier things are to accomplish, the better.  In order to avoid taking up extra space tagging the pictures from ForeFlight and Garmin Pilot, I'll use the convention of placing ForeFlight images on the left, and Garmin Pilot images on the right.

General Interface Points

My first reaction to the Garmin Pilot interface was that it was slightly less organized and slightly more casual-looking than ForeFlight.  After digging around, though, you get the hang of where they put things and why they put them there.  The "more casual-looking" comment comes from the fact that Garmin Pilot's buttons are huge, but when you're bouncing around in turbulence, or trying to otherwise fly the plane, the last thing you need to worry about is fat-fingering a button.  Each button is clearly labeled, both textually and graphically.  In the end, I can't fault them for that.  They're just different approaches.

The Maps Interface

The maps interface for both apps gets all kinds of information in front of you.  In the display arena, I give Garmin Pilot the edge, as it offers the same information as ForeFlight and slightly more.  You can see ForeFlight's information displayed in the picture, but Garmin Pilot's is not (you can access navigation information under Menu > Show Navigation Info).  Additionally, Garmin Pilot offers widgets, which are larger and give you more data in each widget.  As an example, the Garmin Pilot navigation widget gives you (by default) altitude, bearing, course, cross track error, distance to destination, distance to next, ETA to destination, ETA to next, ETE to destination, ETE to next, ground speed, horizontal accuracy, latitude, and longitude.  While that information is great to have, without filters you'll have to do some glancing around to find the data you want, and it takes up half of your screen area while you're at it.  The widget area can also be converted to somewhat of an avionics suite through Menu > Split Screen > Panel.  While it's a neat tool, it also eats half of your map display.  Such a feature would be a great backup in the case of an emergency, however.

Both apps are equally capable with maps and overlays, but in the functionality arena, I give ForeFlight the edge.  While Garmin Pilot displays a prominent direct-to button, it lacks the route capabilities that ForeFlight has from this screen.  ForeFlight has a route and nav log right from this interface, whereas with the exception of the direct-to button, Garmin Pilot's route planning is textually accomplished on a separate page.  You can, however, graphically plan using Tools > Graphically Edit Route, and just tap on the airports and VORs that you want, though fixes can be tougher, and you don't have the ability to specify airways.

The Flight Planning Interface

The flight planning interface allows you to add your flight plan into the app in order to display it on the map, or file it using the filing features.  Both applications allow you to type in your route, or create your route by tapping on the individual waypoints on the map, however ForeFlight is the only one that allows you to do it on the same page.  Both apps will also parse V and J airways, which helps immensely in entering longer routes.  As ForeFlight allows you to manage this all from the same page, along with providing the user guidance on altitude with wind data, my vote is for ForeFlight here.

The Airports Interface

The airports interface for both apps gets you all the information you'll need for any airport in the database.  As they both generally have the same information, and the same amount of information, I'll call it even data-wise.  You can see in the pictures, though, each app has its own approach to data display.  ForeFlight offers more of a filtered view, while Garmin Pilot gives you all of the data on larger screens.  Despite the very logically-organized and filtered view offered by ForeFlight, I'll give the interface edge to Garmin Pilot.  While you can see all of the frequency information is dumped into one page, it doesn't require me to click around the various frequency types to get the data I need.  It's just a matter of scrolling.  The buttons for this information are also larger, making them easier to hit.

The Charts Interface

The charts interface of both apps allows you to find charts and store them in binders with relative ease and organization.  ForeFlight's search feature seemed easier to use and more organized than Garmin Pilot, as its search feature shows airports you've selected from the airport, maps, and file and brief pages, along with charts from your favorite airports.  The Garmin Pilot search feature simply gives you a search box, though it does have buttons at the top right to filter down by chart type, and a history of what you have searched and viewed before.  In binder view, however, Garmin Pilot automatically adds in temporary binders for your origin and destination airports if you've entered a flight plan.  As they both display the same data, and each have minor strong points, I'll call this one relatively even.

The Imagery Interface

The imagery interface allows you to get access to weather.  Both products have a significant amount of weather data available.  I'd argue ForeFlight did a better job of segmenting the data by country, but that's not to say Garmin Pilot's interface isn't just as capable.  I'll call this one even as well.

