Diminishing takeoff conditions

[Foggy]

So I took my friend down to WVI near Santa Cruz. We came out at around 11:30am and ate some food and I preflighted the plane. Well, we were totally strapped in, iPad mounted, GPS ready, kneepad open, and I turn the mags on, turn the starter, and nothing. Apparently the started was borked.

So we switched planes and by the time we were taxing onto the runway it was already 1:15pm. It was an hour long flight with a nice 10kt headwind the whole way south. I had planned to get picked up by some friends who were planning on surfing, and then probably getting a cab back between 6-7pm so I could be back before nightfall, although I am night current and wasn't too worried about the possibility of flying at night if we had to. I had been checking the status of the coastal fog, which I knew would overtake the airport at night and would burn off by noon each day. Well it was totally clear since around 11am that morning, and I could see the solid fog bank back off the coast on our approach to Watsonville. I asked in the airport office about what time the fog normally comes back in, and they said probably around 8. I confirmed that with the TAF sites in the area that forecasted clear skies at 8pm, but a 500 overcast by 9pm. We couldn't get picked up by our friends so we took a cab and walked to the destination. We watched some surfers for an hour or so and ate food while we waited for out friends to arrive. By then I realized that we would have to leave right when our friends got here, using their car most likely, as I could see down the coast towards the region where the airport was and I saw the fog start to move in off the shore and push up onto the land.

I periodically called the AWOS at the field, and it was consistently 10sm vis and sky clear. But I did notice that around 6pm the temp started dropping, from the high of around 22C it was down to 18C, dew point 12C. I called the AWOS again a bit later and the only change was the temp to 17C/12C. This made me a bit nervous, as I have read that with a dew point spread of less than 5 degrees you can start having visible moisture. I could tell that the fog was getting much thicker along the shoreline and up into the hills.

Our friends arrived and I basically carjacked them to get to the airport. On the way I called the AWOS again and it was reporting 10 miles vis, but a 15C/12C spread with 700 broken. This was not what I wanted to hear, but I imagined that with two intersecting runways, that I could always take off away from the fog and towards the clear sky inland. I hoped that maybe the fog was just directly over the reporting station and the whole field wasn't covered. We were driving through thick fog on the way, but about 10 minutes out we started to see patchy blue sky. This was promising, but as we got even closer the sky got dark again.

We jumped out and ran to the plane, I could see some sky off the end of runway 02, and if we departed to the north, and I thought that if we moved quickly, we could just stay clear of clouds until we were out from under them, then climb. I did a fast preflight, and had to keep reminding myself that not conducting a good preflight could be worse than taking off into potential IMC, and that we could always just walk down the road and get a hotel for the night. I convinced myself to just "get it up" and onto the runway to see how it looked from there. I also found the landing light to be inoperative during the preflight. I quickly taxied up the runway 2, listening to the AWOS. It was reporting from the south at 7knots and 400 overcast. So I was taking off with a tailwind, but I could see that straight out there was a patch of clear sky, and I knew that the fog was thin, and did not go any farther than that clear spot, as it was pushing inland from only one direction. There were some hills to the north, but I was sure I could stay below the fog, then climb and be well clear of the hills. Even though my brain was telling me the logic of the situation, I couldn't stop imagining NTSB reports with my name on them.

I did a quick runup, not skipping anything, but quick. Then taxied out and pushed full power, I climbed for a few seconds, and then leveled off, I could now see the fog layer very clearly, I stayed at 300 feet, then climbed through what I thought was the clear spot. It was actually just less dense fog, and while I was still climbing through clear air, there was fog on both sides of me. I never lost sight of the horizon or had any trouble seeing the ground, it was just nerve-wracking. I knew that if there was IFR traffic it would probably be landing right at me, but I checked and I don't think there is an instrument approach for that runway, although I am not instrument rated so I can't be sure. Overall it was completely fine, and the flight home was uneventful (besides the large amount of firefighting planes going past me). But I think what I did was probably stupid, I never thought I would find myself taking off with a tailwind with a 400ft overcast and 6 mile vis reported with one end of the runway almost swirling with ground fog.

I have some photos that better show the situation:

https://imgur.com/a/epvV4

 

[Jim Logajan]

I couldn't stop imagining NTSB reports with my name on them.

You need not have worried - your name would not have appeared (unless you are really famous.) Just the registration number of your aircraft would appear.

I have some photos that better show the situation:

http://imgur.com/a/epvV4

Hmmm. Based on the description in your text I was expecting to see something much worse than what your photos show.

 

[Jim Logajan]

As for legality, taking off on rwy 2 and turning right, the OP overflew the city. That's 1000 feet minimum. At at 1000 feet, that's in Class E, so the cloud clearance was 500/1000/2000. So, he either busted 14 CFR 91.119 or 14 CFR 91.155, and certainly 14 CFR 91.13.

91.119 starts with "Except when necessary for takeoff or landing," so no violation could have happened with regard to that regulation. Besides, lots of airports would be impossible to use without that qualifier to 91.119.

Claims of violations to 91.13 shouldn't be allowed on Internet aviation forums.

Even in Class G, the FLIGHT VISIBILITY must be 1 mile, which is unlikely in the light fog described.

In summer, you PLAN to stay overnight, and the marine layer becomes far, far less of an issue. Or you get an instrument rating.

His photos seem to show visibility beyond a mile.

 

[Jim Logajan]

It was most definitely illegal. See Administrator v. Murphy for someone who got caught doing just what you did, and got 90 days on the ground to consider the error of his ways.

Murphy entered clouds. The OP did not. The pivotal facts of Murphy do not match the flight the OP describes or his photos show.

Also, your understanding of the "necessary for takeoffs and landings" exception is flawed. It only applies during the climb to and descent from pattern altitude or other legal 91.119 altitude -- it does not authorize you to level off below 500 feet after takeoff in order to stay under the weather.

Why does temporarily leveling off to avoid some clouds during ascent suddenly turn a takeoff into a non-takeoff? Does leveling off 500 ft over a populated area during landing to get back on a glide slope (because you descended too quickly) also turn that landing into a violation of the regulations?

 

[Jim Logajan]

Thank you -- I misread the original post. But since the OP "then climbed through what I thought was the clear spot. It was actually just less dense fog", I still think this would be considered a violation of 91.13 and 91.119 as well as 91.155. Note that by definition, fog means a visibility of less than 5/8 mile, and you need 1 mile and clear of clouds to be legal VFR in Class G airspace.

The OP posted a link to photos showing the clouds, fog, and haze that prevailed in the area. Since neither you nor I can say with any confidence what the visibility was of the "less dense fog" and which of the conditions he photographed match what he flew through, it would seem premature to claim any absolutes in regards to regulation violations. Keep in mind that if the OP saw blue sky from the ground, though, that very fact would indicate visibility was indeed much greater than 1 mile since it takes many miles of atmosphere to turn light into a "blue sky". I believe if you have to fly right into a cloud to discern it, then it isn't per se limiting visibility.

You want to custom-tailor situations to try to poke holes in the FAA's position, go right ahead, but taking off VFR under a cloud deck of less than 500 feet is going to be considered a violation of that rule.

You made an important claim regarding the interaction of two regulations that I have never seen claimed before. In order to fly within regulations I think it fair to determine the origin, logic, and extent of that regulatory interaction. So I am forced to ask questions about hypothetical situations to determine the extent of your claims.

Also, you may say that you are stating the FAA's position, but right now all I know for certain is that it is your position. The only position that may have "holes" is yours; you need to provide something more substantial to prove the position belongs to anyone but you.