Rogue IFR

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...
PIREPs are assumed to be accurate.

That doesn't mean ATC can rely on them to KNOW something.

Besides, even a PIREP does not imply IFR conditions in the exact spot the
target is flying. The PIREP is valid for a specific point in space at a
specific point in time. Assuming there was no collision, obviously the
target aircraft was not in that specific point in space at that specific
point in time.

It's pretty funny, actually, the way you can't help yourself and insist on
arguing even when someone is supporting the point you're trying to make.
Thanks for the good laugh...

Pete

"Peter Duniho" writes:

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...
PIREPs are assumed to be accurate.

That doesn't mean ATC can rely on them to KNOW something.

snip

Are you the type of guy that wonders every day if the sun will rise?

"Bob Fry" wrote in message
...
Are you the type of guy that wonders every day if the sun will rise?

I have no idea how that in any way relates to the question at hand.

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"Bob Fry" wrote in message
...
Are you the type of guy that wonders every day if the sun will rise?

I have no idea how that in any way relates to the question at hand.

Answers the question really!

"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

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

"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

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...

That doesn't mean ATC can rely on them to KNOW something.


Of course it does. If a pilot says he's in the clouds ATC knows he's in
IMC.



Besides, even a PIREP does not imply IFR conditions in the exact spot the
target is flying. The PIREP is valid for a specific point in space at a
specific point in time. Assuming there was no collision, obviously the
target aircraft was not in that specific point in space at that specific
point in time.


The airplanes don't have to be at exactly the same point. If a pilot
reports he's in the clouds then any other aircraft within 2000 feet
horizontally, 1000 feet above, or 500 feet below of the reporting aircraft
is in IMC.



It's pretty funny, actually, the way you can't help yourself and insist on
arguing even when someone is supporting the point you're trying to make.
Thanks for the good laugh...


I was responding only to the part of your message that was incorrect.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...
That doesn't mean ATC can rely on them to KNOW something.

Of course it does. If a pilot says he's in the clouds ATC knows he's in
IMC.

Sorry. I thought the "...about the VFR target" was implied obviously enough
for you to pick up on it. Apparently not. I'll try to keep things simpler
for you in the future, so you can keep up.

The airplanes don't have to be at exactly the same point. If a pilot
reports he's in the clouds then any other aircraft within 2000 feet
horizontally, 1000 feet above, or 500 feet below of the reporting aircraft
is in IMC.

ATC doesn't have enroute radar capable of determining when another aircraft
is within those limits. Furthermore, that assumes accurate reporting by the
VFR target's transponder. Again, an unidentified target would not qualify
for that assumption.

I was responding only to the part of your message that was incorrect.

There was no such part.

Pete

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...

ATC doesn't have enroute radar capable of determining when another
aircraft is within those limits.


Enroute radar? Do you mean Air Route Surveillance Radar? Why are we
suddenly limited to ARSR for discussion purposes? Please, Pete, tell us
about the capabilities of ATC radar.



Furthermore, that assumes accurate reporting by the VFR target's
transponder. Again, an unidentified target would not qualify for
that assumption.


It assumes nothing at all. If a pilot reports he's in the clouds, then any
other
aircraft that is within 2000 feet horizontally, 1000 feet above, or 500 feet
below
the reporting aircraft MUST be in IMC.



There was no such part.


Yes there was. You said ATC can't rely on PIREPs to KNOW something. That's
obviously incorrect.