Scud-running: Definitely Bad, but is it legal?

SbestCFII said:
Now this is the kind of day I love taking my new instrument students up into. I had this one guy back in early 2013 from Miami...never flew in a cloud. First mission, I launched him into a 700' overcast with light rain. Didn't see daylight again for over an hour. He took it like a champ. Since then he's gotten his commercial and is working on his multi with an eye for CFI. He'll do well too and I have gained another pilot friend in Florida.
If you're out there...Hey Ivan!
Click to expand...
Was like that late this morning around MPV too... ceilings between 500 and about 1500, too low for safe VFR (imo), but perfect for practice approaches in actual I'd have been up there for sure, except I had an appointment at the dentist. :mad2:

By the time I got out, it was noon, and the overcast was breaking up. If I'd hustled I might have gotten one approach in before everything went VFR.

It's the way my luck has gone all summer. :(
 
Let's start with the title. Scud running is not "definitely bad". It's a tool in your toolbox. Some tools are more appropriate in some circumstances than others, but the tool itself is not "good" or "bad"
 
Tom-D said:
I believe it makes a big difference "where" you do it. three pilots this week in the north west showed us that is not the place.
Click to expand...
Yup. In flat country without any towers nearby, could be safe. Would not do it in the mountains (including here in VT).
 
azure said:
Yup. In flat country without any towers nearby, could be safe. Would not do it in the mountains (including here in VT).
Click to expand...

You have to change the definition of scud running in the mountains. 3,000 AGL ceilings can be about right....
:D
 
Launched into low ceilings in Low Country fog, SC. Ceilings were reported 1800, more accurately 1200-1500.

Getting closer to the destination there were a lot of towers, thankfully strobe lit but the ceiling kept dropping. Vis was great below. We were 10 miles from the airport and I told my wife if it dropped any lower it was 180 turn and find somewhere else or return to destination.

Didnt drop any further, got the field in sight. Had some issues after fueling, by the time we were ready it had baked off into a nice hot, choppy day with heat swells.

After that experience I have no problems with diverting, not going, turning around, etc. We were safe, and I was calm and I only made the decision to go because it was low country coverage, not a storm/rain/etc, knew the weather and knew it would bake off.

I can easily see now how in those circumstances it can go nasty real quick.
 
azure said:
Was like that late this morning around MPV too... ceilings between 500 and about 1500, too low for safe VFR (imo), but perfect for practice approaches in actual I'd have been up there for sure, except I had an appointment at the dentist. :mad2:

By the time I got out, it was noon, and the overcast was breaking up. If I'd hustled I might have gotten one approach in before everything went VFR.

It's the way my luck has gone all summer. :(
Click to expand...
Thunderstorms were all over LI today. Me and my CFI were going to finish up my IPC and file but we ended up getting grounded due to convective activity near JFK. We finally got to go out around 2pm and got practice approaches in.
 
JHW said:
Let's start with the title. Scud running is not "definitely bad". It's a tool in your toolbox. Some tools are more appropriate in some circumstances than others, but the tool itself is not "good" or "bad"
Click to expand...

I always liked the CASA "Press of Weather" clause that basically makes scud running legal in Aus.
 
SbestCFII said:
Good point. Out west, you also might also be in Class G higher than 1200' flying in IMC without a clearance (IFR rated and current of course). As a side "benefit" of NextGen, some of that airspace may one day be Class E.
Click to expand...
MOST of that airspace is already Class E. The old class G below 14.5k out west is disappearing at an alarming rate.
 
On our trip down to Myrtle Beach last fall there was marginal all up and down the east coast - had a solid 2+ hours in and between IMC layers for the first leg to N. NC. Decided I'd had enough of flying in the clouds and launched without an IFR clearance into what should have been 1500' ceilings trending toward 2000'... instead kept getting squeezed lower, and lower... finally all I could see in front of me was a wall of fog so did a 180 back to an airport I knew was still VFR, landed, and picked up the clearance. Probably should have accepted the advice of the Class D whose airspace we went around to get me an IFR clearance in the air.
 
bullwinkle said:
Definitely keep the obstacle database updated on your GPS if you are doing this...

