Outside reference in IMC

On May 20, 7:30*pm, "Bob F." wrote:
Extra credit points! *The statement below is incomplete (hint: qualification
is missing). *There are lots of places in US airspace where you could be IMC
and NOT fly under IFR rules, and no flight plan...where are they?

Where Mx has never departed with him flying a real plane.......
Unless secretarial chairs have the ability to leave the (G)round.

wrote:
On May 20, 5:36 pm, romeomike wrote:

You can only log the time if you are in IMC (not legally VFR) AND you
have to fly solely by instruments. Let's say you are 50 feet below a
cloud deck with 50 miles of forward visibility and nothing obscuring the
ground or horizon. This is legally IMC and IFR applies, but you don't
log it as such because you can fly it without having to fly solely by
reference to instruments.

What about the inverse as given in my example? 50 feet above an
overcast?


IMO, given that an overcast may obscure the horizon and not be "level"
or at the same altitude as you progress, I would think you would be
justified in logging it. I for one would want to be scanning instruments
to make sure I'm maintaining altitude, course, level wings, etc. It
wouldn't be quite as intense as if I were in the clouds, but justifiable
to the feds if they examined my log book. I'm sure there are scenarios
that would generate debate but maybe not this one?

On May 20, 9:11 pm, Marty Shapiro
wrote:
"Bob F." wrote m:

Extra credit points! The statement below is incomplete (hint:
qualification is missing). There are lots of places in US airspace
where you could be IMC and NOT fly under IFR rules, and no flight
plan...where are they?

Glass G airspace. Lot's of it out west.


Even in class G you must still follow all the IFR rules, except you
don't need a ATC clearance.

On May 20, 9:45*pm, romeomike wrote:

IMO, given that an overcast may obscure the horizon and not be "level"
or at the same altitude as you progress, I would think you would be
justified in logging it. I for one would want to be scanning instruments
to make sure I'm maintaining altitude, course, level wings, etc. It
wouldn't be quite as intense as if I were in the clouds, but justifiable
to the feds if they examined my log book. I'm sure there are scenarios
that would generate debate but maybe not this one?

While I personally don't log it in my logbook as IMC time, I think
like you, it's IMC since like you said, sloping clouds give an
illusion of a false horizon. In my training, my instructor said no,
it's not, and we were between layers!

The second reason I personally think it's IMC, is that you have no
ground reference to fly by and have to use instruments to navigate.

wrote:


In my training, my instructor said no,
it's not, and we were between layers!


I'm not an ultimate authority on this, but I don't get your instructor's
point of view. If someone else can explain how in this scenario one can
safely fly without reference to instruments, you and I are sure to learn
something.

On May 20, 11:21*pm, romeomike wrote:

I'm not an ultimate authority on this, but I don't get your instructor's
point of view. If someone else can explain how in this scenario one can
safely fly without reference to instruments, you and I are sure to learn
something.

Yep, I didn't get it either but in the full scheme of things, I wasn't
complaining, as at least I had an instructor who wasn't afraid of
touching a cloud. He went on to the regionals, and my second
instructor wouldn't fly in ceilings less then 1000.and my airport
minimums was 1/2 that.

On the other hand, the second instructor had much better cockpit
management so I did have the best of both worlds.

wrote:


Yep, I didn't get it either but in the full scheme of things, I wasn't



Could it have been a situation where you got authorization for
VFR-on-top to do some air work?

Of course in that case you would not have been just 50 feet above the
cloud layer

because you would have had to comply with VFR cloud clearances.

Andrew Sarangan wrote in
:

On May 20, 9:11 pm, Marty Shapiro
wrote:
"Bob F." wrote
m:

Extra credit points! The statement below is incomplete (hint:
qualification is missing). There are lots of places in US airspace
where you could be IMC and NOT fly under IFR rules, and no flight
plan...where are they?

Glass G airspace. Lot's of it out west.


Even in class G you must still follow all the IFR rules, except you
don't need a ATC clearance.





All of them? Any FAR which states "when operating is controlled air space"
doesn't apply. That still leaves a few, but most of them are gone.

Communication with ATC? Not required in G.

Flight plan? Not required in G. No need to file or activate.

Altitude? Well, yes. But with no ATC communication requirement, you can
change it anytime you want. Unless I missed something in a quick scan,
91.179 doesn't address altitudes below 2,000' AGL and over a flat area,
such as a desert, you only need to be 1,000' AGL per 91.177. So, the rules
on altidude based on direction of flight does not necessarily apply. If
they did in G which only goes to 1,200' AGL, all IFR traffic there would be
one way.

Fuel on board? Well, I guess if you got ramped checked, you should have
statutory IFR reserves on departure, but since you're not required to have
a flight plan in G, what would be used to determine if you met IFR
reserves?

Malfunctions? No report required in G.

Instrument currency? Absolutely must have. No exceptions for class G!

SFAR 97 only applies to published routes, which are at least class E.

So, although it would be very stupid to do so, you can fly IFR in class G
airspace and not follow most of the IFR rules.

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

romeomike wrote in news:1kkcg5-
:

wrote:


In my training, my instructor said no,
it's not, and we were between layers!


I'm not an ultimate authority on this, but I don't get your instructor's
point of view. If someone else can explain how in this scenario one can
safely fly without reference to instruments, you and I are sure to learn
something.

VFR over the top (not to be confused with the IFR clearance of VFR on top).

For example, fly from SJC or RHV to TVL. The central valley can be covered
in Tule fog but it could be CAVU above 1,000' AGL. You also have CAVU at
SJC, RHV, and TVL. Climb VFR and then cross the Tule fog.

Now put a ceiling of say FL 250 above you. Again SJC, RHV, and TVL are
CAVU. Clime to 9,500', and cross between the layers VFR.

In either cases, you can see the Sierra Nevada mountains or the coastal
hills on return while you are over the lower level ceiling. Even with 25
mile visibility, you'll have enough time to establish a heading prior to
crossing the central valley and just hold it until you see the hills.

Maybe one of our Canadian friends can tell us if Canada now allows VFR over
the top for private pilots. I know when I was a student it was pointed out
that Canada did not allow this while the U.S. did.

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

On Tue, 20 May 2008 20:30:20 -0400, "Bob F."
wrote:

Extra credit points! The statement below is incomplete (hint: qualification
is missing). There are lots of places in US airspace where you could be IMC
and NOT fly under IFR rules, and no flight plan...where are they?

Class G space.