The Flight Plan Filing and Briefing Interface

The flight plan filing and briefing interface allows you to brief yourself and file your flight plan through CSC DUATS (and in the case of Garmin Pilot, DTC DUAT as well).  It's tough to compare these two apps in this category, because they both allow you to do the same thing, but they both use the pages slightly differently.  As you can see, ForeFlight is primarily aimed at setting your flight plan up and getting you on your way to a flight brief and file.  Garmin Pilot's interface is slightly more of a review with a flight summary and nav log, with the flight brief and filing option as well.  I will say, though, that the Garmin Pilot interface does have a nifty feature of knowing when to, and when not to offer the SFRA flight plan option, whereas it is always available in ForeFlight.  This page, on both applications, is heavily enhanced through adding your pilot and aircraft information in the settings panels.  While the interfaces are vastly different, I can't say either one is better than the other.

The Scratch Pad

The scratch pad is where you write reminders for yourself.  I used this extensively on my flight a month ago to keep track of how many landings I had done.  There's not much to say other than each one has its own advantages.  With the ForeFlight scratch pad, you can either draw or type.  If you mess up while drawing, however, your only option is to clear the whole sheet.  While you'd otherwise likely writing with pen on paper and just crossing it out anyway, it's worth mentioning.  Garmin Pilot allows you to draw, with no option for typing, though it does have an eraser and a clear option for when you mess up.

The Settings Interface

The settings interface for both applications allows you to set your preferences and store user information about yourself (or other pilots who may be using this application), and the aircraft you fly.  Both are predominantly the same, although the Garmin Pilot app does have a few advantages in showing you pictures of your aircraft icon selection, filter search criteria for map view, and the ability to connect to various Garmin hardware.  While ForeFlight allows you to manage your downloads without having to go to a separate page, Garmin Pilot's download page also shows you the app's memory footprint, as you make you decisions on what to and not to download.  Based on some of the more granular options, and the ability to connect up to all kinds of hardware, I'll hand the win here to Garmin Pilot.

The Larger Differences

One of the main benefits of Garmin Pilot is its ability to tie in nicely with various hardware, to include weather and traffic.  This hardware includes the Garmin GDL 39, which provides both ADS-B traffic and weather, and the Baron Mobile Link, which provides XM satellite weather.  ForeFlight is against the display of traffic in its app, for reasons I can only partially agree with, so no matter what you use it seems weather is the most you'll get.  ForeFlight does, on the other hand, include various publications in its download options, such as the FAR/AIM.  While that's seemingly small, consider the fact that you now have an always-up-to-date version of the FAR/AIM, without having to go buy a new one (about $12) yearly.  If you're ever flying around wondering about cloud clearances or communications requirements, you can easily pull it up to double check.  ForeFlight has also released a new version of the app including terrain data and associated warnings.

Conclusion

Based on the numbers, the Garmin Pilot app takes it based on total categories won, but it's not like you can go wrong with ForeFlight.  I use ForeFlight, and I doubt I'll switch to Garmin Pilot.  Unless I get the equipment to take advantage of some of Garmin Pilot's features, I don't see the advantage for me to give up some of the features I do like about ForeFlight over the Garmin Pilot app.  In the end, your decision may come down to price, as Garmin Pilot is less expensive across the board than ForeFlight, shown below.  Both applications allow you to try the app out for 30 days, so try both of them out and see how you like them.

Here is the breakdown for pricing:

Yearly Subscription
ForeFlight: $74.99 (includes runway proximity advisories, even without purchase of geo-referenced charts)
Garmin Pilot: $49.99 (add $29.99 for SafeTaxi, which adds geo-referenced ground charts)

Geo-referencing:
ForeFlight: +$75.00 (for a total price of $149.99 per year)
Garmin Pilot: +$49.99 (and +$29.99 if you would like SafeTaxi, for a total of $129.97 per year)



If you'd like to see anything else reviewed here, let me know on the Facebook page, or @TheMintGreenLog on Twitter.

Good luck in your decision making.

ForeFlight - Garmin Pilot

Betraying My Past

N571DS - DA40 - 1.2 hours

If one were to take a look at my logbook, or even the posts here, one would not find very many manufacturers listed.  With one exception - a Piper Cherokee - you won't find anything other than Cessna.  For the longest time I stuck with what I was used to, but recent plans and a nudge from Phil made me reconsider.

