Filing IFR in VMC

I always start off IFR. Its not a burned on them. In fact, it is more often a burden on me. Ill go IFR until I get some quirky handling and I always have the option to cancel with them in the air!!
 
mulligan said:
I always start off IFR. Its not a burned on them. In fact, it is more often a burden on me. Ill go IFR until I get some quirky handling and I always have the option to cancel with them in the air!!
Click to expand...
I do it about half the time, favoring Class C and remote Class D airports. At my home airport, 10-15 minute holds for release get old really, really fast. Too close to KSJC. One of those "complex airspace" exceptions.
 
Brad Z said:
Perhaps I do things a bit differently than others while IFR or VFR.

When I fly VFR with flight following, I almost always get a proper hand-off or at least a frequency suggestion for the next sector, so I don't have to many issues finding frequencies. Even if I did, Foreflight makes it so easy to find the center or tracon frequency of a nearby airport that figuring out who to call is quite trivial.

As far as altitudes and airspace, when I fly IFR I'm following along on my sectionals looking ahead for potential terrain or airspace conflicts so I don't get last minute vectors around active restricted areas or MOAs. If I was flying in the flight levels I probably would bother too much with VFR sectionals but flying a single I always been in the habit of following along on the charge paying close attention to landmarks, airports, roads, etc., even when IFR.

If I can see out the window, I'm looking out the window.

As far as finding airports, I'm not above using IFR approaches when VFR--particularly at night--to find and get set up for arrival into the airport.
Click to expand...
You do much the same as I, which is why I said it's not really that big a deal. But it can be to others.

The loss of IFR skills is a much bigger deal.
 
I agree that there are more IFR skills to lose than VFR skills. As someone who now flies IFR all the time, the one VFR element I would need to think hard about is knowing where the airspace boundaries are. They are almost transparent when flying IFR. I remember the days when I could fly VFR around the Denver Class B without looking at a map. No more.
 
kayoh190 said:
. I was more commenting on your hundreds of hours on IFR flight plans - I just didn't realize you were so low time.
Click to expand...
Pretty low time and all my training was in Arizona. Flew 1 day in the last month, not a cloud was touched that day. I love the procedural aspect of IMC but just don't get to do it nearly enough. I flight instruct for fun when I'm not doing the regular job and unfortunately I'm not a CFII. Maybe I'll work on getting that.
 
Everskyward said:
I agree that there are more IFR skills to lose than VFR skills. As someone who now flies IFR all the time, the one VFR element I would need to think hard about is knowing where the airspace boundaries are. They are almost transparent when flying IFR. I remember the days when I could fly VFR around the Denver Class B without looking at a map. No more.
Click to expand...

With two geo-referenced tablets running, a primary and a backup, plus the certified GTN-750 on the panel, it's fairly easy to switch back-and-forth between IFR and VFR, whatever it takes to expedite the flight. Except for my local area or standard routes, I'd be hard pressed to navigate complex Bravos or SUAs without a chart.
 
RotorDude said:
With two geo-referenced tablets running, a primary and a backup, plus the certified GTN-750 on the panel, it's fairly easy to switch back-and-forth between IFR and VFR, whatever it takes to expedite the flight. Except for my local area or standard routes, I'd be hard pressed to navigate complex Bravos or SUAs without a chart.
Click to expand...
When I flew VFR, there were no such thing as georeferenced tablets...

Even now, I don't use a tablet for navigation.

It's a good thing too, because a few months ago I left my tablet in my other residence that is 1000 miles away from the place I usually live. I'm going to be happy to be reunited with it next week, as I try to resurrect it...
 
Last edited:
Let'sgoflying! said:
no.
Click to expand...

This. In fact, some controllers would welcome the traffic in order to justify their jobs. If you are too much of a burden, then you will be waiting for your clearance, or placed in a hold.
 
Everskyward said:
When I flew VFR, there were no such thing as georeferenced tablets...

Even now, I don't use a tablet for navigation.
Click to expand...

I don't either -- it's my backup, in case the panel fails.
And from the fun point of view, nothing beats your eyeballs plus memory, which is how I fly gliders (though I might start to cheat as I progress to longer distances).
 
James331 said:
Busy airspace is where VFR really is a great tool to have in your belt, I can cut major time off my routing into so very busy airspace by mixing IFR and VFR.

A class D is a class D, a class B is a class B and a sectional is a sectional, especially if you have GPS, VFR doesn't require any crazy local knowledge at all.

