Rogue IFR

Don't they fly IFR in IMC without radar separation in the UK all the time?

Mike
MU-2


"Roger Long" om wrote in
message ...
I ran into an old client today and we stumbled on to the flying topic.
Turns out he got his PP a couple years ago and bought a plane.

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.

Yikes! What are they teaching student pilots these days? I've asked here
before and seem to find myself asking myself that question a lot. You
can'
t teach common sense but the legality of what he's doing didn't even seem
to
be on his radar screen.

What does ATC do when they see a 1200 target boring through what they know
is solid IMC?

--
Roger Long

"Mike Rapoport" wrote:

Don't they fly IFR in IMC without radar separation in the UK all the time?

Glider pilots fly IMC (clouds) in the U.K without radar sep.
As I understand it each pilot broadcasts in the blind on the
designated freq. and says: "I'm [location] at [altitude]."
and they use either/both [altitude] or [location] for
separation.

Todd Pattist
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)
___
Make a commitment to learn something from every flight.
Share what you learn.

Mxsmanic wrote:

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.

The obvious solution is for him to stay on the ground.

George Patterson
You can dress a hog in a tuxedo, but he still wants to roll in the mud.

"Craig Prouse" wrote in message
...
Roger Long wrote:

What does ATC do when they see a 1200 target boring through what they
know
is solid IMC?

How would they know, really? I think it's the other way around. I think
ATC sees a 1200 target, and they go, "look, VMC over there."

ATC doesn't really care. Their concern is to separate the IFRs and call
traffic to IFRs if there's time. It's the pilot's job to comply with
visibility and cloud separation rqmts-not ATC's job to police it.

Only time ATC cares what the pilot sees outside the window is when ATC has
to decide if it's legal to approve a request, or issue a clearance requiring
VMC. In those cases, ATC will ask "say flight conditions".

Cloud layers are another possibility that could make the VFR target entirely
legal. Just the fact that there's a ceiling out there doesn't rule out
legal, and in some situations, sensible, VFR flight above the layer, or
between them. Way too many variables for ATC to spend time worrying about
the VFR target.

Jay Honeck wrote:
Would it be legal? Nope. Would it be safe? Except for the
not-talking-to-ATC part, yup.

It might not be safe, either. IFR GPS's have an extra quality/geometry
"monitoring" algorithm called RAIM that VFR units don't have. It's
possible that you'd be OK, but it's also possible that you won't and
wouldn't know about it.

That said, I've had RAIM alarms on my IFR GPS, where my handheld GPSMAP
195 thought everything was OK, and I could see by looking out the window
that we were exactly where both GPSs thought we were.

-- Jay

__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino/ ! ! !

Checkout http://www.oc-adolfos.com/
for the best Italian food in Ocean City, MD and...
Checkout http://www.brolow.com/ for authentic Blues music on Delmarva

It might not be safe, either. IFR GPS's have an extra quality/geometry
"monitoring" algorithm called RAIM that VFR units don't have. It's
possible that you'd be OK, but it's also possible that you won't and
wouldn't know about it.

True enough, but I'm comparing my AvMap to my King VOR -- not to an
IFR-certified GPS.

With my AvMap I am able to taxi to my hangar without looking out the
windows. I wouldn't want to try *that* using my VORs... :-)

Thus, comparing apples to apples, I'm positive I could fly a much safer and
more accurate non-precision instrument approach (which is all we have here)
into Iowa City using my AvMap, even though it's technically illegal. Still,
it's nice to have the capability on board, in case of an emergency.

But I sure wouldn't do it routinely, as was the case of the pilot in Roger's
example.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

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


PIREPs are assumed to be accurate.

Yes but as far as the FAA "officially" is concerned, they are "anecdotal" when it comes
to enforcement actions.

Don't they fly IFR in IMC without radar separation in the UK all the time?

We fily IFR in IMC here in the states all the time. We need to be in contact
with ATC, who clears out a section of airspace for us until we report the next
checkpoint, and clears out the next section ahead of us, all depending on our
position reports but coordinated on the ground. Radar is used in congested
areas (like the entire East coast) but it is not necessary for legal IFR in
IMC.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

Imagine flying an ILS approach in IMC (low vis with heavy rain) when, at 800 ft
the tower says "traffic 12 o'clock less than a mile squawking VFR". It would
have been nice to confront that fellow to find out why he tought it was a good
idea to endanger many lives.
I don't understand how some could support flying rogue IFR without realizing
the hazard they are creating for the masses who follow the rules.

"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!