VFR on top question

On Sat, 01 Jul 2006 16:41:31 GMT, Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

I still don't get it. If you have to go to 7000 to ensure radar coverage
then that's how high you'd have to go for that second pair of eyes. If
you're high enough to ensure radar coverage you're high enough to be cleared
direct.

The radar outage would only be for a small segment of the flight. Why go
so high when I don't need to.

Not quite sure why the outage, since it happens right around the MEI
airport who has approach controllers but it does. Terrain isn't a factor
since it's flat as a board.

Now, I probably could request 7000 for that short period of time when I
expect out of radar contact, but by the time I climbed to 7000 feet the
time gained in flying the lower altitude would be lost in the climb to 7000
feet.

In other sectors, I have flown outside of radar coverage, but had to report
when a certain distance of a VOR, but this particular sector doesn't work
this way.

Bottom line for "flight planning purpose" I am only out of the second pair
of eyes for a very short duration of the flight. It was more efficient to
select a lower altitude for passenger considerations and lose the second
pair of eyes in a part of the trip where traffic is very minimal at best.

So, I'd be willing to give up 20 minutes of non radar coverage for a more
direct and quicker flight. If I was by myself, this all would have been a
moot point as I would just fly the victor highways.

Allen