Since the advent of GPS, I just punch in my eventual destination, and make the rest up as I go along. Half the fun for me is not knowing where I'm going to land next.

Flying cross country in an open cockpit ultralight, like the 1500 mile trip to Gimli Manitoba I made in '83, with paper charts was a whole different deal. Refueling was 100% via truck stops and gas stations, no taxiing up to a self serve fuel island and whipping out the credit card. Imagine unfolding a badly needed sectional in a direct 45 mph slipstream, and with no cell phone and their capabilities. No Ipad either of course, you pussies! I consider myself also pussifed nowadays, when I get in my enclosed cabin with heat, two GPSs, smartphone, and an 8 hour duration minimum, flight planning is sooo easy. No Ipad yet though. And I still use an antique paper Flight Guide, mostly because it has numerous notes I've made in the margins that are still useful, though most of the runway headings have changed due to the earth's wobble I'm told. I cross check it with my Adventure Pilot GPS's data base, if I remember. It's funny, how just in a few years, my ultralight xc's hold more in common with the flying from the 19teens and '20's, then they do with the way we aviate now!

That’s awesome. One of my favorite things to do with friends when I’m a passenger is to have them turn off their GPS and use a paper sectional for fun.

It becomes pretty serious, pretty fast, with some of these “children of the magenta line” who’ve completely lost all their land navigation skills.

When they’re riding in my plane, it’s even more fun watching them try to use my VOR’s to pinpoint their position.

Courierguy,

Beeryboats and his dad started back in the pre-computer era. I agree they would miss the more interesting aspects of flying cross country should they load the little airplane down with various GPS, tablets, batteries, etc. There is so much more interesting to see on any route through the desert and mountains. Yes, we can see out with all the electronic gear in. Do we want to give up some out for in and is the total experience the same?

Jim

A great read on the longest cross country (flying all the way around the world) is “Three-Eight Charlie”, written by Jerrie Mock, the first woman to fly solo around the world in 1964 in a Cessna 180.

When you see what she accomplished navigating her flights without any of the conveniences we have today (smartphone in the palm of your hand or the internet in general) you really gain an appreciation for how easy we have it.

I guess my jokingly made point, was that a simple GPS is such a game changer for me ( and one I'd be loathe to give up), I have yet to feel an urgent need for many of the aids mentioned here, iPads, in flight WX, etc. I think they are all great, just haven't got round to them yet. I never had VOR, or Loran, so straight from paper to GPS, wow......

Yeah, the first panel mount Apollo GPS installed in our 170B in 1990 was mind blowing at the time. The fact that you could type in an airport identifier instead of GPS coordinates and it gave you a heading made it seem like you could never need any more. A moving map chart wasn’t even on our radar or thoughts!

It’s a wonder folks successfully flew all those decades in all these old planes with nothing but a compass, chart, and a clock. (sarcasm alert!)

CamTom12 wrote:Beautiful Vag!

This ^^^

Cary

Jay,

As others have suggested, just think of it as a bunch of quick hops. The one thing that I would do is bite the bullet and purchase the XM weather for your trip. ADSB weather is nice but it is nice to see the big picture so you can make in flight routing decisions based on the weather ahead.

Tim

I have been flying with ADS-B weather now for about 4 1/2 years, and frankly, I can't see the benefit of XM, other than the ability to get it on the ground in some canyon. That's not worth the cost, to me. To others, maybe. Everywhere I've flown in the last couple or three years, since all the towers became operational, I've been able to pick up the weather shortly after leaving the pattern altitude. It's easily good for 200 miles ahead, and at Vagabond speeds (or my hot rod P172D speeds), that's plenty for enroute diversion planning. So with a decent ADS-B receiver (I have a Stratus 2) and an iPad with ForeFlight, there's a great weather picture available that is only a few minutes old, plus a lot of other bennies that ForeFlight provides. That is so different from when I was flying back in the paleolithic age!

