"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:MOqXe.342109$_o.14257@attbi_s71...
To be honest, I'm not entirely sure there *is* a workable rule here.

Well, by all means, we should obviously simply abandon any attempt to
regulate how VFR pilot fly with respect to clouds and visibility! After
all, there is NO workable rule!

Give me a friggin' break. The scenario you described in your post is
ridiculous. It would be MUCH preferable to violate the cruising altitude
regulation, than to violate the cloud clearances regulation. But
regardless, guess what? Sometimes, you cannot meet the VFR visibility or
cloud clearances requirements.

You know what most people do when that happens? They acknowledge that their
lives would so much simpler if they just got the instrument rating, and they
successfully avoid violating the VFR visibility and cloud clearances
requirements. They do this either by maneuvering around the clouds, or
flying at an altitude that preserves the required visibility and clearances,
or (GASP!) they simply don't fly.

What a concept: the weather doesn't allow one to fly VFR legally, so the
VFR-only pilot just doesn't fly. If you find an area through which you
cannot fly legally, you divert. You go around, over, under, or turn back.

On the bright side, I find your "I am unaffected by any discussion contrary
to my previously determined path" approach to be refreshingly consistent
with everything else you post here. At least you a true to your habits.

Pete