Cloud Separation...

In a practical environment, when does cloud separation become an
issue? A few months ago I was passing through the Denver Class B, and
was just above a widely scattered broken layer of clouds. These were
puff balls all within a layer of about 500Ft. Out towards the horizon
they looked like a solid layer, but nearer to me there was probably
only 10-20% coverage.

I debated climbing higher and getting a little more separation between
me and the layer (but that would have required a more rapid decent
later to get into my destination), or decending below the layer (but
that would have taken me out of the Class B and into a very busy VFR
corridor), so I elected to stay where I was.

Visibility was excellent, but I was passing pretty close to some of
the cotton balls. Should I have gone to a different altitude? Which
way? I wasn't assigned an altitude by Center, but should I have told
them I wanted to assend or desend and get their recommendation? Do
you all avoid any and all clouds, or just the big ones that will
interfere with trafic spotting and visibility?

WW

"Wily Wapiti" wrote in message
om...

In a practical environment, when does cloud separation become an
issue? A few months ago I was passing through the Denver Class B, and
was just above a widely scattered broken layer of clouds. These were
puff balls all within a layer of about 500Ft. Out towards the horizon
they looked like a solid layer, but nearer to me there was probably
only 10-20% coverage.

I debated climbing higher and getting a little more separation between
me and the layer (but that would have required a more rapid decent
later to get into my destination), or decending below the layer (but
that would have taken me out of the Class B and into a very busy VFR
corridor), so I elected to stay where I was.

Visibility was excellent, but I was passing pretty close to some of
the cotton balls. Should I have gone to a different altitude? Which
way? I wasn't assigned an altitude by Center, but should I have told
them I wanted to assend or desend and get their recommendation? Do
you all avoid any and all clouds, or just the big ones that will
interfere with trafic spotting and visibility?


Passing through Denver Class B airspace and talking to Center?

Center controllers aren't in a position to recommend altitudes...they don't
even have windows to look out of. I'm sure that any request would get
something like "Climb/descend at your discretion, maintain VFR."

Bob Gardner

"Wily Wapiti" wrote in message
om...
In a practical environment, when does cloud separation become an
issue? A few months ago I was passing through the Denver Class B, and
was just above a widely scattered broken layer of clouds. These were
puff balls all within a layer of about 500Ft. Out towards the horizon
they looked like a solid layer, but nearer to me there was probably
only 10-20% coverage.

I debated climbing higher and getting a little more separation between
me and the layer (but that would have required a more rapid decent
later to get into my destination), or decending below the layer (but
that would have taken me out of the Class B and into a very busy VFR
corridor), so I elected to stay where I was.

Visibility was excellent, but I was passing pretty close to some of
the cotton balls. Should I have gone to a different altitude? Which
way? I wasn't assigned an altitude by Center, but should I have told
them I wanted to assend or desend and get their recommendation? Do
you all avoid any and all clouds, or just the big ones that will
interfere with trafic spotting and visibility?

WW

"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
...

Center controllers aren't in a position to recommend altitudes...they
don't
even have windows to look out of. I'm sure that any request would get
something like "Climb/descend at your discretion, maintain VFR."


I had a somewhat related incident today.

I took a handoff on a VFR Bonanza from Minneapolis Center this morning. He
was eastbound at 8500 MSL, about 40 miles from GRB when he checked in. GRB
Class C airspace tops out at 4700 MSL. On initial contact, as best as I can
remember, he said, "level at 8500 and I'd like your authorization to remain
at this altitude". I gave him the altimeter setting and told him I could
neither approve or deny his request.

Controllers can assign or approve wrong-for-direction altitudes for VFR
aircraft only where ATC provides separation to VFR aircraft.

There is a small minority of pilots who do not understand the concept of
pilot in command and see a controller or ops inspector with a violation book
hiding behind every cloud.

Bob

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

"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
...

Center controllers aren't in a position to recommend altitudes...they
don't
even have windows to look out of. I'm sure that any request would get
something like "Climb/descend at your discretion, maintain VFR."


I had a somewhat related incident today.

I took a handoff on a VFR Bonanza from Minneapolis Center this morning.
He
was eastbound at 8500 MSL, about 40 miles from GRB when he checked in.
GRB
Class C airspace tops out at 4700 MSL. On initial contact, as best as I
can
remember, he said, "level at 8500 and I'd like your authorization to
remain
at this altitude". I gave him the altimeter setting and told him I could
neither approve or deny his request.

Controllers can assign or approve wrong-for-direction altitudes for VFR
aircraft only where ATC provides separation to VFR aircraft.

"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
...

There is a small minority of pilots who do not understand the concept of
pilot in command and see a controller or ops inspector with a violation
book
hiding behind every cloud.


Uh, okay, and some that aren't familiar with VFR cruising altitude
requirements either.

"Tom Fleischman" wrote in message
rthlink.net...

What would have been wrong with you perhaps *mentioning* to the pilot
that he was not at the correct VFR altitude for his direction of
flight?


He obviously already knew that, that's why he requested authorization to
remain at that altitude.



Or are you as obstinate with the pilots in your airspace as you are
here in this forum?


I'm not obstinate at all.

Actually talking to Center-then Approach-then Departure-Then back to
Center, but you get the point...

WW

Bob Gardner wrote:

There is a small minority of pilots who do not understand the concept of
pilot in command and see a controller or ops inspector with a violation
book hiding behind every cloud.

When I'm getting FF, I try to make it clear when I'm willing to be flexible.
It can be tough, though: "..request class B direct ... at pretty much any
altitude that you'd like" just never works as well as I'd hope grin.
It's kind of a shame. When the frequency isn't busy, it's all clear and we
can come to an agreement easily enough. But that's when it doesn't likely
matter.

Is there some shorthand that ATC will recognize for this?

- Andrew

Andrew Gideon wrote:

Is there some shorthand that ATC will recognize for this?

This is a GREAT question!

I haven't found a "magic word," but concisely showing that you're aware
and capable goes a long way.

Detroit Approach seems to like hearing my request for "any assigned
altitude." Also, asking for vectors then direct to my destination is
good.

Mentioning the ATIS that you have at the primary airport is good too.
It lets them know that you know what runways are being used, i.e.,
you're situationally aware.

E.g., "Detroit Approach, 938SA over Grosse Isle, 2500 feet, request
vectors direct Ann Arbor at any assigned altitude, we have Alpha at
Metro."