"Going for the Visual"

Yes, there was an article like that.
But didn't it turn out that the article was a fabrication?
I think it was one of those "It could have happened..." stories.
That sort of journalism appalls me.
---JRC---

"Ray Andraka" wrote in message =
...
Uhh, I'd check that one. A year or two ago there was an article in =
IFR or IFR
Refresher about this subject. FAA busted some guy who cancelled when =
clear of
the clouds because he was not legal for VFR. IIRC, the guy busted had =
like 750
and 6+. The gist of the article was that unless you were in legal VFR =
you can't
cancel in the air.
=20
Otis Winslow wrote:
=20
Careful on that one.

"Jim Weir" wrote in message
...

I don't know about the rest of ye all, but the real world out here =
is to
be
vectored as low as the controller can give you, get the airport in =
sight,
and
"cancelling IFR". That way the 1000 & 3 does not apply.

Jim

=20
--
--Ray Andraka