Cary

beeryboats wrote:Thanks for the overwhelming advice everyone! And yes I have read that book, and no, I've had it to 6500' when I was much younger and lighter and that's all she's got! Not kidding, full throttle and nose high. Not fun!

<snip>
Thanks,
Jay

Were you properly leaning it? Or is that one of the models that has a fixed jet? If you can lean it, do so, because it will make all the difference in its power at higher altitudes.

A story: Back in the late 70s and into the mid 80s, I was instructing part time at Laramie, elevation 7277', DA in the summer approaching 10,000' at times. This day was summer, but not that hot, so perhaps a DA of between 8500' and 9000'. A brand spanking new 172 landed, and a young couple with two little girls came in, borrowed our crew car, and drove into town for lunch. When they returned, they had the airplane refueled, loaded up, and taxied out. I could tell from the color of the exhaust that he wasn't leaning on the ground. After his runup, he taxied onto 21 and started his take off roll. Pretty soon, he was taxiing back in--he'd aborted the take off.

He asked the girl at the desk if there was a mechanic--something was wrong with the airplane, because it had no power. It was the weekend, so no, there wasn't any mechanic available. I interjected: "Did you lean for take off?" I got a deer-in-the-headlights look from him--he hadn't the slightest idea what I was talking about. So I explained the need to lean at higher elevations, and of course, he wanted to argue that the POH said to take off full rich. So I had to persuade him, and then I offered to show him how to do it, which we did.

After he shut it down again, the family loaded up, taxied out, and this time after they pulled out onto 21, they took off--just like every 172 should, when properly leaned.

So your little Vagabond, if it can be leaned, should be leaned, starting at about 2500' MSL. The difference will be dramatic.

Cary

contactflying wrote:Courierguy,

Beeryboats and his dad started back in the pre-computer era. I agree they would miss the more interesting aspects of flying cross country should they load the little airplane down with various GPS, tablets, batteries, etc. There is so much more interesting to see on any route through the desert and mountains. Yes, we can see out with all the electronic gear in. Do we want to give up some out for in and is the total experience the same?

Jim

Jim, you hit the nail on the head. Yes, I have an iPad just for foreflight but have not downloaded it yet. I'm not real comfortable with electronics as some younger folks are. I should say, portable electronics. I'm up to my neck in computers at work. Dad does pretty good with his GPS but I prefer a paper chart. The battery never goes dead. Lol. And yes I have many hours in a Baby Great Lakes open cockpit biplane using paper charts.

The reason I joined this forum is you guys know mountain flying and I'm trying to avoid it. I'm worried about routes below 6000' and fuel stops every 1-1/2 to 2 hours at 80kts. Seems to me sectional charts are only so useful. They show the highest point, but that could be a tower. Can you overlay topography maps over a sectional to get a better idea of what you may be up against?

Google Earth puts terrain elevation down on the bottom of the screen as you move the mouse across the map. That would be a good starting point IMO. When flying this type of airplane through the mountains, I usually follow a major river or interstate highway. They also take the lowest elevations through the mountains and usually there is a good selection of airports along the way for fuel.

I have quietly entertained your proposed flight for some time. From northern California, I would take I-5 north to the Columbia River, east to Ken Wa., I-90 to I-15 junction south about 30 miles south on I-15 there is a river that loops and turns northeast follow it back up to I-90. Go east on I-90 to Three forks MT. Go north on the Missouri River until you get to Great Falls MT. once there the options open up going east you could stay on the Missouri river or start to angle south from there.

I think the highest point along this route is 5920'. That is in Montana when you first start going south on I-15. The north route also typically provides cooler temps and better aircraft performance.

You only need topo maps (1:25,000) for the passes. Study the pass north and south of the planned route as well as the planned pass. Climb with the terrain unless you get lots of thermals. Click my signature box for complete stuff on mountains flying. I spend most of the chapter on finding ridge lift into prevailing winds. You should have generally tail winds going east. There is a free topo map site on the internet. Just keep enlarging until the contour interval is 20-100 feet or so.