Both IFR and VFR are great tools, but I've seen IFR guys who never go VFR get to the point they aren't comfortable doing anything outside of the local area VFR ops, and I've seen rusty IFR pilots who are just as bad, often times worse if they end up trying to work that rust off in actual.
Click to expand...
Well I think for the most part we agree. If you are truly comfortable with flying VFR along that particular route, it can be a blessing.
If not, it can be a nightmare.

My issue is with folks that haven't flown VFR in eons who think it's basically IFR flying in VMC. Homework is needed, and even more important is local knowledge.
I used to fly lots of VFR in the New York area (years ago), but would never have contiplated flying LA area VFR. One needs to know their boundaries.
 
PPC1052 said:
This. In fact, some controllers would welcome the traffic in order to justify their jobs. If you are too much of a burden, then you will be waiting for your clearance, or placed in a hold.
Click to expand...

Eh not so much 'justifying' their jobs, it is their job. But I agree somewhat, as traffic count dictates the number of controllers at a FAA facility and their pay grades. IOW a controller working Chicago O'Hara will make more than a controller working the tower at Appleton.
 
mscard88 said:
Eh not so much 'justifying' their jobs, it is their job. But I agree somewhat, as traffic count dictates the number of controllers at a FAA facility and their pay grades. IOW a controller working Chicago O'Hara will make more than a controller working the tower at Appleton.
Click to expand...

I always wanted to meet Chicago O'Hara. :)
 
mscard88 said:
Eh not so much 'justifying' their jobs, it is their job. But I agree somewhat, as traffic count dictates the number of controllers at a FAA facility and their pay grades. IOW a controller working Chicago O'Hara will make more than a controller working the tower at Appleton.
Click to expand...
They're all over paid. :confused:
 
mscard88 said:
Eh not so much 'justifying' their jobs, it is their job. But I agree somewhat, as traffic count dictates the number of controllers at a FAA facility and their pay grades. IOW a controller working Chicago O'Hara will make more than a controller working the tower at Appleton.
Click to expand...

Yours is a more accurate statement than my cynical description.
 
MetalCloud said:
ATC works for you. You don't work for ATC. If you as PIC want to file IFR, do it. The system that supports you will accommodate.
Click to expand...

Pilots pay the salary of ATC? That's news to me. Yes you can argue taxes, but it's still not the same as if ATC were privatized and the money came straight from, and only from, the user (i.e. airlines and pilots). ATC's job is to provide a safe and efficient traffic flow to pilots, but they aren't a "customer". In order to provide that safe and effective traffic flow, the controller has a list of priorities and transmissions to make that is constantly changing. A 700 page book of rules are swirling around in the controllers brain while they apply them to every situation. One more IFR aircraft, especially a very slow one, IS adding workload on ATC. It's not necessarily a bourdon, or bad workload, but it does add to it. Once airborne, a slow IFR overflight isn't a big deal. Landing or departing an airport that is uncontrolled is where they can really slow things down. ONE IN ONE OUT. If a jet is wanting to go to the same airport, waiting for a single engine to fly an approach or take off and be up through an altitude high enough for the jet to then shoot an approach (even if its a visual) can be very time consuming. My two cents: depart satellite airports VFR and pick it up in the air. When you are landing, cancel when you see the airport. But you don't have to do either, just don't be surprised if you have a 10 minute delay on the ground because ATC makes the jet landing thats 30 miles away first before you can depart.
 
I agree with all that Collin. However, in my aircraft I'm pilot in command. If I want to file IFR on a beautiful day because it's what I feel is the best / safest way to compete the flight, I will. If it means I have to be vector it around a 737, so be it. What I meant was that ATC's job is to help us be safe. I'd rather wait 10 mins for a clearance through LA Bravo than do VFR flight following only to be dropped because of workload then scramble.
 
Yep, until they start charging $$$ for clearances... we'll see....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
The average pilot pay.
Click to expand...
Okay, I'll play for a bit.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports a median pay for airline pilots of $114,200.
Payscale.com shows a median of $100,191 and a range of $37,774 to $273,010.

Payscale.com shows the average pay for an Air Traffic Controller is $80,938 (median pay) per year.
According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), the average annual salary of an air traffic controller in May 2015 was $122,950.

Even though they are both aviation related job's it's obviously an apples and oranges comparison that I only attempt to compare based on your reasoning for your opinion.