The only time I have had to do this was when I was a new pilot and the weather got a jump on me. It was pretty unsettling, I would not do it intentionally. Basically heard the GPS constantly giving "obstacle" and "terrain" alerts.
Click to expand...

I (may have, theoretically) done something similar as a brand new PPL as well. With building thunderstorms. At night. And no GPS. :yikes:

Of course it was all unintentional, and was a good lesson in go/no-go decisions. Had another pilot (student, though) helping work the second VOR to keep updates on our position and any obstacles on the sectional.
 
Last edited:
I've done it, probably a little more than I like to admit. I try not to do it now, as I do not like having sweaty palms.
 
jordane93 said:
Thunderstorms were all over LI today. Me and my CFI were going to finish up my IPC and file but we ended up getting grounded due to convective activity near JFK. We finally got to go out around 2pm and got practice approaches in.
Click to expand...
Yes, the cold front was pushing down from the NW, so it would have reached you later than it did us. Up here it was perfectly benign by sunrise, though low enough until 9am to worry about getting back in at home.

I did think about going south to chase the IMC, but there were still convective cells moving through southern NH and I didn't see much in the way of low ceilings between there and here after about 1300.
 
Had to descend to 50' AWL (above water level :D) headed to Ketchican from Washington up the inside passage. No towers over the water. I just looked out for boats. :lol: The cloud layer was thin and narrow and I could confirm weather on XM and ATIS to the destination airport and secondary Canadian airports along the way.

Set personal minimums and stick to them. I usually don't launch with anything less than 1'000' agl, and recently updated obstical data bases. :lol:

Better to scud run (with personal minimums) that try and fly over weather and get caught on top.
 
Last edited:
Don't go very close to glassy water. The reflection makes you think you are higher than you are. There have been some accidents due to low flybys over glassy water. Avoid.
 
petrolero said:
would you do that with 1 sm vis as he said?
Click to expand...
OP said vis was 3 miles. He mentioned:
Since in Class G airspace below 1200' the visibility and cloud clearance requirements 1 sm. and clear of clouds. Assuming no obstacles, could you technically and legally make this "scud-run" to another, similar airport?
Click to expand...
The way I read it, the scenario vis is 3 miles.

I personally would not do 1sm VFR.
 
Fearless Tower said:
I personally would not do 1sm VFR.
Click to expand...

I would in a Cub or other slow mover.

Rather than think in terms of visibility distance, think of it as time. 1.5 to 2 minutes of visibility would be my cutoff. Though I have done less in a snowshowers were visibility may or may not have been less than 1sm at times, but I knew EXACTLY where I was, and where the towers were.
 
Fearless Tower said:
OP said vis was 3 miles. He mentioned:
The way I read it, the scenario vis is 3 miles.

I personally would not do 1sm VFR.
Click to expand...

That's just it, where do you draw the line? Because if you are willing to go in three, you may very well find yourself in one or less, what now?

If you have IR capability, you can always get out by getting a clearance. If not, you still have to keep it flying.
 
Henning said:
That's just it, where do you draw the line? Because if you are willing to go in three, you may very well find yourself in one or less, what now?

If you have IR capability, you can always get out by getting a clearance. If not, you still have to keep it flying.
Click to expand...
For me it goes back to what I said earlier - if you are going to scud run in MVFR conditions, you best have a good plan and backups/outs if things don't work out.

My personal limit is 3sm to takeoff. If it gets worse than 3 in flight, I will re-assess and act accordingly - invoke plan B or C as applicable.

If I take off in 1sm and it gets worse.....I don't really want to do that.

That's just where I draw the line.
 
Fearless Tower said:
For me it goes back to what I said earlier - if you are going to scud run in MVFR conditions, you best have a good plan and backups/outs if things don't work out.