The main thing is energy management. Slow in thermal updrafts, fast through downdrafts. Otherwise just let tailwind lift you up the alluvial slope in the desert and stay with the ridge, even off heading a bit to gain altitude. There is no worry with low AGL as long as we can turn to lower terrain. Let the nose go down in the turn. Make S turns to stay on the upwind side of the ridge until you gain comfortable altitude. You will be going down between ranges for gas, so use terrain or thermals to get back up without waisting time and fuel getting up.

With 15kts tailwind, and your airspeed, you could climb My. Taylor, without s turns. But the pass either side is only 9,000 and wide as the desert.

Call me 417-830-0638.

Jim

Lost wrote:Google Earth puts terrain elevation down on the bottom of the screen as you move the mouse across the map. That would be a good starting point IMO. When flying this type of airplane through the mountains, I usually follow a major river or interstate highway. They also take the lowest elevations through the mountains and usually there is a good selection of airports along the way for fuel.

I have quietly entertained your proposed flight for some time. From northern California, I would take I-5 north to the Columbia River, east to Ken Wa., I-90 to I-15 junction south about 30 miles south on I-15 there is a river that loops and turns northeast follow it back up to I-90. Go east on I-90 to Three forks MT. Go north on the Missouri River until you get to Great Falls MT. once there the options open up going east you could stay on the Missouri river or start to angle south from there.

I think the highest point along this route is 5920'. That is in Montana when you first start going south on I-15. The north route also typically provides cooler temps and better aircraft performance.

Good idea!

contactflying wrote:You only need topo maps (1:25,000) for the passes. Study the pass north and south of the planned route as well as the planned pass. Climb with the terrain unless you get lots of thermals. Click my signature box for complete stuff on mountains flying. I spend most of the chapter on finding ridge lift into prevailing winds. You should have generally tail winds going east. There is a free topo map site on the internet. Just keep enlarging until the contour interval is 20-100 feet or so.

The main thing is energy management. Slow in thermal updrafts, fast through downdrafts. Otherwise just let tailwind lift you up the alluvial slope in the desert and stay with the ridge, even off heading a bit to gain altitude. There is no worry with low AGL as long as we can turn to lower terrain. Let the nose go down in the turn. Make S turns to stay on the upwind side of the ridge until you gain comfortable altitude. You will be going down between ranges for gas, so use terrain or thermals to get back up without waisting time and fuel getting up.

With 15kts tailwind, and your airspeed, you could climb My. Taylor, without s turns. But the pass either side is only 9,000 and wide as the desert.

Call me 417-830-0638.

Jim

I grew up in the San Francisco bay area, and flying rc sailplanes was my only hobby. I could sit up at Cal State Hayward and fly off that slope all day! Dad and I used to get all kinds of lift flying the east bay hills in his Cessna 140. There's nothing scarier than the sink on the back side of a ridge.

Going East, when on the back side of the ridge, it's all about the vertical space available. Exit down the drainage to the desert. Up drainage at the next range after fuel.

colopilot wrote:
With respect to iPads, definitely. Foreflight now lets you use a web browser to plan on your PC which will sync to your tablet as well, so while I like Skyvector a whole lot, I like being able to instantly translate all of that work to my in-flight tools even better. Also bring a portable battery pack or two since you probably don't have an electrical system (you mentioned hand propping).

FYI, you can export from skyvector to Foreflight.

Cary wrote:

Jay,

As others have suggested, just think of it as a bunch of quick hops. The one thing that I would do is bite the bullet and purchase the XM weather for your trip. ADSB weather is nice but it is nice to see the big picture so you can make in flight routing decisions based on the weather ahead.

