It all depends on what the definition of "cloud" is...

"Geoffrey Barnes" wrote in message link.net...

I'm clear on how far away I have to stay from clouds during VFR flight

Are you 300' away from that cloud or 400' away? What, you can't say?
Then you shouldn't be flying VFR! That's why I decided to get an
instrument rating. (j/k!)

I'm guessing this counts as a "cloud", right? I mean, I couldn't see
through it.

That's my rule. If I can't see what's inside it, I don't try flying
through it. Also applies well to mountains and birds.

it. I reduced my speed a bit to keep my extended downwind from getting too
close to the steel mill, and began to think of a plan that would keep the
tower happy and me in legal VFR conditions. I was just about to ask to do a
360 in place when the Citation came over the numbers and the tower cleared
me to turn base.

On an 8-mile downwind you're practically in the enroute phase of
flight. In Class D you're not even in the tower's airspace anymore.
Widen out around, pinch in, or do the 360, whatever seems to make
sense to you. If you know you;re the only one in the pattern just do
it and give a courtesy call so the tower knows. If it's busy just give
a shout and say, "waddaya want?" and they'll tell you.

At that point, I asked to switch from touch-and-go to full stop, mostly
because I didn't want to get caught facing that vapor cloud again.

imagining a 50s-style scifi movie, "Attack of the Vapor Cloud!"/

There was nobody else in the pattern, and I don't think the tower
controllers would have cared. But I didn't think of that at the time, and I
wasn't convinced that I could stay legal if someone in authority decided
that pillar of vapor coming from the steel plant constituted a "cloud". So
I just landed and cut the flight short.

How big was this pillar, 50', 200', 500' around, and you have miles of
airspace with which to avoid it? Chill out (or just sublimate)! No one
in the FAA sits around with radar scopes looking for VFR pilots who
come within 400' of a cloud when the limit is 500'. Not by any means
saying you can't get snagged in a technicality but my primary thought
process is, "am I creating a risk by doing this."

Example: few weekends ago I flew from BED to MVY under an broken
cumulus ceiling that ranged between probably 2800' and 4000'. It was
being produced by typical summer ground heating and ended abruptly at
the shoreline. The forecast was unambiguous and expected no change
until long after the flight.

We cruised at altitudes between 3500' and 2500' the whole way pretty
much. It was an otherwise gorgeous Saturday and we were cleared to
land by Vineyard tower 5 miles out. Had the ceiling been 1000' higher
we would have been sequenced at #5. I should mention the visibilities
were 50 miles, and the tallest things between BED and MVY are one
small patch of radio towers that are very easy to see and avoid. I
also was under flight following the whole way, just so ATC knew where
I was in case there was any IFR traffic that might want to come down
through the clouds.

To be sure, this is a flight I probably wouldn't have made on my own
50-100 hours ago (200TT now) but for this, what I could see was, that
I had oodles of visibility, very static weather conditions (no chance
of convective stuff either), and 1500-200' of legal altitude to work
with. Under these circumstances is anybody going to care whether I was
within 400' or 500' of the cloud above me? The ASOS at my home field
is often off by 100s of feet from what I see out the window. You say
to-may-to, I say to-mah-to. I felt comfortable that I had a million
"outs" in case things got worse (airports everywhere within 5-10mi of
my route the whole way) and I conducted the flight in such a way as
not to endanger anyone else either. Maybe I'm being overconfident, or
maybe I'm becoming more experienced. Sometimes it's hard to tell the
difference. All I know is that it looked to me like a ton of guys
missed a great day to fly.

-cwk.