I was told that I should look into a Diamond, and more specifically, the DA40.  Since some of my flying has been more destination-based for time building, a faster aircraft would be desirable to make the trips cheaper.  While the DA40 rents for just about $20 more per hour than the C172R I normally fly, it also flies at least 20 knots faster.  For longer flights, that actually saves me a little money.  Since I have a few major cross country flights coming up, the math worked out such that getting checked out in the DA40 made sense, so I went for it.

I had intended to book the flight for today, but somehow ended up booking it for Sunday.  When I showed up at the airport, I was met with "hey - what are you doing here today?"  As it turned out, I made a mistake when booking the flight, and booked it for tomorrow.  Luckily, the plane was available and Tim was able to fit in one more flight before calling it quits for the day.

Since I'd done the written exam portion of the checkout beforehand, I was able to save that time and jump right onto the preflight.  Even though I'd read the checklists several times over, even some of the simpler tasks seemed more difficult as I hadn't worked with the plane directly.  I could run through all of the things that were different, but I'll just say that even finding the pitot tube was somewhat of a challenge at first.  Differences aside, I was able to finish the preflight just as Tim was walking out.

Starting the plane is very similar to C172R models in terms of priming the engine, but taxiing was rather different, as steering is accomplished via differential braking.  The runup was only slightly different as that's where flap operation and the constant speed prop are tested.  Taking off, however, was very different.  Without nosewheel steering, keeping the nose on the centerline was a challenge.  The rudder pedals that power the giant rudder have a much longer throw than the Cessnas I'm used to, and I wasn't adding as much rudder as I could have.

Image from DiamondAircraft.com

The engine rocketed us up to altitude quickly, where I turned out west to maneuver in the practice area.  In the practice area, I put the aircraft through slow flight, power on and power off stalls.  After getting a feel for the aircraft, I took the plane over to Winchester (OKV) to practice landings.  The first landing ended up just being a landing attempt, as I flared too early, heard the stall warning horn go off a little higher than I would've liked, and punched the throttle in to go around and try again.  The second attempt actually ended in a landing, but I would say that it was more of a controlled impact.  Oddly enough, the feedback that I received was that I was flaring a little too early and getting the nose up too high.  Yeah, I got the nose up too high.  That's something I never thought I'd hear someone say.  For the third landing, I flared later and didn't bring the nose up as much, yielding a very smooth landing.

Since we were getting closer to the time we needed to have the aircraft back, I brought the plane back to Leesburg (JYO) for a final landing.  That landing was similarly smooth, ending the flight on a nice high note.

After shutting down and walking inside, Tim and I recounted the flight just to make sure I had the numbers right.  Apparently the way in which I recounted my landings - "first was missed, second sucked, third was nice, and fourth was nice" - drew a laugh out of a lady who was working at a nearby table in the terminal.  The people using the plane next walked up right as we were about to leave, which helped us avoid walking back out to the box to drop it in there.

While I didn't unleash my array of electronics on this flight, I'll have them next time.

That plane is awesome.

Hours:
Pilot in Command Cross Country (PIC XC): 0.0 - 76.2 (of 50)
Actual/Simulated Instrument (Act/Sim): 0.0 - 10.5 (of 40)

Review: CloudAhoy

Any time I have the thought "back in my day," I like to laugh at myself as I'm neither old in age nor in pilot experience.  After having used CloudAhoy on a few flights, however, I can't help the thought.  Reviewing my training flights, or flight performance in general was all manual, based off of what my instructor and I both remembered during the flight.  In some cases, one of us would scratch something down on a piece of paper as a reminder, but the post flight analysis was based off of our recollections of the flight, regardless of how our memories were jogged.

Enter CloudAhoy.

Where I once tried to re-fly the flight in my head and pull out the noteworthy parts through memory, I now have the flight recorded and tracked in its entirety.

