Rogue IFR

Why would a "meat bomb" flight be announcing on an Approach frequency?
That's usually done on CTAF isn't it? And when did it become standard
procedure to let ATC know, on an IFR flight plan, that while you are
climbing it's, oh btw, solid IMC?


"Dan Luke" c172rgATbellsouthDOTnet wrote in message
...
"Roger Long":
What does ATC do when they see a 1200 target boring through what:
they know is solid IMC?

Nothing. They don't *know* it's IMC where the VFR target is on the screen.

The only time I've ever heard an ATC comment about something like this was
west of Houston one day. A pilot reported climbing through a solid cloud
deck at the same time another pilot was reporting "jumpers away" from his
meat bomb hauler nearby. The controller said something like "I don't know
who it is for sure, but somebody's fibbing."
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

"G.R. Patterson III" writes:

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

Is that a U.S. rule, or are you mixing SVFR with contact approaches?


All the best,


David

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.

Sure he can, no instrument rating required.

David Reinhart wrote:

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.


At my airport it is common to get a fog bank over the eastern half of
the airport, the half that includes the ASOS. The western half will be
CAVU, which includes the full length of the small runway I normally use.
There I sit in the full sun unable to get a clearance for takeoff.

"Kobra" wrote:
That's usually done on CTAF isn't it?

Jumper planes use VFR traffic advisories a lot when they're near a
radar terminal area . I hear them nearly every weekend over Trent Lott
airport SW of Mobile.

And when did it become standard
procedure to let ATC know, on an IFR flight plan, that while
you are climbing it's, oh btw, solid IMC?

Did I say it was? What's your point?
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

"Kobra" wrote in message
...
[...] 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."

It's not just an academic possibility. Anyone who thinks that weather, and
reports of weather, are anywhere close to being as reliable as the sun
coming up each morning is fooling themselves. You can have one airplane in
solid IMC, and another just 500' below, and one can be legally VFR while the
other is legally IFR.

In fact, for any random target on radar in controlled airspace not on an IFR
flight plan and under ATC control, the most likely explanation is that the
airplane is in VFR conditions, regardless of weather reported in the area by
other aircraft.

There are numerous other possibilities, but the bottom line is that a pilot
in solid IMC has no way of knowing what flight conditions an airplane only
hundreds or thousands of feet away is experiencing, nevermind can a report
from that pilot be useful in knowing what flight conditions another airplane
is experiencing.

People need to give up their fallacious idea that weather is uniform in time
and space. It's not. One of the reasons it's such a hard element of flying
to come to terms with is that it's highly variable. The views expressed in
this thread and others by pilots who seem to think that a single pilot
report of IMC conditions is sufficient for knowing what conditions another
pilot is flying in are just plain wrong, and not just in a "technicality"
sense.

Pete

"Newps" wrote in message
news:R9Smb.34321$Fm2.13493@attbi_s04...
If the field has an ASOS, for example, then it would have to report at
least a mile, no matter what you say.

That's true. I still don't see where "IFR minimums" comes into it.

David Reinhart wrote:

No instrument rating is required to get a SVFR clearance during the day.

I stand corrected. Thanks for the info.

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

"Peter Duniho"

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?
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.

I agree. Could the flight be cleared into the CZ but not cleared to land
due to visibility?

le moo

"David Reinhart" wrote in message
...
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.

I've seen fog obscure one otherwise usable runway but not another.

le moo


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.