Rogue IFR

Larry Fransson wrote:

On 2003-10-25 06:21:05 -0700, (null) said:


If this pilot were to call in to request a landing would the controller
be obligated to report this? I know where to find the regs governing
pilots but don't think my AIM/FAR manual has the controller's regs.


The controller will handle it in accordance with the usual rules for the conditions that exist - VFR or SFVR.

No. There are no SVFR conditions as far as the controller is concerned.
It is either VFR or IFR. The pilot has to ask for a SVFR clearance,
and one may be issued if traffic allows and the viz is a mile. Less viz
is required for a helicopter.


It's up to the pilot to adhere to the minimum visibility and cloud
clearance requirements. Controllers are not cops.

If a guy is flying around VFR in the clouds and trying to land at my
airport and I am working, I will personally call FSDO.

"Roger Long" om wrote in message .. .
I ran into an old client today and we stumbled on to the flying topic.
Turns out he got his PP a couple years ago and bought a plane.

He said with a completely straight face that he's thinking of getting an
instrument rating because he "flies in IMC a lot." He does OK but would
like to be able to ask ATC where the other planes are and fly into towered
airports.
What did you say to all this, out of curiousity?

Yikes! What are they teaching student pilots these days?

Much the same as they've always taught.

This doesn't sound to me like an issue of what's been
taught.

It sounds to me like an issue of moral failings.

Sydney (on a restrained day; next week maybe I'll say what
I really think)

"Newps"
I think that a controller would be very reluctant to deny an SVFR
clearance
into the zone. (Unless the weather at the field was below IFR
minimums.)
Maybe a controller here can comment.

You have to have a mile viz to get a SVFR.

Yes, but conditions can vary wildly in a control zone area. Particularly
around bodies of water.

Class D's normally do not
have radar so you have to get your SVFR from whoever runs the approach
control, although I have gotten SVFR's from class D towers immediately
upon request so I could tell they had some kind of agreement with the
approach control. A controller wouldn't hesitate to deny a SVFR
clearance if traffic won't permit it. The minimums for any instrument
approach do not factor into the equation.

So a controller would issue an SVFR clearance even if the field is below IFR
minimums?

le moo

"Happy Dog" wrote in message
. ..
So a controller would issue an SVFR clearance even if the field is below
IFR
minimums?

What does "below IFR minimums" mean? Do you mean the minimums for an
instrument approach at the airport? If so, which approach would apply,
assuming more than one approach at the airport? Why should a VFR flight be
required to use reported weather when an IFR flight is not?

It's not the controller's job to ensure that the pilot is obeying the FARs.
If the pilot claims that flight visibility is 1 mile, the controller should
approve SVFR (assuming the necessary traffic separation conditions are met).

Pete

Happy Dog wrote:


You have to have a mile viz to get a SVFR.


Yes, but conditions can vary wildly in a control zone area. Particularly
around bodies of water.

While that is true, if the official airport viz is not a mile you ain't
gettin' a SVFR.




Class D's normally do not
have radar so you have to get your SVFR from whoever runs the approach
control, although I have gotten SVFR's from class D towers immediately
upon request so I could tell they had some kind of agreement with the
approach control. A controller wouldn't hesitate to deny a SVFR
clearance if traffic won't permit it. The minimums for any instrument
approach do not factor into the equation.


So a controller would issue an SVFR clearance even if the field is below IFR
minimums?

Like I said the SVFR rules are not tied to what the minimums for any
approach happen to be.

Peter Duniho wrote:


It's not the controller's job to ensure that the pilot is obeying the FARs.
If the pilot claims that flight visibility is 1 mile, the controller should
approve SVFR (assuming the necessary traffic separation conditions are met).

That would only apply if there were no weather reporting at the field.
If the field has an ASOS, for example, then it would have to report at
least a mile, no matter what you say.

Happy Dog wrote:

I think that a controller would be very reluctant to deny an SVFR clearance
into the zone.

It wouldn't matter. The pilot under discussion here doesn't have an instrument
rating, so he can't get an SVFR clearance anyway.

George Patterson
You can dress a hog in a tuxedo, but he still wants to roll in the mud.

No instrument rating is required to get a SVFR clearance during the day. You only
need an IFR rating to do SVFR at night, when the regs say the aircraft must be
equipped for instrument flight and the pilot must be instrument qualified.

Dave Reinhart


"G.R. Patterson III" wrote:

Happy Dog wrote:

I think that a controller would be very reluctant to deny an SVFR clearance
into the zone.

It wouldn't matter. The pilot under discussion here doesn't have an instrument
rating, so he can't get an SVFR clearance anyway.

George Patterson
You can dress a hog in a tuxedo, but he still wants to roll in the mud.

That's a contentious point that I don't know has been settled yet, though I think
the rulings so far are leaning the way you describe.

Since the ASOS/AWOS is usually not located at the end of a runway (I think they
try for a spot close to airport center) and airports are pretty large pieces of
real estate, it's entirely possible for the system to be reporting visibility
different from what the pilot is seeing from the air on approach. I think what
will certainly cause the FAA to jump on you is if an RVR is installed for the
runway you used and it was reporting visibility less than minimums.

Dave Reinhart


Newps wrote:

Peter Duniho wrote:

It's not the controller's job to ensure that the pilot is obeying the FARs.
If the pilot claims that flight visibility is 1 mile, the controller should
approve SVFR (assuming the necessary traffic separation conditions are met).

That would only apply if there were no weather reporting at the field.
If the field has an ASOS, for example, then it would have to report at
least a mile, no matter what you say.

Pete,

Beating a dead horse...

I'm with you on this issue that ATC doesn't care too much about VFR ac in
IMC and can't go after someone based on a PIREP of an ac near the same point
in space. But I understood Dave's comment. He's trying to say you're being
way too technical. It's like someone saying, "We all know the sun will come
up tomorrow" and you arguing, "Well, technically you're incorrect. You
really can't say that with 100% accuracy. There is a mathematical
possibility that it will not."


"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"Dave" wrote in message
...
Answers the question really!

What "answers the question really"? My reply to the question answers it?
Then please, tell me...am I the type of guy that wonders every day if the
sun will rise?

For extra credit, explain how ANY answer to that question has anything to
do
with the reliability of a PIREP.

Pete