When I first downloaded the application and looked at the user interface, I laughed.  There are four boxes to enter your data - tail number, your name, a co-pilot or CFI, and optional remarks - two areas showing your connectivity to data (3G or wireless) and GPS (internal or external), and two large start and stop buttons.  It's as simple as that.  Press start before you start the engine, and press stop when you're done.  It also has an auto-stop feature (enabled/disabled on the settings page), which helped the one time I forgot to press stop, but I couldn't tell you what triggers it.  I'm guessing it was either the GPS getting turned off, or just that it noticed I hadn't moved in so many minutes.  In any case, the initial user interface is extremely simple, which is what drew my laugh initially.  It was only later that I picked my jaw up off of the floor because of the amount of data that hit me post flight.

After the flight is where the magic is shown.  If you think the app looks too simplistic on the flight screen, wait until the flight data is shown on the debrief screen.  Switching from the iPad to a computer yields even better results, like the ability to utilize the Google Earth browser plugin for more features.  Either way, in the app or on a computer, the left panel allows you to view the flight, broken up into segments automatically by default.  If the app detects you are taxiing, or taking off, or flying a turn around a point, or a chandelle, or landing, it will automatically section that data off so that you can analyze that part of the flight on its own.  Automation is never perfect, so it sometimes grabs items that it shouldn't, but that hasn't caused any huge issues for me so far.  As an example, on my last flight it snagged one of my laps around the pattern as a left 360 (the yellow line in the picture).  Various colors help you to see the various maneuvers.  The blue lines are normal flight, with the white and amber being approach and touch-and-go segments, respectively.  All of these segments, again, are recognized automatically.

What about the non-standard, or very specific segments, you ask?

You may remember from the flight up to Harford County that I flew the GPS approach to the airport.  The entire GPS approach was shown as blue (normal flight - pictured above), as the app saw the approach as nothing out of the ordinary.  Trying to keep up with, and set the program up for every single approach out there would be nearly impossible.  Instead, the developer created a CFI tab so that you could add your own maneuvers.  This way, you can add the maneuvers you plan on flying before the flight, and your CFI or co-pilot can simply click on the begin and end buttons for each maneuver.  This allows you to track, color and name each maneuver so that you may analyze them separately.  Additionally, you can also track your hood time by adding that as a custom segment type.

The flight marker option allows you to simply mark a specific point in the flight to remind yourself later on.  While the option isn't as specific as defining a segment, it's a lot faster for situations that happen on the fly.  The note in the program states: "in flight, when you want to mark an event, tap the event marker and optionally write a corresponding comment on a piece of paper.  The tap will result in a number marker shown on the flight path at the current location.  Each tap, increments the number.  You can later discuss these comments with your student during the debrief."  Having this tab back when I was training for my private pilot license would have really helped me out.

The last tab is a settings tab that allows you to select an auto stop feature, disable broadcasting in flight, lock the screen, and set up your CloudAhoy account.

For those of you currently in any level of training, if your instructor does not currently use CloudAhoy, I would recommend talking to him or her about adding it as a tool for your flight training analysis.  It could really have a significant impact on the way that you learn and progress through training.  After all, one of the fundamentals of instructing, and therefore learning, is critique and evaluation, which this tool would only further enhance.

The only potential negative I found with the application was that it doesn't come with a manual.  Granted, we often joke that people rarely ever actually read said manuals, but one would still be helpful for reference.  To the developer's credit, however, there are several locations with information buttons explaining what the feature is meant to do.  The above quote about flight markers came directly from one of those in-app buttons.

Overall, it's a great app and you really can't go wrong with it.  Beyond that, it's free, so you have nothing to lose.  Try it out on your next flight and see how it can help you debrief after a flight.

cloudahoy.com

Dizzy Yet?

N172DR - C172R - 1.4 hours

I was supposed to go on a flight with my friends Matt and Mike this past weekend, but weather got in the way of that twice.  Saturday afternoon was cancelled because of low clouds and rain, and Sunday was cancelled because of wind and turbulence.  Of course, having just received my new mounts and camera, I was itching to go play with the new toys.

As I've mentioned a few times in previous posts, the commercial pilot license requires a certain amount of solo night flight experience, and a part of that is 10 takeoffs and landings at a towered field.  I've passively thought of my options since learning of the requirement, and my general conclusion was that none of them were particularly good.  Charlottesville (CHO) requires about 45 minutes just to get there, though the tower stays open all night.  Martinsburg (MRB) is closer, but the tower closes earlier than I'd need it to.  Dulles (IAD) would be great, but the A/FD says "no flight training after 2200 local," and you'd be nuts to try to request pattern work there.  After some thought, though, I remembered that Frederick (FDK) now has a tower, and it stays open long enough to fit in 10 landings after dark.

