by Sabrina Woods, FAA Air Traffic Organization

A non-instrument-rated pilot originally planned for a much-anticipated cross-country trip but instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) conditions at the airport prevented the pilot from leaving on the intended day. After two days of waiting, IMC still prevailed; however several witnesses observed the pilot and the pilot’s son at the fuel dock. At the time they all assumed that the pilot would taxi back to the hangar since the ceilings were between 200-400 feet above ground level (AGL). Instead, the airplane departed and disappeared from view into the overcast clouds. Multiple witnesses heard the airplane continuously change speed and direction, followed by the sound of the airplane impacting the ground. Airplane components were found in two locations: at the main wreckage site and along a debris path that consisted of the outboard portions of the left wing and left stabilator. Both the pilot and son suffered fatal injuries in the crash.

In 2011, shortly after departure for a VFR cross-country sightseeing flight over ocean waters, a Cessna Skywagon encountered IMC. Weather radar data and satellite imagery revealed that a tropical wave had produced thunderstorms with heavy rain and 47-knot winds. The aircraft was eventually recovered from the ocean. It was not equipped for instrument flight, nor was there any record of the pilot requesting a weather briefing at any time during the flight. The pilot and four passengers were killed in the mishap.

In 2015, a pilot attempted a solo VFR nighttime training flight despite the fact that the pilot’s flight instructor had not cleared the pilot for this phase of training; believing the pilot needed more practice with an instructor on board. The flight was conducted on a dark, moonless night, under an overcast ceiling, and over the ocean. About seven minutes into the flight, the pilot encountered IMC and requested assistance from ATC. Despite their best efforts to vector the pilot, the aircraft impacted the ground at a high rate of speed and the pilot was killed.

Shocked!

Each year the Joseph T. Nall Report provides detailed analysis of GA accident data and safety trends. The most recent report (2014 data) indicated there were 1,163 non-commercial, fixed-wing accidents. More than 70-percent of the accidents that occurred in IMC were fatal compared to 15-percent of those that occurred within visual meteorological conditions (VMC). As the preceding accident summaries demonstrate, flying VFR into IMC is still by far the most lethal causal factor for general aviation mishaps. For this reason, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has determined it to be a major safety hazard for the GA community.

When I was researching accidents that resulted from VFR into IMC, what stood out is that, unlike most of the other mishap causal factors, this particular rate of occurrence has remained stubbornly fixed — drifting between a 79 and 92-percent fatal accident rate for VFR into IMC over the last several decades. Decades! This is in spite of several significant upgrades in weather forecasting technology, and a rather robust safety awareness and education campaign effort specifically focused on the subject. My research left me shocked and more than just a little concerned about why this particular phenomenon keeps occurring.

So Why Does It Still Happen?

The FAA, NTSB, and various aviation safety advocates from industry and academia alike have tried to determine what happens when a pilot finds him or herself in the incredibly hazardous situation of being VFR flying into IMC conditions. Some researchers have theorized that cockpit technologies are insufficient at depicting meteorological conditions in real time. Others believe that pilots get distracted or that they overestimate their own aeronautical abilities. Others even go so far as to accuse aviators of being willful in their disregard for the dangers and deem flying VFR into IMC as an act of negligence.

While I think some of these ideas have merit (others, not so much) I, too, have a couple of different theories to offer on how VFR into IMC can happen. I humbly present to you what I call the “just around the river bend” bad idea; the “where’d everybody go?” gaffe; and the “there’s no place like home” hot spot. Let me explain further …

It’s Just Around the River Bend …?

In this situation, a pilot is flying along when the visibility starts to deteriorate. Instead of diverting from the undesirable condition or even just landing the aircraft, he or she continues, thinking that clearer conditions might be just “around the river bend.” Or worse, he or she relies on the latest weather app to “shoot the gap” and tries to fly through the inclement weather.

As you might have read in the May/June 2018 edition of this magazine in my “Weather Technology in the Cockpit” article, one mission of the initiative is to educate pilots on the inherent inaccuracies, latencies, and limitations of weather displays in the cockpit. Information that you see on your favorite weather app might not be real-time, with lagging delays of up to 20 minutes! This means that the hole a pilot might try to slip through is no longer there upon arrival.

