"Mike" nospam@ microsoft.com wrote in message
news
"Tman" x@x wrote in message
. ..
Bob Noel wrote:

hmmm, all the wx reports I saw were legal VMC (not smart VMC, but still
\
I think you're confusing VMC and VFR.
It may have been legal VFR.
legal). Do you have reference to reports that the conditions were not
VMC?
The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s)
of this accident as follows:
The pilot's failure to maintain control of the airplane during a descent
over water at night, which was a result of spatial disorientation.
Factors in the accident were haze, and the dark night.

That's IMC buddy. Could be a clear VACU night over water with no
moonlight, and if you can't maintain a horizon due to those factors,
thats IMC even though it is also very much legal VFR.

No, that's not necessarily IMC. IMC means less than legal VFR.

I believe he WAS in IMC, however there's little doubt he was at least in
instrument conditions, which is not the same as IMC.


As they say, looks like he flew into Cumulo-Granite.

--
Regards, Bob F.