City controlled airspace?

In much the same way that flying VFR over a layer of clouds is VFR on top,
no matter how much the pack howls.

"Over the top", your (IFR) clearance is over.
"On top", your clearance is on.

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jose" wrote in message
et...
In much the same way that flying VFR over a layer of clouds is VFR on
top, no matter how much the pack howls.

"Over the top", your (IFR) clearance is over.
"On top", your clearance is on.

Jose

Thank you. That is exactly my point.

Thank you. That is exactly my point.

Well, it's not quite the same. In one case people believe there's a
difference, but just don't remember which is which. In the other case,
people don't realize there's a difference in the first place.

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Steve Foley" wrote in message
...

In much the same way that flying VFR over a layer of clouds is VFR on top,
no matter how much the pack howls.


From the Pilot/Controller Glossary:

VFR-ON-TOP - ATC authorization for an IFR aircraft to operate in VFR
conditions at any appropriate VFR altitude (as specified in 14 CFR and as
restricted by ATC). A pilot receiving this authorization must comply with
the VFR visibility, distance from cloud criteria, and the minimum IFR
altitudes specified in 14 CFR Part 91. The use of this term does not relieve
controllers of their responsibility to separate aircraft in Class B and
Class C airspace or TRSAs as required by FAAO 7110.65.


From FAR Part 1:

1.1 General definitions.

IFR over-the-top, with respect to the operation of aircraft, means the
operation of an aircraft over-the-top on an IFR flight plan when cleared by
air traffic control to maintain "VFR conditions" or "VFR conditions on top".

VFR over-the-top, with respect to the operation of aircraft, means the
operation of an aircraft over-the-top under VFR when it is not being
operated on an IFR flight plan.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
link.net...

"Steve Foley" wrote in message
...

In much the same way that flying VFR over a layer of clouds is VFR on
top,
no matter how much the pack howls.


From the Pilot/Controller Glossary:

The FAA defines the piece of paper in my pocket as a certificate.

The FAA defines flight over a layer by a VFR Aircraft as VFR-OVER-THE-TOP.

The FAA does not define flight over a layer by a VFR aircraft as VFR-ON-TOP

The FAA does not define the piece of paper in my pocket at a license.

"Steve Foley" wrote in message
...

The FAA defines the piece of paper in my pocket as a certificate.


The airman certificate in your pocket is by definition a license.



The FAA defines flight over a layer by a VFR Aircraft as VFR-OVER-THE-TOP.

The FAA does not define flight over a layer by a VFR aircraft as
VFR-ON-TOP


Now you're catching on.



The FAA does not define the piece of paper in my pocket at a license.


Correct, but some people conclude that because pilots' licenses issued in
the US are called "airman certificates" they are not licenses. In much the
same way some states call drivers licenses "operators permits", but they are
no less a license.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Steve Foley" wrote in message
...

The FAA defines the piece of paper in my pocket as a certificate.


The airman certificate in your pocket is by definition a license.


Where is that definition written?

My point here is that if the city is going to write laws, they should use
proper terminology. I once saw a real estate development delayed because one
town required the developer to obtain a certificate of compliance for a
traffic study from an adjacent town. The problem is that the adjacent town
doesn't issue certificates of compliance for traffic studies. By the time
the developer came back to the town with the requirement, there was enough
turnover in the planning board that his development wouldn't be approved by
the present board. They refused to remove the requirement, and refused to
approve a new plan. He ended up going to superior court to have the
requirement removed. The whole thing was political, but I could picture
something similar happening when the anti-airport activists get the local
police caught up in their fight. The neighbors call the cops claiming the
airplanes are being operated by people without 'licenses'.

The cop asks for your license, and you produce your certificate. The
neighbor tells the cop "That's not a license, it's a certificate'". What
does the cop do?

I agree with you that it is a de facto license, however it is not a de jure
license.

On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 14:08:18 -0700, C J Campbell
wrote in
200704181408187826-christophercampbell@hotmailcom:

Now that the government issues the certificate and reserves the right
to take it away, it represents a license. It is the same thing, no
matter how much the pack howls.

The government doesn't licence Constitutional rights.

The FAA certifies that the airmans certificate holder has met
proficiency and knowledge standards.