Another reason some pilots are reluctant to turn around is what human factors scientists call “sunk cost bias.” In general, we are often reluctant to turn away from something when we feel we have already put a certain amount of time, effort, and money into it. We would rather hang on just a little longer because we value the very real “wasted” effort more than the intangible hazard. Regardless, waiting for a hole that might never manifest, or prioritizing the extra $$ you burned trying to get to your destination is just a bad idea when dealing with foul weather or poor visibility.

Where’d Everybody Go?!

Another reason pilots might unwittingly find themselves in a bad “VFR into IMC situation” is because the conditions changed without the pilot observing it happening. Picture this: You are flying along in VFR conditions when you take a moment to fiddle with your radio that keeps emitting a high-pitched squeal when you key the mic. Once satisfied that the squelchy situation is resolved, you look up to find yourself on the cusp between marginal VFR conditions and IMC. The soup is getting worse with every passing minute, and the “where’d everybody go?!” panic starts to set in.

This scenario is more common than you might think and is often the result of distraction — when something not pertinent to the task at hand captures and holds your attention; or fixation — when you are overly focused on one specific task to the detriment of all others. Poor situation awareness, lack of experience in interpreting changing weather conditions, and overestimating one’s own abilities are also common culprits in missing the shift from VMC to “not-VMC.” These mistakes can break down the efficacy of your aeronautical decision making which can lead to additional errors and an increase in risk. Mitigate them by creating systematic procedures that work for you and your aircraft type, and by creating and closely following a scan pattern.

There’s No Place Like Home

Very similar to the “just around the river bend” bad idea is the overwhelming desire to just get home. Colloquially this is called “get-home-itis” or “get-there-itis”; however, most theorists refer to it as plan continuation bias. It is similar to the former because the aversion to sunk costs is the same. But get-home-itis often goes much deeper because the pilot is particularly keen to accomplish his or her goal regardless of the fact that things have changed and there are indications that doing so is very risky (see Air Safety Institute video in Learn More). Sometimes complacency (I’ve done it before, so why shouldn’t it work this time?) over-reliance on technology, and good ol’ fashioned pride can get in the way of a person’s making the safer, albeit seemingly inconvenient choice.

Victims of plan continuation bias can be internally motivated (e.g., wanting to get home to a waiting family member), externally motivated (e.g., wanting to get the rental back to avoid additional charges) or a combination of both. When it comes to flying VFR into IMC, this bias can compel a pilot to make unsafe choices in his or her aeronautical decision making. An excellent and rather sad example is in the very first paragraph of this article. Despite the fact that we all know there is no place like home, sometimes it is better if the getting there desire waits in deference to a safer course of action.

An Ounce of Prevention …

Benjamin Franklin once penned that “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” Granted, Mr. Franklin was talking about fire safety; however, the axiom rings true today and is easily applicable to a host of different situations. Thorough pre-flight planning and being conscious of your skill set and experience level, aids in thwarting VFR into IMC tragedies. The best time to take preventative measures is by building a solid “Plan A” and a “Plan B” before you go fly. If you are anything like me you will even build a “Plan B++.” In your plans you should consider what alternate courses of action will be available if the weather or visibility starts to turn sour, when you should consider adopting those courses of action, and a realistic assessment of your own personal minimums so that you know exactly what you need to do to avoid ever getting close to a bad situation.

Trust me on this. Being in the thick of things is no time to try and reconnoiter and develop a Plan B. Spatial disorientation, in particular, often goes hand in hand in VFR into IMC accidents. When it comes to deteriorating weather conditions, if you are not instrument qualified, the best course of action is to remain in VFR conditions and land the plane as soon as possible.

To put a different twist on an oft-quoted line from the famous final airplane scene in Casablanca: If that plane leaves [VMC], you’ll regret it — soon and for the rest of your life. Because if you do the right thing, then maybe not today, and maybe not tomorrow, you will eventually get where you’re going, but without the regrets that you — or the loved ones you leave behind — would have if you fall prey to a VFR-into-IMC accident.

Learn More

• VFR into IMC Seminar with FAA’s Jim Viola
• SKYbrary “Inadvertent VFR into IMC”
• AOPA Air Safety Institute, “Accident Case Study: In Too Deep”

Sabrina Woods is a guest writer for the FAA Safety Briefing. She is a human factors scientist with the FAA’s Air Traffic Organization. She spent 12 years as an aircraft maintenance officer and an aviation mishap investigator in the Air Force.