quick VFR weather question..

[SupraPilot]

hello..the other day me and a friend were arguing about VFR weather and cloud coverage...
for example say there are scattered low clouds in the area say around 1500 ft.. and then it is 100% clear above that or there is an overcast or whatever ceiling at say 10000ft...<--(wouldn't make a difference here anyway)
Say i wanted to fly a cross country..would i be able to do it...

my friend says no becasue he thinks that VFR pilots arent allowed to fly on top of the clouds AT ALL...i say i would be able to as long as i dont fly through the clouds and there is a way for me to get up and down through them...
so who is right??
i think i am right becasue even though there is low clouds as long as i can still see the ground to know where i am then ill be ok...

also is there such thing for a VFR pilot flying a cross country to get on top of a low overcast cloud layer even if he cant see the gound??
i would think this is possible as long as there is a way back down through it at your destination and you have some sort of navigation equipment on board

ok any info is appreciated

Thanx
Ant

 

[SkyHog]

hello..the other day me and a friend were arguing about VFR weather and cloud coverage...
for example say there are scattered low clouds in the area say around 1500 ft.. and then it is 100% clear above that or there is an overcast or whatever ceiling at say 10000ft...<--(wouldn't make a difference here anyway)
Say i wanted to fly a cross country..would i be able to do it...

my friend says no becasue he thinks that VFR pilots arent allowed to fly on top of the clouds AT ALL...i say i would be able to as long as i dont fly through the clouds and there is a way for me to get up and down through them...
so who is right??
i think i am right becasue even though there is low clouds as long as i can still see the ground to know where i am then ill be ok...

also is there such thing for a VFR pilot flying a cross country to get on top of a low overcast cloud layer even if he cant see the gound??
i would think this is possible as long as there is a way back down through it at your destination and you have some sort of navigation equipment on board

ok any info is appreciated

Thanx
Ant

If you are in America, and you have your PPL, you can fly over the top of clouds. If you are still a student, then no.

 

[SCCutler]

What Nick said. Of course, anyone who is VFR-only and flies along atop a solid cloud deck, counting on a break at the destination, is forging links in the chain of causation.

Also, remember: "scattered" is not a ceiling, but "broken" is.

 

[MauleSkinner]

my friend says no becasue he thinks that VFR pilots arent allowed to fly on top of the clouds AT ALL...

Have your friend look up "91.155 Basic VFR weather minimums" and note that a VFR pilot can legally fly above clouds as long as he maintains the proper cloud clearance (generally 1000 feet above, with exceptions).

i think i am right becasue even though there is low clouds as long as i can still see the ground to know where i am then ill be ok...

also is there such thing for a VFR pilot flying a cross country to get on top of a low overcast cloud layer even if he cant see the gound??
i would think this is possible as long as there is a way back down through it at your destination and you have some sort of navigation equipment on board

You are correct...you can fly on top of clouds, ranging from "few" to "overcast" (well, "undercast") LEGALLY. As has been noted, it's not necessarily a good idea, and can be one of those links in the accident chain that kills you. My personal rule of thumb is fairly large holes in the undercast within gliding distance at all times, although the aircraft I'm flying, the terrain, and the amount of room between the clouds and the ground can change this.

As to the "navigation equipment on board", you need a compass to do it legally, although a clock is pretty much necessary in order to use the compass properly in this case Electronic navigation equipment is technically optional, although it may be necessary depending upon the degree of navigation accuracy you require.

Fly safe!

David

 

[The Old Man]

If not a student, "on top" is perfectly legal.

Always, always, always:
Know where the closest hole is.
Know where the edges are
Know the weather is better where you are going (and improving)

 

[poadeleted20]

Even student pilots can legally fly above a scattered deck as long as they can "maintain visual reference to the surface." However, the wisdom of flying above a 1500-foot scattered deck depends on a wide range of circumstances.

If it's early in the day, and the deck is the remnant of the overnight fog, and is dissipating, it might not be a bad idea at all. OTOH, if it's late in the day, and the layer is developing, flying above it would be a real bad idea. You'd have to have a pretty good idea of the weather situation so you would know that there's always a good VMC "out" in case the layer starts to close up. In addition, even if you can get down below the clouds at your destination, the minimum cloud clearance and minimum altitude rules would leave you an extrememly narrow band relatively close to the ground in which to operate when trying to find and land at your destination airport. That would also be a big problem if the layer starts to close and you have to drop below it in a hurry, perhaps many miles from your destination or even an emergency divert airport.

For those reasons, even though it's legal, I would generally recommend that a non-IR pilot (especially a Student Pilot) not operate above a 1500-foot scattered deck. I would also strongly recommend against it unless you have some sort of radio nav gear aboard, just in case you do get trapped up there and have to navigate to good VMC without reference to the surface (even a handheld GPS would do in this case).