At first, I figured I'd wait and just take care of the flight later, but between the days getting longer and the potential for controllers to be furloughed in the near future, I thought the best time would be now.  I booked a plane, packed my stuff, and set off towards Leesburg (JYO).

Before preflighting, I set up the three cameras so that I could get some video of it from multiple angles.  The video that came from them wasn't the best, but the angles worked out pretty well for the flight itself.  They'll all look better with a day flight, too.  You know, being able to actually see things makes video that much better.

Here's the ContourGPS shot over the nose:

[Video got lost when Contour closed down for a while.]
I imagine that the ContourGPS will always be up somewhere on the windscreen so that it can get a clear shot up to the GPS satellites, so you'll always have that typical angle to look forward to.  The next angle, shot from the ContourROAM is out the right window, which caught some pretty cool reflections off of the right wing.  You can see the sunset reflected, and the moon as I turn north.

[Video got lost when Contour closed down for a while.]
The final angle I got with the new ContourROAM2 was of the panel, which included my back.  Phil shoots from this angle with his GoPro, and the end result is pretty cool looking.  I'll try it out the next time I fly during the day.  Unfortunately, I didn't bother getting a larger SD card for the new camera, so it cut out just before I landed back at JYO.

[Video got lost when Contour closed down for a while.]
I also managed to get myself a copy of Adobe Premiere Elements 11, so the video edits in the future should be a heck of a lot cooler.  Don't get me wrong, Windows Live Movie Maker is a decent starting point (not to mention, it's free), but it can't pull off what I'd like it to.  We'll see what I can put together as I learn more about the program.

The flight up to FDK was nice and quick, and I was worked into the pattern behind another aircraft to begin what I saw as my own version of the Daytona 500.  In order to pass the time, I made each lap a game of judging how well I got the nose up in the flare.  After three times around, I told the controller taking over for the last controller that I was going to be doing seven more laps so that he knew what the plan was.  He worked me in between a couple others who showed up for pattern work, and another couple of IFR arrivals.  The last few trips around the pattern were under the guidance of the first controller.  Getting closer to the 10 landings mark, I actually lost count, despite making tick marks on the scratchpad of ForeFlight.  After an insurance lap, just in case I had double counted a lap, I let the controller know on the upwind that I was done bothering her for the night and was heading back to JYO.  As she and I exchanged salutations, another pilot in the pattern checked to make sure I was spacially-oriented well enough to get home with "you dizzy yet?"

With the assistance of ForeFlight, I kept myself below the Class Bravo airspace as I got closer to JYO.  The landing, which would make 12 for the night, was a simple straight in approach to Runway 17.

[Video got lost when Contour closed down for a while.]
I'm off to mess around with Premiere Elements 11 to see what I can to do these videos.  So far, I haven't found a feature to correct my bonehead error of not properly leveling the ContourGPS, so I'll try to make sure it's level next time.

Hours:
Pilot in Command Cross Country (PIC XC): 0.0 - 76.2 (of 50)
Actual/Simulated Instrument (Act/Sim): 0.0 - 10.5 (of 40)

Higher Tech

I joined the ranks of the more technologically advanced back in February when I got my ContourGPS.  Since then, I've been gotten a few new mounts for it.  The first one is the suction cup mount, which I've used for quite a while now, and you have all seen the results in the videos.  It gets great shots over the nose of the plane, mounted up on the windscreen.  Since the view from the inside is pretty normal these days (just look on YouTube), I started to look into ways to mount a camera externally.  I've seen a few people mount cameras externally using the 3M tape that came with the camera, but I'm not so sure I'd trust tape against the relative wind and turbulence.  Beyond that, the planes I fly are owned by other people, and I'm sure they wouldn't appreciate tape residue all over their planes.  Looking around at the automotive mounts, I thought I'd found what I was looking for: a roll bar mount.