The top paid ATC's are level 12 controllers. They, as federal government employees subject to a salary cap, can never come close to a top paid pilot pay(wide body major airline pilot).
 
Not at all. Just using this forum for it's intended (best I can tell) purpose of back and forth discussion. You brought up pilot pay, I continued with a factual comparison. I, like everyone else, can determine my own career. And you thinking controllers are overpaid doesn't bother me. We are all entitled to our opinions.
 
Last edited:
But alas we aren't entitled to our own facts, and opinions won't be respected if not defended...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
RotorDude said:
With two geo-referenced tablets running, a primary and a backup, plus the certified GTN-750 on the panel, it's fairly easy to switch back-and-forth between IFR and VFR, whatever it takes to expedite the flight. Except for my local area or standard routes, I'd be hard pressed to navigate complex Bravos or SUAs without a chart.
Click to expand...

The VISUAL part of VFR isn't about looking at a tablet, it's about a window.

This kinda is the point I was trying to make.

Yeah tablets can be great for a aid, but that's it, think most even say "not for navigation" on em'


Just curious, why 2??
 
I'm also in the camp of using your IFR skills as much as possible till you get good. Then make the change to use the appropriate procedures (IFR or VFR) for your mission. I have a buddy who never goes anywhere VFR. I give him a hard time because I can and because of the big stupid smile on his face when he flies somewhere with me VFR and we just do what we want (relatively speaking). Both are useful, both can get rusty; be good at both. :)
 
James331 said:
The VISUAL part of VFR isn't about looking at a tablet, it's about a window.
This kinda is the point I was trying to make.
Yeah tablets can be great for a aid, but that's it, think most even say "not for navigation" on em'
Just curious, why 2??
Click to expand...

I find it hard to navigate visually through a complex class B, even one I am familiar with. Sure, there are visual landmarks you can use, but the airspace has funny curves, kinks and shelves, so nothing is as accurate in knowing where the next shelf begins and ends as your geo-referenced moving map. To just go from airport A to B VFR, sure, your eyes are your best tool, but this wasn't the context I was addressing.

Re "not for navigation", that restriction is ancient history. My tablets have the approach plate subscription, which is legal and required to fly IFR (my GTN has the approach, but no altitudes). Which explains why I need two of them. They are also geo-referenced, which is a tremendous backup tool while shooting approaches.
 
I think you're mixing things up, using the information on the charts, just displayed on the screen is fine, but using the GPS info from a consumer grade tablet, not so much for primary nav.
 
Personally, I'm not worried about losing VFR skills. I'll probably file IFR for all cross-country flights of anything =>50nm, likely for the rest of my flying days. I'd rather be as sharp as possible with my IFR skills, so that when I do end up in IMC, (which I don't plan to do intentionally, except to climb/descend through a layer) I'm as safe as possible.

When I'm flying cross-country, it's about getting there, not about tootin' around in the sky. But even when flying on an IFR flight plan, I'm still using VFR skills. I'm still looking out the window, and flying by the horizon more than the instruments. And I'm constantly checking my position against charts, etc... I learned pilotage and dead-reckoning, but I also learned ADF, and how to use the whiz wheel, none of which I plan to use as primaries. I have plenty of respect for those of you who can and regularly do fly old-school, but I don't want to. It's not who I am. And there is no legal requirement for me to do so.

I use 2 iPads running FF, both tied to a Stratus 2. Both are geo-referenced at all times. Having them and using them doesn't make me dependent on them, unless I let them. It doesn't matter if I'm looking at charts on an iPad or on paper, both work. One is just more convenient than the other. I don't carry paper (except a note pad) and never will, except for checkrides. 2 iPads, and an iPhone, all running FF, and a backup battery, and a solar charger that can sit nicely on the dash, and a portable radio w/VOR... I'm fine without paper. It's about being as safe as I (not others) and my passengers can be while flying. It's not about proving that I can do things old school.

And if ALL that stuff fails, I'll find a flat spot, put'er down and walk away, cuz fate's trying to tell me something.
 
James331 said:
"Aircraft 1234 we have advised routing for your clearance, advise when ready to copy"

"Ready to copy"

"Cleared to KABC via blah blah blah.....................still going, blah blah"

"Sorry to interrupt, 1234 will go VFR direct with flight following"
Click to expand...

Yep, been there, done that. Sometimes the clouds/weather mean I have to take the scenic tour. :( But if the weather is VMC then yeah, "cancel IFR".
 
