Furniture said:
A ceiling at 600 feet isn't necessarily super low,
Well, that depends on a bunch of things.
Like whether one's flying in it...
For those not familiar with flying operations, minimum VFR (Visual Flight Rules) requirements for operating in controlled airspace, in Canada, are three miles vis, no less than 500 feet vertical distance from cloud, and no less than one mile horizontally. Subtract, then, 500 feet from the reported ceiling. There are slightly different minima in control zones and uncontrolled airspace, and between helicopters and seized-wing aircraft, but not enough to make a difference in this case.
The ceiling given in a METAR (METeorological Aerodrome Report) is accurate for the reporting airfield. It does not take terrain or building heights into account at any distance from the airfield. Orly is south of the core of Paris, and well within the built-up area of the city. I do not know the height of the tallest buildings that would have been encountered along the route, but accepting a low ceiling and reduced visibility, with or without a head of state aboard, would have been stupid.
Broken cloud (“BKN” in TAFs and METARs) means 5/8 to 7/8 coverage. Broken cloud constitutes a ceiling. Gaps between clouds can close pretty quickly, which is why they’re known as “sucker holes”.
The crew would have received much more in-depth briefings from the Met guys at Orly than just a cursory glance at METARs and TAFs (Terminal Aerodrome Forecasts), and would have studied the terrain enroute as well. Based upon my limited (compared to theirs) information, I’d not have flown in the stated conditions, either. I’ve spent more than enough time concerned about weather conditions in which I’ve found myself over many years, and known too many who died or were severely injured in weather-related crashes.
I spent three years with 444 Squadron in Lahr, West Germany (1986-1989), where our limits for completing a mission were 250 feet AGL (Above Ground Level), clear of cloud, and 800 metres vis. Flying in those minima could be
very uncomfortable at times, even with greatly-reduced airspeed. At normal cruise speed, one would cover that 800 metres in 15 seconds. Gary Larson nailed it in the Far Side “What’s that mountain goat doing way up here in these clouds” cartoon (but major towers, power lines, and high-rise buildings are more common).
Airspace is much more dense, complex, and busy in Europe than in most of Canada. We were far less familiar with much of the geography over which we often flew than the natives were, and geography can make big differences at low altitudes in poor weather. The Marine crew would have been even less familiar with the geography in which they were scheduled to fly than we were back then.
I also flew two six-month Police helicopter trials in Canada: Peel Region (Brampton and Mississauga) in the last half of 1999, and Toronto in the last half of 2000. Toronto International was slap in the middle of our patrol area during the Peel Region trial. Most of our work was done at night. A lot of the workload (and the Peel Region trial was the busiest that I’ve ever been in a cockpit) was intently monitoring a very busy ATC frequency as, from the controllers’ points of view, we bumbled around unpredictably (and, yes, I always kept them informed). We flew at a comfortable 1000 feet AGL while patrolling, and only went below that when absolutely necessary. Descending below 500 feet, on the rare occasion that we did so, above lit buildings at night was not comfortable; in theory, there are no unlit cranes or antennae poking up that high above building tops, but I was NOT going to break my comfort limits unless somebody’s life depended upon it.
Flying, then, after all of that, was not an option.
I am not sure where in Paris he was staying (one article mentioned the US Embassy), but I have read that it was a 60 km drive to the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery and that it would have taken 2.5 hours in each direction and required road closures throughout the total duration of the drive in both directions. Google Maps gives a distance of 87 km and a driving time of 1.1 to 1.5 hours, depending upon the route, from the city core (as defined by Google Maps). That distance might not sound like it would take that long, but this would have been a large motorcade.
Instead of going to Aisne-Marne, he went, later, to Suresnes American Cemetery about 12 km west of the city core (as defined by Google Maps), with a normal driving time of 29 minutes, or one-third that of the max time to Aisne-Marne.
What security concerns did his Secret Service, and French security personnel, have, with the route and driving time to Aisne-Marne? It’s generally best to listen to their recommendations. We also do not know how packed his schedule was. Was roughly six hours available? When was it known that conditions would be too bad to fly? Forecasts can change quickly. It may (or may not) have looked perfectly feasible to fly a few hours prior to the planned departure time, and then become too late to safely engage Plan B. I don’t know what the forecast was the previous day, when the flight was planned to depart, or how long it takes to fully engage the back-up plan.
Plus, of course, the headline would then have been “Trump Ignores Secret Service, Drives Anyway, Recklessly Endangers Many Lives”.
His visit to Suresnes also occurred in rain. Was there more, the same, or less rain there than Aisne-Marne? Nobody seems to have noted that. His hair likely got as wet as it would have had he gone to the original location, but I presume that the Presidential Umbrella would have been neither more nor less effective in either place. I don’t think that wet hair was his prime concern. Safety, security, and concern for others would have trumped that yugely.
This is a fuss with no substance - merely a concerted exercise to demonize a President, about whom so many have been wound up to believe the worst, by media and others. A fair chunk of the Parisien citizenry would certainly have bitched, justifiably so, in my opinion, if his motorcade had interfered with their drives home on top of any rain-related delays that already faced them.
Erring on the side of caution - sometimes A Good Thing, no matter what others may say.
op:
