ORCA lower than MEA?

On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 13:07:41 -0800, Sam Spade wrote:

Ron Rosenfeld wrote:



4-4-7 does not appear to prohibit (for the pilot) operations at 91.177
compliant altitudes. If ATC does not issue me an altitude restriction,
then 91.177 would apply.

I would agree. But, few pilots can figure that one out.

Then, if I am with a Center that is trained to take exception with
altitudes below the MEA or MIA, then they will also take exception with
my 91.177 selection, if it is "too low."

True, but it is ATC's responsibility to issue me a clearance of "VFR on top
at or above nnnn"
Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

Ron Rosenfeld wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 13:07:41 -0800, Sam Spade wrote:


Ron Rosenfeld wrote:



4-4-7 does not appear to prohibit (for the pilot) operations at 91.177
compliant altitudes. If ATC does not issue me an altitude restriction,
then 91.177 would apply.

I would agree. But, few pilots can figure that one out.

Then, if I am with a Center that is trained to take exception with
altitudes below the MEA or MIA, then they will also take exception with
my 91.177 selection, if it is "too low."


True, but it is ATC's responsibility to issue me a clearance of "VFR on top
at or above nnnn"
Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)


I haven't done it in a long time myself. I did have LA Center a couple
times way back when say "Unable to approve VFR on top at the requested
altitude.."

So, since On Top is an amendment to an IFR clearance I think they can
make whatever they choose out of their responsibilities with on On-Top
amendment to your IFR clearance.

Some controllers or facilities, particularly a mountain-area center,
might reasonably be very unconfortable with the IFR flight plan aspect
of the aircraft being below MIA or MEA.

On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 17:09:40 -0800, Sam Spade wrote:




I haven't done it in a long time myself. I did have LA Center a couple
times way back when say "Unable to approve VFR on top at the requested
altitude.."

So, since On Top is an amendment to an IFR clearance I think they can
make whatever they choose out of their responsibilities with on On-Top
amendment to your IFR clearance.

Some controllers or facilities, particularly a mountain-area center,
might reasonably be very unconfortable with the IFR flight plan aspect
of the aircraft being below MIA or MEA.

No doubt.

Here in the NE I've only used OTP to get through an overcast.

And my usual clearance would be basically out of the 7110.65. Something
like:

CLIMB TO AND REPORT REACHING VFR-ON-TOP,
NO TOPS REPORTS.
IF NOT ON TOP AT 7000', MAINTAIN 7000', AND ADVISE.
Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

Ron Rosenfeld wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 17:09:40 -0800, Sam Spade wrote:




I haven't done it in a long time myself. I did have LA Center a couple
times way back when say "Unable to approve VFR on top at the requested
altitude.."

So, since On Top is an amendment to an IFR clearance I think they can
make whatever they choose out of their responsibilities with on On-Top
amendment to your IFR clearance.

Some controllers or facilities, particularly a mountain-area center,
might reasonably be very unconfortable with the IFR flight plan aspect
of the aircraft being below MIA or MEA.


No doubt.

Here in the NE I've only used OTP to get through an overcast.

And my usual clearance would be basically out of the 7110.65. Something
like:

CLIMB TO AND REPORT REACHING VFR-ON-TOP,
NO TOPS REPORTS.
IF NOT ON TOP AT 7000', MAINTAIN 7000', AND ADVISE.
Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

Picking at nits, that is a clearance to on top, as opposed to modifying
an en route IFR clearance from an assigned altitude to en route on top.
In the former you are excepted to cancel reaching on top. What you do
is a very common practice around here in terminal airspace, and always
has an altitude assignment at, or above MVA. I suppose it could be done
with a center at an airport where they provide terminal service. Never
done that (always files a full en route IFR flight plan out of such
airports; PRB coming to mind where I have done that a lot.

On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 00:55:42 -0800, Sam Spade wrote:

Ron Rosenfeld wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 17:09:40 -0800, Sam Spade wrote:




I haven't done it in a long time myself. I did have LA Center a couple
times way back when say "Unable to approve VFR on top at the requested
altitude.."

