IFR Take Off Considerations

[Spandau]

An interesting conversation happened today while everyone was siting around in the fog and drinking coffee. Here's the scenario: you are in a private, single-engine, high performance airplane - call it a Cessna 210 for argument sake. The weather is 3/4 mile and 100' overcast. Can you legally depart?

[frog]

Is a Cessna 210 a high performance airplane ?
Doubt it !

[lownslow]

Depends on the runway but generally I would say yes. Don’t know if I’d want to.

[wordstwice]

For a private operator the only thing governing your legal takeoff is visibility.

With the ceiling at 100’ and not being able to return is limiting in a CASS operation and would require a take of alternate but you could still depart.

[dialdriver]

An interesting conversation happened today while everyone was siting around in the fog and drinking coffee. Here's the scenario: you are in a private, single-engine, high performance airplane - call it a Cessna 210 for argument sake. The weather is 3/4 mile and 100' overcast. Can you legally depart?

Yes, in this case. IFR departures are governed by visibility only. You will need 1/2 mile to take off.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Just because you can legally do something doesn’t necessarily make it a good idea…..

[2R]

Not enough weather information to make any decision . What is causing the low ceiling ? What about temperature dew point spread ?
Ice ? Enroute Weather ? Destination weather ? Weather guessers accurate this week ? Probability of unforecast weather ?
Coastal ? Mountain ? Prairie ?
Where are the Fronts ? Cold fronts in summer and Warm fronts in winter create the most challenging weather conditions that demand respect in ANY aircraft , Civil or Military .

[trey kule]

If I understood the OP’s question correctly he was asking if it was legal to depart.

The answer is Yes.

I expect we have all learned from the unasked questions about other considerations, whether it is wise etc. So much good information that had nothing to do with the question asked.
You gotta love the internet.

[Float_lover]

For a private operator the only thing governing your legal takeoff is visibility.

With the ceiling at 100’ and not being able to return is limiting in a CASS operation and would require a take of alternate but you could still depart.

This is only in company, take-off alternate are not required (should be) in 604

[Spandau]

Not enough weather information to make any decision . What is causing the low ceiling ? What about temperature dew point spread ?
Ice ? Enroute Weather ? Destination weather ? Weather guessers accurate this week ? Probability of unforecast weather ?
Coastal ? Mountain ? Prairie ?
Where are the Fronts ? Cold fronts in summer and Warm fronts in winter create the most challenging weather conditions that demand respect in ANY aircraft , Civil or Military .

Actually, this is just a hypothetical question at face value.

But I thought it used to say in the Cap Gen that you needed 1/2 a mile and landing limits on a runway. Obviously I'm thinking of something else, but I just wanted the opinion of the learned herd. And yes, just because it's legal doesn't make it a good idea.

[‘Bob’]

Of course you can.

All you need is 1/2 mile to takeoff.

If weather is below landing minima, you need a takeoff alternate but only for Part 7 operations for which this aircraft would be excluded from operating IFR under any weather conditions.

It’s also a single engine plane so if you have an engine failure you are out of luck no matter what. 3 miles and 1000 feet would make that impossible turn a necessary one (cue Interstellar music). What other return would have to be immediate vs continuing to destination? Fire? You won’t have a chance to set up for an approach anyways unless it’s a reciprocal one and it’s probably at higher minimums—did you think of that? Control or structural or low fuel or instrument problems make low minimums the least of your concerns. Sick passenger maybe?

I know a lot of mostly older and wealthier individuals who treat their Centurions like a PC-12 or a TBM850 but they are going to find themselves statistics one of these days.

A piston single is a cloud breaking airplane. Layer of fog giving you 1/2 mile VV001? Sure. Solid IMC up to 10,000 with ice? Even in a P210 with radar and TKS, not a chance.

[Spandau]

Somebody (Budd Davisson, maybe) once called single-engine, single-pilot IFR "the World's Most Dangerous Legalized Sport", and I'm inclined to agree. But, as I said, it was just a hypothetical question.

[fish4life]

Single engine piston IFR is one reason why the cirrus having a chute is a good idea. If it’s hard IFR and that engine quits your best chance is pulling the chute

[rookiepilot]

This is why (SP, SE) IFR is much more complex than VFR....way more legal, yet not wise, options......then add icing and embedded CB's.

I've done my share but with some hard, (read conservative) rules.....

I'm not convinced a twin is that much safer ---at least in those first moments after T/O......losing one just entering IMC near the blue line speed, doesn't sound fun for an amateur like me.....

[digits_]

Somebody (Budd Davisson, maybe) once called single-engine, single-pilot IFR "the World's Most Dangerous Legalized Sport", and I'm inclined to agree. But, as I said, it was just a hypothetical question.

A very broad statement. Treat it with respect, but it doesn't have to be dangerous. Using that logic VFR at 500 AGL is fine, but IFR at 5000 ft with a cloud base at 500 AGL is not?

[fish4life]

This is why (SP, SE) IFR is much more complex than VFR....way more legal, yet not wise, options......then add icing and embedded CB's.

I've done my share but with some hard, (read conservative) rules.....

I'm not convinced a twin is that much safer ---at least in those first moments after T/O......losing one just entering IMC near the blue line speed, doesn't sound fun for an amateur like me.....

Depends on the definition of amateur, if amateur is someone that flies 20 hours a year I agree. If amateur is someone that doesn’t fly professionally but flys 200 hours a year an practices various scenarios then I disagree

[digits_]

A twin might also not be much safer the first few seconds after rotation, but it sure will be the next few hours in cruise!

[oldncold]

did my first ifr ride over 30years ago with ernie pool tc inspector great guy full of tips on ifr. during the ground portion of my ride
gave me a scenario of the rutland one departure out of ylw, which was. it's 200ft 1/2 mile can you depart in your twin Comanche. I knew the answer was yes ernie then said you are now at 600ft agl and your engine fails. what is the climb gradient required and environmental conditions your now single engine. Climb in ft per min. never forgot ernies wisdom of that lesson that I would be royally hooped. ride went well and he signed off my ir it. so to original poster make sure ya look up the climb gradient on the departure. to make sure that if the poop hits the fan you can meet the ft per nm or min in those imc min conditio

[digits_]

Correct me if I am wrong, but single engine in a twin you do not need to meet the climb gradients on the charts, you only need to make sure you don't hit anything.

[dialdriver]

Correct me if I am wrong, but single engine in a twin you do not need to meet the climb gradients on the charts, you only need to make sure you don't hit anything.

There is no requirement to follow CAP Departure Procedures at any time, single engine or not.