Rykymus said:
Personally, I'm not worried about losing VFR skills. I'll probably file IFR for all cross-country flights of anything =>50nm, likely for the rest of my flying days. I'd rather be as sharp as possible with my IFR skills, so that when I do end up in IMC, (which I don't plan to do intentionally, except to climb/descend through a layer) I'm as safe as possible.

When I'm flying cross-country, it's about getting there, not about tootin' around in the sky. But even when flying on an IFR flight plan, I'm still using VFR skills. I'm still looking out the window, and flying by the horizon more than the instruments. And I'm constantly checking my position against charts, etc... I learned pilotage and dead-reckoning, but I also learned ADF, and how to use the whiz wheel, none of which I plan to use as primaries. I have plenty of respect for those of you who can and regularly do fly old-school, but I don't want to. It's not who I am. And there is no legal requirement for me to do so.

I use 2 iPads running FF, both tied to a Stratus 2. Both are geo-referenced at all times. Having them and using them doesn't make me dependent on them, unless I let them. It doesn't matter if I'm looking at charts on an iPad or on paper, both work. One is just more convenient than the other. I don't carry paper (except a note pad) and never will, except for checkrides. 2 iPads, and an iPhone, all running FF, and a backup battery, and a solar charger that can sit nicely on the dash, and a portable radio w/VOR... I'm fine without paper. It's about being as safe as I (not others) and my passengers can be while flying. It's not about proving that I can do things old school.

And if ALL that stuff fails, I'll find a flat spot, put'er down and walk away, cuz fate's trying to tell me something.
Click to expand...

Well, that's kind of limiting. Your choice, I guess.

Try filing to Half Moon Bay on a nice day and see what happens. Compare it to what you would do VFR. Try departing San Carlos IFR for some real fun.

I fly VFR when I have passengers I might like to let fly, or when timing is an issue. I won't fly IFR to a CAP mission (usually) unless conditions require it, or I can get in faster (e.g., there might be some scattered IMC to dodge -- it's happened).

There are VFR skills you won't exercise while IFR. "Cessna 123XY remain clear of Class B."
 
And I've been flying hard night IMC with only one iPad, which I rarely even use ;)
 
James331 said:
I think you're mixing things up, using the information on the charts, just displayed on the screen is fine, but using the GPS info from a consumer grade tablet, not so much for primary nav.
Click to expand...

James, I have decades and thousands of hours of experience flying FAA-certified panel grade avionics, and a few years and hundreds of hours with "consumer grade" tablets. If anything, I find the latter more accurate and more reliable. My use of the tablets is primarily to provide geo-referenced approach plates, which is a very important safety feature when shooting single pilot low IFR approaches. In a pinch, each of them can back up the panel.
In fact, less than a year ago my expensive super-duper approach-certified GTN gave up the ghost in IMC, and having two low-cost tablets ready and willing to keep me oriented was very useful and turned the experience into a non-event (the destination was VFR).
 
They are nice, but I don't trust them nearly to the extent as my GNSs.

I'm glad it worked for for you

Did you also inform ATC and get vectors or use another form of nav?
 
@MAKG1: Very good points, which I took to heart today. I flew my brother and my mom to KHAF for brunch. IFR there, VFR back, so my brother could try a little flying.

That's why I come here. So people smarter than me can teach me things.
 
James331 said:
They are nice, but I don't trust them nearly to the extent as my GNSs.
I'm glad it worked for for you
Did you also inform ATC and get vectors or use another form of nav?
Click to expand...

Sure, when the GTN died I momentarily went nordo, but fortunately I was monitoring Guard on the old COM2 and heard ATC calling me there. I don't recall at the moment what I told them, if anything, but pretty sure I continued on my "direct" vector to a waypoint near destination, and after descending a bit, broke out VMC so there were no approach issues.
BTW, Garmin claimed my GTN was the first to suddenly and completely die like that (they wrote it up as "system board failure" or somesuch) but still charged me a pretty penny to fix it because it was a few months out of warranty.
 
Rykymus said:
@MAKG1: Very good points, which I took to heart today. I flew my brother and my mom to KHAF for brunch. IFR there, VFR back, so my brother could try a little flying.

That's why I come here. So people smarter than me can teach me things.
Click to expand...
Ooh, the flying weather the past several days has been extremely good. Hazy today, but strongly inverted. Great for introducing a first timer.

I spent the afternoon driving to/from OAK to apply for a SIDA badge. The office was on the south field, so no way to fly in. You got the better deal....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top