The mount comes with a hose clamp in a rubber sleeve, which keeps it in position and avoids scratching the strut.  Since the included hose clamp is meant for a three inch bar, I bought a larger clamp and wrapped it in electrical tape.  The ContourGPS is marketed as resistant to water, mist and spray, but I'd prefer not to find out how resistant it really is, since it was rather expensive.  Because of that, I opted to hold off until I bought one of the basic models.  Though all Contour cameras all have the option for a case, I could capture more video with a second camera, so why not get another?

The ContourROAM is slightly less expensive than the ContourGPS, is waterproof to one meter, has a wider angle lens, and has an instant record switch.  The latter means I don't have to worry about it being on or off before trying to start recording, which has caused issues in the past.  The still picture mode also allows a higher picture frequency than the ContourGPS (one picture per second, rather than every three seconds), which means the time lapse videos will seem a lot less jerky.  My thought was that flights would be shot externally on the ContourROAM, and internally on the ContourGPS.

I tried to use the roll bar mount plus ContourROAM setup on my flight back in August, but it wasn't sitting correctly and seemed loose in the clamp.  I wasn't about to lose the camera that I had just bought and potentially damage something on the ground, so I opted to hold off on using it.  The roll bar mount is for round tubes up to three inches, but the Cessna strut is larger and flattened to be more aerodynamic.  Because of that, the mount sits on top of it, instead of around it.  I'm still working on a solution for it, but whatever I come up with has to be absolutely secure.  Beyond that, I'm still trawling the regs to see if it would be in violation of something, but if you recall, the GoPro commercial did have externally-mounted cameras on an Extra.  As to whether or not they had special approval for that or not, I have no idea.

The ROAM2 in its assorted colors

For now, though, I have two more suction cup mounts on the way from Contour.  One will be used with the ContourROAM to snag different camera angles, and the other will be used with a ContourROAM2 I'm hoping to snag in the near future.  I have plans to add more, but I'll cross that bridge when I get to it.  In the end, I'm hoping to have an array of cameras for an idea I have to add more to what's written here.

www.contour.com

Every Flight Is Unique

At first, I was going to take a stab at talking about weather, but as I began looking back at what is required of pilots on each flight, I thought I'd take a broader approach.

One of the nice things about the regulations is that they offer a broad scope of authority to pilots.  While the regulations can get very specific about certain topics, you'll note FAR Part 91.3 is rather broad:

§ 91.3 Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command.
(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.
(b) In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency.
(c) Each pilot in command who deviates from a rule under paragraph (b) of this section shall, upon the request of the Administrator, send a written report of that deviation to the Administrator.

Using a broad brush here, the basic summary is that the pilot in command is responsible for, and has the final say in, the operation of the aircraft, but may have to justify his or her actions upon request.  You have to admit, that's a lot of authority that's being handed over.  Just like many things in life, however, it's a double-edged sword.  That wide-ranging authority also means that you may be called upon to answer for wide-ranging regulatory issues that may have arisen during a flight.

So, how do you minimize your risk of being called upon to answer for those wide-ranging regulatory issues?

You avoid them as much as possible.

Being a pilot doesn't mean that you need to walk around with the ability to cite the FARs at any possible moment, but knowledge of those FARs is extremely important.  At a minimum, you should be very familiar with Part 91, which should keep you out of most troubling scenarios.  In addition to the regulations, however, you should be aware of the information required by FAR Part 91.103:

§ 91.103 Preflight action.
Each pilot in command shall, before beginning a flight, become familiar with all available information concerning that flight. This information must include—
(a) For a flight under IFR or a flight not in the vicinity of an airport, weather reports and forecasts, fuel requirements, alternatives available if the planned flight cannot be completed, and any known traffic delays of which the pilot in command has been advised by ATC;
(b) For any flight, runway lengths at airports of intended use, and the following takeoff and landing distance information:
(1) For civil aircraft for which an approved Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual containing takeoff and landing distance data is required, the takeoff and landing distance data contained therein; and
(2) For civil aircraft other than those specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, other reliable information appropriate to the aircraft, relating to aircraft performance under expected values of airport elevation and runway slope, aircraft gross weight, and wind and temperature.