 

[SkyHog]

btw, I'm not proud of this story, but I pulled a stupid with VFR Over the Top...might be a good read before you try it:
http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4231

 

[Greebo]

I've done VFR on top (w/o an instructor) once, on a return flight from Pittsburgh to Baltimore. PGH had plenty of clearance, and so did Baltimore, but the mountain ridges had a SCT - BKN cloud layer from around 4k to 6k. Initially I was going to go under, but the clearance got low enough that I'd only have had about 1,500 ft clearance over the ridges in some very wooded areas, and it was very hazy as well, so I opted to go up to 7,5 and go over the top for a much nicer ride all around.

I've got no problems with the idea of vfr on top so long as the forecast and current conditions indicate that the destination isn't likely to create a potential 'trapped on top' scenario.

 

[gismo]

For those reasons, even though it's legal, I would generally recommend that a non-IR pilot (especially a Student Pilot) not operate above a 1500-foot scattered deck. I would also strongly recommend against it unless you have some sort of radio nav gear aboard, just in case you do get trapped up there and have to navigate to good VMC without reference to the surface (even a handheld GPS would do in this case).

Students aside, my pre-IR rule of thumb was that I could fly over any clouds as long as I could see a way down at all times. So flying over the edge of a solid layer that ended close enough to me that I could see the clear air was OK as was flying over a scattered layer with large gaps between clouds. If the holes started to shrink down to a mile across I'd have to go under. Before setting this personal limit I did manage to get "trapped" on top once but the layer was so thin I was able to maintain a horizon reference while passing through it except for about 20 seconds (and yes I did "confess" to a nearby TRACON first who "cleared" me through). On that trip, my destination's current and forecast wx called for nothing but Cirrus and that enticed me to try going over a solid layer. Halfway across I got cold feet when FSS indicated that the cloud layer extended beyond my destination. Turned out to be widely scattered when I got there (under the clouds) so I could have made it, but I just got too uncomfortable no knowing for sure and vowed not to repeat the experience. In any case I found the anxiety level creeping up pretty fast once I hadn't seen a single gap in the clouds below for about 30 minutes. YRMV.

 

[SupraPilot]

ok all good info guys..and thanx again casue i finally proved my stubborn friend wrong...

this argument started the other day when we had a front pass through and after it pased it left a scattered layer about 1500 ft behind it and the conditins improved from then on...i wanted to go flying that day and my friend said we werent able to do it casue of the low clouds..now i can show him that he wasted my flight time the other day..

so basically its not illegal for me to fly above a overcast layer as long as i keep it safe and can get down and although not manditory it is good to have some good electronic navi on board to keep my position for sure...

Thanx
Ant

 

[fgcason]

If not a student, "on top" is perfectly legal.

Always, always, always:
Know where the closest hole is.
Know where the edges are
Know the weather is better where you are going (and improving)

While not technically required I would add:
Know there is empty clear air between the bottom of the cloud and the surface.

Personally if I have to descend through a cloud deck VFR or IFR for any reason I'm going to want to be able to have a good look around when I come out the bottom before I get to the hard immoveable stuff.

 

[poadeleted20]

ok all good info guys..and thanx again casue i finally proved my stubborn friend wrong...

this argument started the other day when we had a front pass through and after it pased it left a scattered layer about 1500 ft behind it and the conditins improved from then on...i wanted to go flying that day and my friend said we werent able to do it casue of the low clouds..now i can show him that he wasted my flight time the other day..

so basically its not illegal for me to fly above a overcast layer as long as i keep it safe and can get down and although not manditory it is good to have some good electronic navi on board to keep my position for sure...

Tread carefully if you choose to walk this path, because while it is indeed legal, it is also fraught with peril. You really should have an absolutely golden "out" in case things don't turn out quite as expected.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Just for additional information purposes, I'm bringing up the 135 requirements for VFR over the top...There's no specific regulatory reference under 91, but the 135 version is pretty much the regulatory version of the guidelines mentioned here...

135.211 VFR: Over the top carrying passengers: Operating limitations.
Subject to any additional limitations in § 135.181, no person may operate an aircraft under VFR over the top carrying passengers, unless -
(a) Weather reports or forecasts, or any combination of them, indicate that the weather at the intended point of termination of over the top flight -
(1) Allows descent to beneath the ceiling under VFR and is forecast to remain so until at least 1 hour after the estimated time of arrival at that point; or
(2) Allows an IFR approach and landing with flight clear of the clouds until reaching the prescribed initial approach altitude over the final approach facility, unless the approach is made with the use of radar under § 91.175(f) of this chapter; or
(b) It is operated under conditions allowing -
(1) For multiengine aircraft, descent or continuation of the flight under VFR if its critical engine fails; or
(2) For single engine aircraft, descent under VFR if its engine fails.

Note the last item requires more than just "holes in the undercast"...It requires you to NOT PUT YOURSELF IN A SITUATION where PIC emergency authority must be used to get back below the cloud deck...interesting, huh?

Fly safe!