So, since On Top is an amendment to an IFR clearance I think they can
make whatever they choose out of their responsibilities with on On-Top
amendment to your IFR clearance.

Some controllers or facilities, particularly a mountain-area center,
might reasonably be very unconfortable with the IFR flight plan aspect
of the aircraft being below MIA or MEA.


No doubt.

Here in the NE I've only used OTP to get through an overcast.

And my usual clearance would be basically out of the 7110.65. Something
like:

CLIMB TO AND REPORT REACHING VFR-ON-TOP,
NO TOPS REPORTS.
IF NOT ON TOP AT 7000', MAINTAIN 7000', AND ADVISE.
Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

Picking at nits, that is a clearance to on top, as opposed to modifying
an en route IFR clearance from an assigned altitude to en route on top.
In the former you are excepted to cancel reaching on top. What you do
is a very common practice around here in terminal airspace, and always
has an altitude assignment at, or above MVA. I suppose it could be done
with a center at an airport where they provide terminal service. Never
done that (always files a full en route IFR flight plan out of such
airports; PRB coming to mind where I have done that a lot.


You're correct, of course.
Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

Sam Spade wrote:

And my usual clearance would be basically out of the 7110.65. Something
like:

CLIMB TO AND REPORT REACHING VFR-ON-TOP,
NO TOPS REPORTS.
IF NOT ON TOP AT 7000', MAINTAIN 7000', AND ADVISE.
Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

Picking at nits, that is a clearance to on top, as opposed to modifying
an en route IFR clearance from an assigned altitude to en route on top.
In the former you are excepted to cancel reaching on top.

Not true. If you have to climb thru the clouds and desire to cruise
with an OTP clearance this is exactly what you'd get. The 7000 is
probably the top of the controllers airspace or a necessary altitude to
separate you from traffic. A place like southern California sometimes
develops a routine where they get a clearance like you suggest so they
can climb thru the marine layer.

Newps wrote:


Sam Spade wrote:

And my usual clearance would be basically out of the 7110.65. Something
like:

CLIMB TO AND REPORT REACHING VFR-ON-TOP,
NO TOPS REPORTS.
IF NOT ON TOP AT 7000', MAINTAIN 7000', AND ADVISE.
Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)


Picking at nits, that is a clearance to on top, as opposed to
modifying an en route IFR clearance from an assigned altitude to en
route on top. In the former you are excepted to cancel reaching on top.


Not true. If you have to climb thru the clouds and desire to cruise
with an OTP clearance this is exactly what you'd get. The 7000 is
probably the top of the controllers airspace or a necessary altitude to
separate you from traffic. A place like southern California sometimes
develops a routine where they get a clearance like you suggest so they
can climb thru the marine layer.

In Southern California and all other stratus-laden areas of California,
which are in TRACON airspace, the assignment is alway at, or above MVA,
and predicated on recent pilot reports.

It is not possible (at least in these parts) to continue such a
clearance as an IFR, VFR-on top without an IFR flight plan. If there
was an IFR flight plan there would usually not be a clearance to on-top.

Are you saying if, for example I am departing BIL, and without a flight
plan I request a climb to on top, and then when on top I request on-top
to Salt Lake City, you would grant it?

Sam Spade wrote:


In Southern California and all other stratus-laden areas of California,
which are in TRACON airspace, the assignment is alway at, or above MVA,
and predicated on recent pilot reports.

It is not possible (at least in these parts) to continue such a
clearance as an IFR, VFR-on top without an IFR flight plan. If there
was an IFR flight plan there would usually not be a clearance to on-top.

Are you saying if, for example I am departing BIL, and without a flight
plan I request a climb to on top, and then when on top I request on-top
to Salt Lake City, you would grant it?


Of course. It would be nicer if you had already filed a flight plan to
SLC because then I can just change the altitude in the computer to OTP,
but I can always quickly enter the flight plan. Our cargo guys here
have prefiled IFR flight plans. Whenever they can they go OTP and they
often tell us they are OTP as they are taxiing out. So we never give
them a hard altitude but simply "maintain VFR OTP". This works because
most days are just like today, not a cloud in the sky.