VFR on top

[ccsmith51]

Originally Posted by Jesse

...

For those out there reading who don't have an IFR ticket, please get one. The statement, "a VFR pilot is only half a pilot" is not too far off. ...

That is blatantly insulting to those of us that choose to not incur the costs of obtaining an IFR rating, or the costs of acquiring and operating IFR compliant aircraft.

That is along the same lines as claiming that only tailwheel pilots are "real" pilots...

Or any number of stereotypical comments that denigrate a group of people that make an informed choice that suits their particular needs and circumstances.

Sorry, as a VFR pilot since 1967 that has no interest in IFR, I take offense to the implication that I am less of a pilot than someone else just because I don't happen to have an IFR ticket.

Respectfully,

[DanH]

Nice Budd Davisson article here:

http://flighttraining.aopa.org/magaz...r_The_Top.html

BTW, set aside the obvious issues of visibility and cloud clearance at the destination. For the cruise portion of the flight above a cloud layer, the fundamental risk is the same, IFR or VFR.

[Neal@F14]

Originally Posted by Jesse

The statement, "a VFR pilot is only half a pilot" is not too far off.

That's OK by me, since my RV only has one engine, it's only half an airplane

[flyingriki]

Originally Posted by ccsmith51

That is blatantly insulting to those of us that choose to not go incur the costs of obtaining an IFR rating, or the costs of acquiring and operating IFR compliant aircraft.

That is along the same lines as claiming that only tailwheel pilots are "real" pilots...

Or any of a number of stereotypical comments that denigrate a group of people that make an informed choice that suits their particular needs and circumstances.

Sorry, as a VFR pilot since 1967 that has no interest in IFR, I take offense to the implication that I am less of a pilot than someone else just because I don't happen to have an IFR ticket.

Respectfully,

Well said. Many non-pro IFR pilots are long out of currency and can hurt themselves and others.

[Mike S]

Originally Posted by ccsmith51

That is blatantly insulting to those of us that choose to not go incur the costs of obtaining an IFR rating, or the costs of acquiring and operating IFR compliant aircraft.

That is along the same lines as claiming that only tailwheel pilots are "real" pilots...

Or any of a number of stereotypical comments that denigrate a group of people that make an informed choice that suits their particular needs and circumstances.

Sorry, as a VFR pilot since 1967 that has no interest in IFR, I take offense to the implication that I am less of a pilot than someone else just because I don't happen to have an IFR ticket.

Respectfully,

Yep, but then things do change sometimes.

After 43 years, I now find it is time to get the IFR---------because I now have a plane that, IMHO, "Justifies" the rating.

The higher, faster, and farther abilities of the RV 10 can sometimes only be utilized if you can go IFR. Way different than flying the old Stinson was.

[David Paule]

I fly lots of VFR and only VFR and only during daylight. Here's how I handle it.

1. Never go VFR on top. Not ever. Unless I can see the ground on the far side.

2. If the forecast doesn't include solid VFR underneath, I can't go to that destination.

3. If I'm under broken, don't go on top unless it's getting more open and the forecast is for improvement.

4. If I'm on top of broken, keep an eye out for signs that it's going solid. Well before that, duck under.

5. If I'm on top of broken, keep an eye out how high the bottoms are. A hole is no good if there' no way out from it underneath.

6. Have enough fuel to allow plenty of options. Fuel is cheap. Options are priceless.

7. Have enough daylight to allow plenty of options.

8. Carry enough charts (electronic or paper, doesn't matter) and airport information, so that I can determine alternates.

Dave

[RV6_flyer]

Originally Posted by Mike S

Yep, but then things do change sometimes.

The higher, faster, and farther abilities of the RV 10 can sometimes only be utilized if you can go IFR. Way different than flying the old Stinson was.

Before I was IFR rated, I ended up spending the night at an airport while an RV-10 showed up, refueled, filed IFR, then flew the last leg home. That night, I knew if I had the IFR rating, I would have spent the night in my own bed. May have only been 20-minues in actual IFR for a 2-hour flight.

[Arlen]

I believe that each rating or endorsement that one adds to the pilots license does serve to improve one's piloting skills. I know it's worked that way for me.

high performance
complex
instrument
seaplane
commercial

others that would also help (but I have not yet pursued):

glider
multi
CFI
CFII
ATP

I really think they're all worthwhile, and each of them makes us a little bit better...

[ty1295]

I plan to get my IFR rating once I resume flying in an RV myself. Not because I think or plan to fly IFR, but I want to mitigate risks of flying by way of increasing my own skills and awaremess as a pilot.

Same to be said for upset attitude training, I don't think anyone does that and then puts themself in that position on purpose, but knowing if you get in that situation you have some skills in your toolbox to help return you safely home.

With that said when I do get my IFR, I wouldn't mind staying current and the occasion you need to use it, the option exists. With everything in flying everyone has their own personal limits.

[DanBaier]

From my perspective, it's hard to have absolute rules - like, never fly VFR on top. It often might not seem the best choice, but flying is by its nature an exercise in risk management. Sometimes, VFR on top, particularly if someone has an instrument rating, is a perfectly sensible approach. Depends on the day, the mission, the aircraft capabilities and the pilot's capabilities.

The advice of filing the NASA form is good, but bear in mind that this program is intended to provide relief when the potential violation was unintentional. If your local FSDO were to call you on this, they could contend the immunity is not available to you under the circumstances. I imagine you'd eventually win the point, but it might not be fun. (Your chances of prevailing can be diminished by the choice of words in a forum message.)

So, how to handle it - if the nearby airport is not overcast, go in that direction and descend until you break out and then turn around. If the nearby airport is not open and it was forecast to be, then keep in mind that the "E" word is your ultimate get out of jail free play. Once you declare, you can pretty much do just about anything - you just have to prepared to respond about the circumstances if asked. Not necessarily saying that it was called for here, but

...I contacted approach and descended thru the clouds but I didn't file IFR or request a IFR clearance [the reasons are unclear to me] and the controller told me to remain in VFR conditions which I couldn't do. [for which the answer should have been simply, "unable"] ...

You could have asked for IFR to descend through a layer and told the controller you'd cancel upon breaking out. If the controller nevertheless said to remain VFR, you could give him one last shot by asking if you needed to "declare." If you didn't get a clearance or a reasonable expectation of when you could expect one, then you could just declare and announce that you were descending. ATC and the FSDO might not be thrilled, but I don't think there's any enforcement that could actually be initiated against you. And, in such a case, the tape is your friend.

FWIW - Dan