Of the many things that can get you into trouble, the main issues you're going to run into are probably airspace, P/R-Airspace, MOAs, TFRs, and weather.  Airspace, to include prohibited/restricted airspace and MOAs, is easily avoided by maintaining situational awareness and keeping a chart handy.  TFRs and weather, however, are a different story, as they change more frequently.  TFRs are something pilots in my area have grown accustomed to.  Being so close to Washington DC, you have to be particularly aware of what's going on, as the Nation's political happenings often include some form of TFR.  Other than that, the last main issue is weather, which should always be something to watch.

The difficulty with weather, though, is that it's constantly changing.  Beyond that, it's also occasionally difficult to understand the weather picture with some of the tools we've been given.  We have the METARs and TAFs (Terminal Aerodrome Forecasts) as closer pictures of the weather, with the FA (Area Forecast, and yes, FA is the abbreviation) providing a wider range of coverage.  Outside of that, you can look at the radar and satellite images, and even out your window.  Even with all of the tools at the Aviation Weather Center, sometimes your own interpretation of the weather isn't exactly as it is in the air.

Two of my last three attempts at flying ended up having weather that was not as forecast.  The first flight attempt had some pretty strong wind that was over 16 knots higher than forecast for the time, while the third flight had clouds that were lower than forecast, along with snow.  The visibility also left something to be desired at times.  The thing to remember, however, is that forecasts are forecasts.  They're a prediction of the future based on what is available at the time, and we all know how difficult predicting the future can be.

Occasionally, I'll find myself glancing at the TAF when it disagrees with the actual weather, wondering when it will actually take over and allow me to go flying.  That desire to go flying is always hard to shake, but remember that you're going to be flying in what you're seeing and what's reported, and not necessarily what's in the forecast.

As the pilot, you're charged with the final operation of the flight.  In order to ensure the safety of that operation, you're also charged with becoming familiar with all possible aspects of the flight prior to departure.  That includes a weight and balance, and other performance information.  Aircraft performance changes with weather, and as weather changes all the time, your measurement from the last flight might not be accurate.  If you have a lot of runway at your disposal, you may not think it's necessary, but if the actual performance differs significantly from the estimated performance, the information could be just as valuable to you as the engine check you made in the run up area.

Make sure to get a briefing, but remember that weather models and forecasts are not always correct.  If you do go flying, always have an out, but also remember that you can always stay on the ground.

Just to cover my own rear, here's a generic disclaimer:
The content provided here is informational only, and is not in any way, shape, or form legal guidance.  If any doubts exist, please contact your local FSDO, the administration, or an aviation lawyer.

Flying in the Snow

N9559V - C172R - 2.0 hours

After my trip to Italy, I had to jump right back onto another plane to head to San Antonio (SAT) for work, which meant I spent quite a lot of time in aircraft this month.  As I was sitting on the connecting flight through Atlanta (ATL) to Dulles (IAD), I ran the mental math and it came out to be about 25 hours in the back of commercial aircraft.  Of course, even though I spent all that time in aircraft, I couldn't log any of it.  After landing at IAD, I decided that I'd take a plane out before the month's end so that I could at least log a couple hours.

After blowing up Facebook asking people if they'd like to join on a trip to Charlottesville (CHO), Phil and I worked out a plan for what we'd like to do.  As with all plans down to CHO, we would fly down, grab some food from Timberwood, and fly back.  Since Phil's brother was down near CHO, we also diverted course slightly to fly over where he would be.

When we got up to the airport, there was a sign up on the desk saying "NO STUDENT SOLO," which I asked about, because the weather seemed to be mostly okay, despite a lower scattered layer of clouds than what the METARs and TAF indicated.  Apparently the conditions on the other side of the Blue Ridge mountains (towards Winchester - OKV) were marginal at best, which is where the practice area is.  I was warned to be careful about low clouds, and to keep it legal.  For those who aren't quite clear on why it would be illegal, the reason I've been doing all of this flying is to get my instrument rating, which, in simple terms, allows me to fly in clouds and poor weather.  It's a separate rating because it is more difficult to control an aircraft and navigate by looking solely at gauges and dials in the aircraft, and not out the window.  Until you have that rating, you have to keep away from clouds.