David

 

[Greebo]

so basically its not illegal for me to fly above a overcast layer as long as i keep it safe and can get down and although not manditory it is good to have some good electronic navi on board to keep my position for sure...

Like Ron said - be very careful and be SURE of your outs. Its something that should be approached with a strong willingness to reject as an option if anything about the conditions is borderline. As I said before, I've done it - but when I did it, I went up and over at one edge of the cloud line, and once up, I could see the far edge, and I only did it because it was the lesser of two evils in my estimation.

 

[Richard]

...forging links in the chain of causation.

Spike, I like that. Duly added to my list of handy tidbits of wisdom.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I've got no problems with the idea of vfr on top so long as the forecast and current conditions indicate that the destination isn't likely to create a potential 'trapped on top' scenario.

Fuel is your friend. So is another pilot.

My first time VFR over the top I was pretty nervous, but I had another pilot (our very own Kath Rawlins) along and she made things much better by using the split-com feature of our intercom to check weather ahead.

I've done VFR over the top a couple more times since then in the 182. I keep tabs on the destination wx, and I feel safe because of my range. Over six hours of fuel when topped off, or about 780nm with no wind. There's generally a hole within 780 nm.

These days, I have the IR so no big worries. I would, however, suggest that even a non-IR pilot have enough instrument training to be able to successfully complete an ILS approach if the poop hits the prop.

 

[etsisk]

a week ago I was heading back to HBI on a cross country, talking to Raleigh for flight following. I told them I was climbing to 4500', if the clouds were going to cooperate, but that I might have to change my mind and that I'd let them know. Around 3800' there was a sct cu layer, and it seemed to be thickening as I looked westward. I was above it at 4000' when I decided that if I didn't know what was between me and HBI, discretion was indeed the better part of valor - so I called Raleigh and told them I was descending down to 3000' to avoid the clouds, if that would work for them. (I'd have gone to 2500' if they needed me to). All went well, including a couple of invisible elevator rides under some of that cu. It was really a great flight - a few freq changes, talking to several different folks on the radio, couldn't get ahold of FSS on the radio (to close my flight plan) at the end of the first leg, so I closed on the phone and got Raleigh to tell 'em to open when I took off. Lots of new stuff and had a great time . . . but I digress...

I just hate the idea of being on top with an ailing airplane. And we have a number of tall towers in these parts . . .

 

[jesse]

What Nick said. Of course, anyone who is VFR-only and flies along atop a solid cloud deck, counting on a break at the destination, is forging links in the chain of causation.

Also, remember: "scattered" is not a ceiling, but "broken" is.

It is very easy to fly into a situation to where you are scud running. These are the times to where it seems like SUCH a good option to go up through a hole into a broken or overcast layer. It may work out for you. But it also may get you killed.

The first issue is the fact that an emergency situation could occur when you are above the layer. Not only do you have the stress of your emergency now you have the added stress to go back down through the layer, VFR, with the possiblity of hitting a tower or the ground.

Now I know you are thinking the event of an engine failure is not likely. So you'll go up anyway.

Still a mistake. How are you going to get back down? What if the weather isn't what you looked at a few hours ago. As we all know weather changes rapidly. Now you might be stuck on top of this layer with no way down. You might not have enough fuel to make it out of it.

Guess what folks. It can get even worse yet. You may find yourself on top of this layer and the layer may start rising on you. You have to keep climbing. The layer keeps rising. Eventually your airplane won't climb anymore. Now what? You are dead.

One time I found myself in a situation where I departed in the afternoon with ceilings of 3,500 ft AGL. After awhile it dropped down and I found myself at 2,500 AGL. I had flight following through all of this and guess what?

Center said: "XXX, you have traffic at your five o'clock, 5 miles, gaining fast..Same altitude. Also radar contact lost, Squawk 1200, Frequency change approved."

IMO the most important thing you can do is pay attention to all of the details of the flight. An accident is most often the result of several contributing events. The quicker you can recognize these the better you can control the situation.

So now there is an airplane gaining fast behind us with the possiblity of a collosion. The visiblity isn't all that good. Center lost radar contact with both of us. Neither of us could climb or descend so I changed course 30 degrees to the left. Never did see the airplane pass, but center did at one point say it was no longer a factor.

It seemed like the clouds were still coming down. I decided that there were one too many things at this point that were dramatically increasing the risk. I contacted flight service and told them my current position and requested ceilings from my current position all the way to the destination. It was now possible to see the big picture. The clouds were going to be dropping to 1,300 AGL. There was a chance that if I were to scud run through that we would be clear after five miles. That was a chance that wasn't worth taking. A quick push of the NRST button and a change of course...7 minutes later the airplane was safe on the ground. There was a SKC layer at pattern altitude coming in. It was a 45 minute delay which resulted in a takeoff into blue skies with amazing visibility.

What would have happend if I would have climbed above the layer? Would I have made it without stopping. Probably. Flying is a game of chess, I think I made the right move...After all I'm still here.

If your only choice to continue the flight is to climb above the layer..You should have already landed.