![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"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 |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 2003-10-23 17:27:46 -0700, (null) said:
You mean, if there was some cloud cover that you wanted to go through, to get into the clear above, you cannot do that legally, even if you are IFR rated, unless you file an IFR plan? You can if you're outside controlled airspace. -- Larry Fransson Seattle, WA |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ron Natalie writes:
He was breaking the regs if you were in controlled airspace (just about everywhere above 1200' in many parts of the country). The obvious solution, then, is to ignore the instruments and try to squint through the clouds. That way his tombstone can say that he died without violating regulations. -- Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Student pilots are still taught cloud clearance requirements and why.
Apparently your friend chooses to forget what he was taught. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"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? |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"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. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Roger Long" om wrote in message
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. something that happenened to me a while back: flying in solid IMC with an instructor (one of these really cool CFI who aren't afraid of actual IMC...) when ATC told us to watch out for VFR traffic a couple of miles away on our twelve oclock... we told ATC that, well, we were in actual (neat layer, there was no way the other guy was just outside the clouds). Gave us one of these funny sensation in our stomach to think about it... --Sylvain |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Seriously though, I'm sure the accuracy of the GPS and the cute little
moving map makes this much more tempting, and thus, common. I'm sure you are correct -- especially for pilots with some IFR training. Myself, for example. I don't have the IR, due to a myriad of time constraints -- yet I've got all the flying requirements under my belt. I'm sure I can keep my wings level in the soup as well as any newly minted instrument pilot. That said, could I fly an unauthorized instrument approach into Iowa City using my giant color AvMap? Sure! In fact, I'd wager that I could fly a BETTER instrument approach using just the AvMap, as opposed to (for example) flying the full VOR 36 approach into Iowa City. Would it be legal? Nope. Would it be safe? Except for the not-talking-to-ATC part, yup. Would I do it? Nope. My ticket -- and my family's lives -- are too valuable to me to risk on something so stupid. But I'm sure there are those who would... -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
We're talking here about a 150-200 hour pilot with no instrument training
other than that required for the PP intentionally launching into weather that some new IFR ticket holders would have the sense to avoid. Being at about that level of experience myself, I can't imagine anyone being tempted to try this without the very accurate position information provided by the GPS. I'm sure people did it with Loran, and some even with just gauges but I bet there were a lot less of them and they didn't get away with it as long. There is something very seductive about seeing that little airplane symbol on a full color map. I'm also pretty sure that, if he weren't flying something as stable as a Skyhawk, I'd have already read the account of his last flight. -- Roger Long |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What is missile defense? An expensive fraud Bush needs Poland as a future nuclear battlefield | Paul J. Adam | Military Aviation | 1 | August 9th 04 08:29 PM |
About when did a US/CCCP war become suicidal? | james_anatidae | Military Aviation | 96 | February 29th 04 03:24 PM |
US plans 6,000mph bomber to hit rogue regimes from edge of space | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 14 | August 5th 03 01:48 AM |
Rogue State | jukita | Military Aviation | 18 | July 13th 03 02:22 PM |