Tim

I have been flying with ADS-B weather now for about 4 1/2 years, and frankly, I can't see the benefit of XM, other than the ability to get it on the ground in some canyon. That's not worth the cost, to me. To others, maybe. Everywhere I've flown in the last couple or three years, since all the towers became operational, I've been able to pick up the weather shortly after leaving the pattern altitude. It's easily good for 200 miles ahead, and at Vagabond speeds (or my hot rod P172D speeds), that's plenty for enroute diversion planning. So with a decent ADS-B receiver (I have a Stratus 2) and an iPad with ForeFlight, there's a great weather picture available that is only a few minutes old, plus a lot of other bennies that ForeFlight provides. That is so different from when I was flying back in the paleolithic age!

Cary

You haven’t spent any time in the northern Rockies or the rest of Montana and the Dakotas then, or if you did, you were at relatively high altitude.

I tried using ADS-B weather in this country with poor success. Look at the distribution of GBTs in MT, ND, and SD. Long ways between transmitters.

And I for one get a nose bleed at greater than 1000 agl. I like to see the country and it’s inhabitants.

XM Weather works EVERYwhere, all the time.

MTV

mtv wrote:

Cary wrote:

Jay,

As others have suggested, just think of it as a bunch of quick hops. The one thing that I would do is bite the bullet and purchase the XM weather for your trip. ADSB weather is nice but it is nice to see the big picture so you can make in flight routing decisions based on the weather ahead.

Tim

I have been flying with ADS-B weather now for about 4 1/2 years, and frankly, I can't see the benefit of XM, other than the ability to get it on the ground in some canyon. That's not worth the cost, to me. To others, maybe. Everywhere I've flown in the last couple or three years, since all the towers became operational, I've been able to pick up the weather shortly after leaving the pattern altitude. It's easily good for 200 miles ahead, and at Vagabond speeds (or my hot rod P172D speeds), that's plenty for enroute diversion planning. So with a decent ADS-B receiver (I have a Stratus 2) and an iPad with ForeFlight, there's a great weather picture available that is only a few minutes old, plus a lot of other bennies that ForeFlight provides. That is so different from when I was flying back in the paleolithic age!

Cary

You haven’t spent any time in the northern Rockies or the rest of Montana and the Dakotas then, or if you did, you were at relatively high altitude.

I tried using ADS-B weather in this country with poor success. Look at the distribution of GBTs in MT, ND, and SD. Long ways between transmitters.

And I for one get a nose bleed at greater than 1000 agl. I like to see the country and it’s inhabitants.

XM Weather works EVERYwhere, all the time.

MTV

True. The farthest north I've been since acquiring ADS-B In was Hardin, MT.

Cary

Cary wrote:

CamTom12 wrote:Beautiful Vag!

This ^^^

Cary

Proving once again that context is everything . . . .

Anyway . . . ahem . . . I'll put in a plug here for the 10 day forecast on Wunderground and the NWS "Scientific Forecaster Discussion" they link to from the National Weather Service. Long term forecasts are still pretty unreliable, but they're better than they used to be. I start watching Wunderground 10 days before leaving on any extended trip. That way, I get a sense for how stable the forecasts are and know to what extent I should be prepared for layovers or route changes. This said, I am too often reminded of the wisdom of "In a rush? Take the bus. Time to spare? Go by air."

CAVU

CAVU wrote:

Cary wrote:

CamTom12 wrote:Beautiful Vag!

This ^^^

Cary

Proving once again that context is everything . . . .

Anyway . . . ahem . . . I'll put in a plug here for the 10 day forecast on Wunderground and the NWS "Scientific Forecaster Discussion" they link to from the National Weather Service. Long term forecasts are still pretty unreliable, but they're better than they used to be. I start watching Wunderground 10 days before leaving on any extended trip. That way, I get a sense for how stable the forecasts are and know to what extent I should be prepared for layovers or route changes. This said, I am too often reminded of the wisdom of "In a rush? Take the bus. Time to spare? Go by air."

CAVU

I do the same. Weather Underground 10-day, plus this guy: http://www.usairnet.com/cgi-bin/launch/code.cgi

It’s a graphical depiction of the GFS MOS by the NWS. It’s a bit conservative, so keep that in mind. In fact, I wouldn’t trust a single prediction source on its own.