My personal limit is 3sm to takeoff. If it gets worse than 3 in flight, I will re-assess and act accordingly - invoke plan B or C as applicable.

If I take off in 1sm and it gets worse.....I don't really want to do that.

That's just where I draw the line.
Click to expand...

Exactly, that's what I was pointing out, the question is not as simple and the answer can change with, "What's plan B and C?" The stronger B & C are, the sketchier A can be, and vice versa.
 
roncachamp said:
Yes.

No. You'd have to be at a cardinal altitude correct for direction of flight and no lower than 1000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal distance of 4 miles, and 200' obstacles are assumed to be everywhere away from airports with IAPs. You'd also need an IAP at your destination to descend out of those clouds and you ruled that out.
Click to expand...
I thought cardinal altitudes were only 3000 AGL and up?
 
Last edited:
You don't need an IFR clearance for Class G, in fact you can't even receive one because it's uncontrolled (by definition) and ATC can't control it. That said the FAA has violated people who have flown IFR in Class G without a clearance and the administrative judge rejected these same arguments, concluding that it was still reckless even if not technically against any specific regulation.
 
Fearless Tower said:
For me it goes back to what I said earlier - if you are going to scud run in MVFR conditions, you best have a good plan and backups/outs if things don't work out.

My personal limit is 3sm to takeoff. If it gets worse than 3 in flight, I will re-assess and act accordingly - invoke plan B or C as applicable.

If I take off in 1sm and it gets worse.....I don't really want to do that.

That's just where I draw the line.
Click to expand...

Went to plan B today leaving Newport news. No issues with vis, just low ceilings. Looked better across the bay. Wrong. Was easy to tell when the blue wall turned into clouds though. Executed a 180 and reroute. All very uneventful but still plan B and MVFR until near Easton
 
frcabot said:
You don't need an IFR clearance for Class G, in fact you can't even receive one because it's uncontrolled (by definition) and ATC can't control it. That said the FAA has violated people who have flown IFR in Class G without a clearance and the administrative judge rejected these same arguments, concluding that it was still reckless even if not technically against any specific regulation.
Click to expand...

That case really muddied the waters. The weather was such that the judge could have gotten him for violating VFR cloud clearance rules, because he was less than 1000 feet above the cloud tops when he entered controlled airspace. This was in a location where controlled airspace started at 700 or 1200 AGL, I forget which. Whether it would have been deemed careless or reckless in an area where the floor of controlled airspace is 14,500 MSL, who knows.
 
Palmpilot said:
That case really muddied the waters. The weather was such that the judge could have gotten him for violating VFR cloud clearance rules, because he was less than 1000 feet above the cloud tops when he entered controlled airspace. This was in a location where controlled airspace started at 700 or 1200 AGL, I forget which. Whether it would have been deemed careless or reckless in an area where the floor of controlled airspace is 14,500 MSL, who knows.
Click to expand...
But if you read the opinion it's clear what he's being violated for. And there was another similar case recently too. Same issue.
 
I "scud run" frequently. It's not bad. As long as you can maintain good visibility underneath there is not a problem at all, and it's not "bad"

However when vis and ceiling start conspiring against you that is when things can get interesting.
 
frcabot said:
You don't need an IFR clearance for Class G, in fact you can't even receive one because it's uncontrolled (by definition) and ATC can't control it. That said the FAA has violated people who have flown IFR in Class G without a clearance and the administrative judge rejected these same arguments, concluding that it was still reckless even if not technically against any specific regulation.
Click to expand...

That's really the long and short of it, it's reckless regardless.
 
"Moreover, our decision in Administrator v. Vance, 5 NTSB 1037, provided constructive, if not actual, notice that a takeoff into uncontrolled airspace under IFR without an ATC clearance constitutes an independent violation of section 91.13(a)." http://www.ntsb.gov/alj/O_n_O/docs/AVIATION/3935.PDF
http://www.ntsb.gov/legal/alj/OnODocuments/Aviation/3935.PDF

That's from Administrator v. Murphy.