After another quick check of the weather both online and outside, Phil and I set off to take up a plane in the fleet that I had not yet flown.  Oddly enough, the last time I flew, I walked by it noting that fact and thought to myself "maybe next time."  Phil checked the fuel while I gave the aircraft its shakedown, and then after tossing way too many electronics into the aircraft, we set off towards CHO.

As soon as I could, I threw the blinders on after departure so that we could both start logging time.  Phil kept us clear of the clouds, while I brought us out towards Upperville (2VG2), and then slightly west of the normal course to overfly Wolftown, VA.  We had to descend a couple times to avoid the clouds, but they lifted as we flew south.  After practicing a couple turns around a point, which turned out to be the wrong point (house), we almost gave up to land at CHO when Phil got a text message with his brother's location in a field.  After turning around, we spotted them standing next to their truck and took a couple laps around them before heading back towards the airport.  On the way, tower assigned Runway 3, and then switched it to Runway 21 because the wind shifted.  The change in runway ended up saving us some time with a straight in landing.

The video picks up after passing Piney Mountain.  The banter in the background is both Phil and me negotiating my target on the runway, which ended up being the old numbers and the new thousand foot markers.  After that, you can hear me groan a bit as I realized I missed it, Phil asking if I'm going to get the nose up for once, and then me groaning a second time about letting the plane float.  The landing was pretty smooth, but in an effort to jump off at the first taxiway I pressed a little too hard on the right brake, causing it to skid.  You can hear me jokingly denying it and then reading back the taxi instructions before the clip ends.

[Video got lost when Contour closed down for a while.]
We passed a Gulfstream on the way in, and for the first time in the entirety of parking at Landmark, nobody came out to park me.  I, of course, took it as an opportunity to park wherever I wanted, and did just that.  The rampies were actually busy towing another plane, but one stopped by to check on us and see if we needed fuel before returning to marshal another plane out.  It was only after walking inside that we found that the crew car had just been taken by the pilots of the aforementioned Gulfstream.  I gave Keya a hard time about letting someone take my car, but her retort was something to the effect of "well I had no idea what to do with it since you haven't been around in so long."  Valid point.  It wasn't a huge deal in the end as she just dropped us off with their van.

Brief pause for Clint Eastwood burger consumption.

Getting ready to head back, I paid for the fuel, and then Keya asked me a ton of questions about the Superbowl in order to get some idea of how to fill her pool sheet out.  Phil and I walked back outside to set up all of the electronics again, started up and set off towards JYO.  Since I've started a tradition of my own signature departure from CHO, here's the video of it.

[Video got lost when Contour closed down for a while.]
After turning on course, I threw the hood back on to log more time, which amounted to 0.9 hours of hood time for the day.  Just 0.5 hours left before I could finish the rest of the instrument requirement in a simulator if I really wanted to, but where's the fun in that?

Getting closer to JYO, and after switching controllers, our radar service was terminated because the radar up at IAD wasn't picking us up in all of the snow.  For a second, we came back up, but then dropped off again, so I told the controller we'd cancel the radar services and just utilize the normal JYO Maneuvering Area procedures.  It added a couple minutes to the flight, but it also kept us from giving the controller a headache.  The clouds dropped back down again, along with the visibility because of the snow falling.  Similar to the rain video I got a while back, the snow looks like you're hitting light speed as it flies by.  It was somewhat unnerving to hear Potomac working an IFR flight on the ILS Runway 17 approach to JYO as we continued in visually, but we sequenced ourselves properly over the frequency, landing in between that IFR Cirrus, and another VFR Bonanza behind us.

Right before I shut down, I snagged the AWOS weather report for insurance in case anyone questioned how visual the weather really was:
KJYO 262115Z AUTO 32005KT 5SM -SN BKN038 OVC044 00/M02 A3026 RMK AO2

I wouldn't recommend buzzing around an area you don't know very well in conditions like that, but if you know the area well and have good tools for situational awareness, you can remain reasonably safe even in degraded conditions.  I'll put it this way: I'll take those conditions in the day over clear and moonless with a low altitude at night.

Another awesome flight for the books.

Hours:
Pilot in Command Cross Country (PIC XC): 2.0 - 76.2 (of 50)
Actual/Simulated Instrument (Act/Sim): 0.9 - 10.5 (of 40)