PC-12
Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial
Flight Crew Last 90 Days 210; Flight Crew Total 10400; Flight Crew Type 360
Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Inflight Event / Encounter VFR In IMC; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Weather; Human Factors
VMC conditions for the majority of the flight and ATIS reported a scattered layer with higher broken clouds. ATIS was approximately 40 minutes old when received. Rain had been in the area earlier but had moved about 30 miles northeast as we neared CCR. While descending I observed we were in a fairly large clear area and while I did see some clouds about 10 miles ahead that were lower; I estimated that I would be safely under them at 2;000 feet (MSL) based on the ATIS. I canceled the IFR plan and continued with the approach controller giving me traffic advisories. As we leveled at 2;000 I observed the clouds were lower than that and descended to about 1;500; turning slightly northwest to stay over the river north and east of CCR. Visibility to the northwest was better; visibility to the south (towards the airport) was obscured with occasional rain and mist near the hill side. Flight visibility varied between 3 and 5 miles but it was not improving as I had expected. My copilot told me that he had the runway in sight and pointed; but I could not see it so I kept our course northwest. We determined after another minute or two that he was incorrect; having seen a road well east of the runway.I continued along the river and descended to about 1;000 feet; hoping that I'd be able to see under the clouds. Remembering that the ATIS was fairly old; I asked approach if they had a report of the current weather at the airport. I did not write down what they told me but remember them mentioning visibility down to 4 miles with a scattered layer below 1;000 feet. I turned the aircraft more northward while looking left towards the airport and could see that the weather in that direction was not good enough to get in VFR. I then asked Approach for an IFR clearance for the RNAV 19R Z approach. They advised that the RNAV 19R Y with a circle to land on 32R was in use. I was instructed to climb to 3;000 feet for my IFR clearance and initiated a climb towards the north since the visibility and ceilings were better in that direction. I was unable to tell exactly where the clouds were above me and ended up entering instrument conditions at about 2;700 with Approach issuing me my clearance a few seconds later. We were vectored around to join final and were handed off to Tower. Tower reported winds favoring 32R and that I could expect to circle. I descended to minimums and had good ground contact with flight visibility varying quite a bit. We were in clear air; solid IMC; back to clear air; and then rain limiting visibility to about a mile all within about 2 miles. I saw runway 19R and looked out my left window since I'd be circling in that direction for 32R. Fog and mist in that area made me skeptical about being able to maneuver and keep the runway in sight; so I asked tower if I could land straight in on 19R. Tower did not respond promptly so I waited about 5 or 8 seconds and then queried them again. I estimate I was about 1 mile from the approach end of 19R when they cleared me to land on that runway. Landing was uneventful.The problem arose because I elected to cancel IFR and attempt to go in VFR. I should have noted that the weather was old and asked for an update before cancelling. Contributing factors include confusion caused by an incorrect sighting of the airport by my copilot which delayed my actions and slowed my decision making. In the future I will ask for an update on airport weather before cancelling IFR and unless I have certainty about ceilings between my aircraft and the airport; I will just stay on the IFR clearance and do the approach. Human performance considerations include the misidentification of the runway's location and my slow action when it became clear that the clouds were lower than they appeared. Instead of descending to 1;000 feet I should have turned the aircraft around; returning to better weather and working out the IFR clearance back there. By the time I actually called for the IFR; I was too far into thepoor weather for turning around to be a better option. Factors affecting the quality of my performance include that my copilot is my boss and he tends to get impatient; pushing for actions like this. I intend to have a discussion with him about my new policy regarding canceling IFR; out of an interest in safety.
PC-12 pilot reported canceling IFR while on approach to CCR due to good visibility according to the 40 minute old ATIS. When it became apparent that the field was not VFR; a new IFR clearance was requested; but IMC was entered before the clearance was received. The RNAV Y Runway 19R with circling only minimums was accepted; but at minimums visibility to the south was poor and a straight in landing on Runway 19R was requested and performed.