So there you have it. Even though an ATC Clearance is impossible in class G, it's a per se violation of 91.113a to fly IFR in class G without a clearance. Essentially the NTSB has ruled that IFR in Class G is always illegal, since a clearance is impossible. You're welcome.
 
Last edited:
frcabot said:
"Moreover, our decision in Administrator v. Vance, 5 NTSB 1037, provided constructive, if not actual, notice that a takeoff into uncontrolled airspace under IFR without an ATC clearance constitutes an independent violation of section 91.13(a)." http://www.ntsb.gov/alj/O_n_O/docs/AVIATION/3935.PDF
http://www.ntsb.gov/legal/alj/OnODocuments/Aviation/3935.PDF

That's from Administrator v. Murphy.

So there you have it. Even though an ATC Clearance is impossible in class G, it's a per se violation of 91.113a to fly IFR in class G without a clearance. Essentially the NTSB has ruled that IFR in Class G is always illegal, since a clearance is impossible. You're welcome.
Click to expand...

Vance was decided in 1986, and Murphy in 1993. Are those the most recent you've seen?
 
Palmpilot said:
Vance was decided in 1986, and Murphy in 1993. Are those the most recent you've seen?
Click to expand...
There may be others but I haven't checked. In general something is only appealed if there's a chance of success so there may be similar enforcement actions that weren't appealed as the NTSB board has now concluded twice that IFR without a clearance in Class G is reckless. Also the only way this would result in an enforcement action is if you near-missed with someone or ****ed them off enough, or bragged to the FSDO about what you were doing. So I'm sure a lot of pilots get away with this and the FAA is none the wiser about it.

In order to result in a published decision like this you'd need
1. An enforcement action
2. An FAA administrator order re sanction
3. An appeal to an administrative law judge
4. A subsequent appeal to the NTSB board.

There are no lawyers who would take it that far given the relatively clear language in Vance and Murphy, so it wouldn't be surprising that there are no further published decisions on this issue.
 
Last edited:
frcabot said:
"Moreover, our decision in Administrator v. Vance, 5 NTSB 1037, provided constructive, if not actual, notice that a takeoff into uncontrolled airspace under IFR without an ATC clearance constitutes an independent violation of section 91.13(a)." http://www.ntsb.gov/alj/O_n_O/docs/AVIATION/3935.PDF
http://www.ntsb.gov/legal/alj/OnODocuments/Aviation/3935.PDF

That's from Administrator v. Murphy.

So there you have it. Even though an ATC Clearance is impossible in class G, it's a per se violation of 91.113a to fly IFR in class G without a clearance. Essentially the NTSB has ruled that IFR in Class G is always illegal, since a clearance is impossible. You're welcome.
Click to expand...

Not quite. The act of launching IFR into G isn't the problem, it's not having a way out of Class G in IMC that makes it the 91.13 violation. If you are filed and have a release and a plan coordinated to depart a Class G field and climb directly into E, then there is no 91.13 violation.
 
roncachamp said:
Under those conditions the lake and sky can be indistinguishable.
Click to expand...

You are telling the truth. I blundered into this over the chesapeake bay one time and was only saved by spotting a work boat just before I killed myself, then shortly after, the shore came into view. It was luck not skill that saved me.
 
Henning said:
Not quite. The act of launching IFR into G isn't the problem, it's not having a way out of Class G in IMC that makes it the 91.13 violation. If you are filed and have a release and a plan coordinated to depart a Class G field and climb directly into E, then there is no 91.13 violation.
Click to expand...
You're probably correct but that's not what the NTSB said.

But according to the NTSB's decision IFR in Class G even if remaining wholly in Class G is still careless.
 
Last edited:
frcabot said:
You're probably correct but that's not what the NTSB said.

But according to the NTSB's decision IFR in Class G even if remaining wholly in Class G is still careless.
Click to expand...

Launching G into IMC and picking up ATC on the way up happens quite a bit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top