Why would someone choose to fly VFR on top?

Subject line says it all. In light of the fact that VFR on top subjects
you to both VFR and IFR constraints, why would anyone ever choose to fly
VFR on top? I can only think of two possible reasons:

1. There happens to be clear air at a +500 foot altitude and not at the
corresponding even-thousand altitude (though how would know that without
popping up 500 feet to have a look is still a mystery).

2. You can get a more direct routing because of the less restrictive
separation requirements.

Have I missed a possible reason?

rg

In article ,
Ron Garret wrote:
Subject line says it all. In light of the fact that VFR on top subjects
you to both VFR and IFR constraints, why would anyone ever choose to fly
VFR on top? I can only think of two possible reasons:

You can fly IFR thought the clouds, come out on top in clear skies,
cancel IFR and then fly VFR (VFR over the top). Or you can fly IFR
through the clouds and remain 'in the system' as you fly VFR (VFR on top)
and if there are more clouds ahead or at your final airport you don't have
to call ATC again.

Example: I know (or strongly suspect) that the tops at at 6000. I call
Ground and tell them that I want an IFR clearance to VFR-on-top. No flight
plan filed. Ground says "Whizbang 1234X is cleared to (nearby VOR), climb
and maintain 7000, if not on top at 7000 advise. Squawk 3456." Great time
saver.

Example: I am in Spokane, or somewhere else where it is severe clear and I
want to go to Seattle or somewhere that I know is VFR. I file an IFR flight
plan with VOT in the altitude block. I am cleared to operate VOT and cleared
for takeoff. Because I am on an IFR flight plan, I make all required reports
and stay in communication with Center until I can see over the tops of the
mountains that there is nothing on the other side but white puffy stuff. I
say "Center, Whizbang 3456 requests a hard altitude." Center gives me an IFR
altitude. Voila....I am back to "normal" IFR for the rest of the trip. I
used to carry packages from SEA to OAK and back in the middle of the night
and used VOT more often than not.

Bob Gardner

"Ron Garret" wrote in message
...
Subject line says it all. In light of the fact that VFR on top subjects
you to both VFR and IFR constraints, why would anyone ever choose to fly
VFR on top? I can only think of two possible reasons:

1. There happens to be clear air at a +500 foot altitude and not at the
corresponding even-thousand altitude (though how would know that without
popping up 500 feet to have a look is still a mystery).

2. You can get a more direct routing because of the less restrictive
separation requirements.

Have I missed a possible reason?

rg

"Ron Garret" wrote in message
...
Subject line says it all. In light of the fact that VFR on top subjects
you to both VFR and IFR constraints, why would anyone ever choose to fly
VFR on top? I can only think of two possible reasons:

1. There happens to be clear air at a +500 foot altitude and not at the
corresponding even-thousand altitude (though how would know that without
popping up 500 feet to have a look is still a mystery).

2. You can get a more direct routing because of the less restrictive
separation requirements.

Have I missed a possible reason?

For a non-IFR rated pilot, if departure and arrival airports are clear, they
can overfly a large area that is overcast/below minimums.


--
Matt

---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message =
...
=20
=20
For a non-IFR rated pilot, if departure and arrival airports are =
clear, they=20
can overfly a large area that is overcast/below minimums.
=20
---------------------=20
Matthew W. Barrow
Land-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO=20


The non-IFR-rated pilot can do that only as VFR-over-the-top.
VFR-on-top requires an IFR flight plan, a privilege of the Instrument =
Rating.

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

For a non-IFR rated pilot, if departure and arrival airports are clear,
they can overfly a large area that is overcast/below minimums.


They can do that VFR, but not VFR-on-top. VFR-on-top is an IFR operation.

Ok, I understand the first example - you just want to go through the
cloud deck, no flight plan, no hassle, as you said - great time saver.

What is the good part about the second way? I mean - how is it really
different from flying it at a hard altitude? You still had to file the
flight plan, you still have to file the assigned route. The only benefit
I see is being able to change altitudes at your discretion. Is this what
you're after or am I missing something else?

Bob Gardner wrote:
Example: I know (or strongly suspect) that the tops at at 6000. I call
Ground and tell them that I want an IFR clearance to VFR-on-top. No flight
plan filed. Ground says "Whizbang 1234X is cleared to (nearby VOR), climb
and maintain 7000, if not on top at 7000 advise. Squawk 3456." Great time
saver.

Example: I am in Spokane, or somewhere else where it is severe clear and I
want to go to Seattle or somewhere that I know is VFR. I file an IFR flight
plan with VOT in the altitude block. I am cleared to operate VOT and cleared
for takeoff. Because I am on an IFR flight plan, I make all required reports
and stay in communication with Center until I can see over the tops of the
mountains that there is nothing on the other side but white puffy stuff. I
say "Center, Whizbang 3456 requests a hard altitude." Center gives me an IFR
altitude. Voila....I am back to "normal" IFR for the rest of the trip. I
used to carry packages from SEA to OAK and back in the middle of the night
and used VOT more often than not.

Bob Gardner

"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
...

Example: I know (or strongly suspect) that the tops at at 6000. I call
Ground and tell them that I want an IFR clearance to VFR-on-top. No flight
plan filed. Ground says "Whizbang 1234X is cleared to (nearby VOR), climb
and maintain 7000, if not on top at 7000 advise. Squawk 3456." Great time
saver.


Great time saver compared to what? What are you going to do when you reach
VFR conditions?



Example: I am in Spokane, or somewhere else where it is severe clear and I
want to go to Seattle or somewhere that I know is VFR. I file an IFR
flight plan with VOT in the altitude block.


Put OTP in the altitude block. VOT is "VOR test signal" or "vorticity".

Yes, I missed the distinction.
Thanks


"John R. Copeland" wrote in message
. ..
"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...


For a non-IFR rated pilot, if departure and arrival airports are clear,
they
can overfly a large area that is overcast/below minimums.

---------------------


The non-IFR-rated pilot can do that only as VFR-over-the-top.
VFR-on-top requires an IFR flight plan, a privilege of the Instrument
Rating.

In article , says...


Example: I know (or strongly suspect) that the tops at at 6000. I call
Ground and tell them that I want an IFR clearance to VFR-on-top. No flight
plan filed. Ground says "Whizbang 1234X is cleared to (nearby VOR), climb
and maintain 7000, if not on top at 7000 advise. Squawk 3456." Great time
saver.



If you want IFR just to get on top, you can get a tower en-route clearance,
then cancel, and you're on your way, VFR. That could be a time-saver, because
you can probably do it without a flight plan.

If you want to stay in the system, then I don't see the time-saver, unless
your altitude flexibility happens to allow you to get a more direct routing.

GF