When is a field really IFR?

FORANE

FORANE

En-Route
Joined
Mar 7, 2013
Messages
3,543
Location
TN
Display Name
Display name:
FORANE
If you are at an untowered field, when exactly is it IFR? If 3/4 directions surrounding a field are clearly below VFR minimums but the 4th direction is greater than 3 miles visibility and at least 1000 AGL ceiling at end of the runway, can one legally takeoff toward the VFR conditions?

Suppose that same field has an ASOS reporting below VFR minimums but the same conditions described above are present with unlimited visibility and ceiling unlimited the one direction away from the field, can one takeoff legally under VFR?

Are the answers different for VFR vs IFR rated pilots? Uncontrolled airspace?
 
Per 14 CFR 91.155, day VFR minimums at an airport in class G airspace are one mile visibility, and you must remain clear of clouds.
 
Class G airspace, 1 mile visibility and clear of clouds is VFR. Many areas Class G is ground up to 700 to 1200ft AGL. Out here in the wild west, Class G to 14,500 MSL, 1 mile VIS and clear of clouds.

If you have 1 mile VIS and you can remain in Class G while flying towards improving conditions that meets Class E VFR requirements before climbing, I do not see an issue.

No, I am not advocating "scudding running".
The answer does not change with an IFR rating.
 
I would suggest the answer to your question is not one of legality but one of safety. Think about it this way, if you take off towards the "legal" area and have to return to the field will you be able to do it safely. If not then what does it matter if it is legal or not?
 
FORANE said:
Suppose that same field has an ASOS reporting below VFR minimums but the same conditions described above are present with unlimited visibility and ceiling unlimited the one direction away from the field, can one takeoff legally under VFR?
Click to expand...

If you get into trouble, the authorities will look at the ASOS record and you will be busted for VFR flight with an IMC ASOS recording. The ASOS observation is the best evidence available to an investigator so you may have to prove that it was wrong... and that won't be easy.

-Skip
 
How about this : about a month ago the ASOS at KIXD (class-d) rerported 1/4, mist. It was a CAVU day.

I suspect there was someone working a farm field right next to the wx sensor, and was kicking up a lot of dust.

I wasn't flying for another 4 hrs or so and it didn't affect me. But I did wonder - would the tower overrule the ASOS? I sure hope so - it would be odd to be on the ramp, ready to taxi, with clear and a million, then hear the numbers say the field is IFR.
 
When the tower comtroller decides he needs a coffee break from the boredom of no aircraft and flips the beacon on. ;) ;) ;)
 
Palmpilot said:
The OP specified an untowered field.
Click to expand...

Ahh. Going by the guys in Canada at the floatplane base, "See that tower over there on top of the mountain? That's exactly one mile from the dock."

They were nuts.
 
The 3sm/1000' must be followed when controlled airspace (that's airspace other than Class G, which may or may not be towered) is designated to the surface for the airport, and the visibility has to be taken from the AWOS/ATIS unless there isn't one. If it is Class G to the surface, you just need to maintain the normal VFR minima (1sm/clear of clouds in the daytime). 14 CFR 91.155.
 
FORANE said:
If you are at an untowered field, when exactly is it IFR?
Click to expand...
When the conditions do not meet the minimums prescribed for VFR in 91.155 for the appropriate airspace.

If 3/4 directions surrounding a field are clearly below VFR minimums but the 4th direction is greater than 3 miles visibility and at least 1000 AGL ceiling at end of the runway, can one legally takeoff toward the VFR conditions?
Click to expand...
No. Prevailing ceiling and visibility is the determinant, and if the visibility throughout 3/4 of the horizon is below VFR mins, then VFR flight is prohibited. Similar standards apply for ceiling.

Suppose that same field has an ASOS reporting below VFR minimums but the same conditions described above are present with unlimited visibility and ceiling unlimited the one direction away from the field, can one takeoff legally under VFR?
Click to expand...
No. Again, prevailing visibility and ceiling is the determinant.

Are the answers different for VFR vs IFR rated pilots?
Click to expand...
No.

Uncontrolled airspace?
Click to expand...
The ceiling and visibility minimums are different for airports in controlled versus uncontrolled airspace -- see 91.155 for details. However, the concept of prevailing visibility and ceiling is the same -- only the required minimum prevailing visibility and ceiling vary with airspace type.
 
ok

So prevailing conditions rule regardless if there are clear conditions on one side of the field... even in uncontrolled class G?

I seem to recall reading there is a case where an IFR rated pilot can takeoff in IMC conditions without a clearance legally so long as he is in VFR conditions by entry of controlled airspace (such as ground fog on field and clear above). Is that true? Maybe departing a class G field? Letting aside the advisability of doing so, could a VFR rated pilot do the same legally?
 
FORANE said:
ok

So prevailing conditions rule regardless if there are clear conditions on one side of the field... even in uncontrolled class G?

I seem to recall reading there is a case where an IFR rated pilot can takeoff in IMC conditions without a clearance legally so long as he is in VFR conditions by entry of controlled airspace (such as ground fog on field and clear above). Is that true? Maybe departing a class G field? Letting aside the advisability of doing so, could a VFR rated pilot do the same legally?
Click to expand...
Why the concern with legality, and not the same concern with advisability, and safety?
 
Palmpilot said:
Per 14 CFR 91.155, day VFR minimums at an airport in class G airspace are one mile visibility, and you must remain clear of clouds.
Click to expand...
I know you know this, but be wary: the question asked was about "untowered fields." Your answer was only about a subset of those. At many nontowered airports you'd be dealing with both the 1-5-2/3 mile general VFR requirements and the need for a 1,000' ceiling.
 
FORANE said:
ok

So prevailing conditions rule regardless if there are clear conditions on one side of the field... even in uncontrolled class G?

I seem to recall reading there is a case where an IFR rated pilot can takeoff in IMC conditions without a clearance legally so long as he is in VFR conditions by entry of controlled airspace (such as ground fog on field and clear above). Is that true? Maybe departing a class G field? Letting aside the advisability of doing so, could a VFR rated pilot do the same legally?
Click to expand...
Sounds like you are responding to Ron saying "no" to your question, "Are the answers different for VFR vs IFR rated pilots?" I think you're misunderstanding each other.

Your question was whether one can take off under VFR from an airport under certain conditions. That answer doesn't change depending on whether the pilot is instrument rated.

The IFR-rated pilot in your scenario who takes off from a Class G airport that is below VFR minimums is not departing under VFR. He's departing under IFR. In general, IFR operations are permitted in Class G airspace without an IFR clearance.

That's "in general." There are other considerations. If I'm correctly guessing which case your'e referring to, that pilot was held to have violated the reckless operation rule despite engaging in activity legal under the IFR/VFR rules due to his proximity to and potential effect on controlled airspace.
 
Last edited:
FORANE said:
So prevailing conditions rule regardless if there are clear conditions on one side of the field... even in uncontrolled class G?
Click to expand...
Yes.

I seem to recall reading there is a case where an IFR rated pilot can takeoff in IMC conditions without a clearance legally so long as he is in VFR conditions by entry of controlled airspace (such as ground fog on field and clear above). Is that true?
Click to expand...
No. That's an OWT. See Administrator v. Murphy.
 
midlifeflyer said:
What makes you think he's not concerned with advisability and safety? I didn't see anything to suggest that.
Click to expand...
"Letting aside the advisability of doing so" and the constant questioning of the issue. To me it looks like he is looking for a loophole, so he can legitimize flying in less than safe conditions.

If I am wrong, I apologize.
 
FORANE said:
I seem to recall reading there is a case where an IFR rated pilot can takeoff in IMC conditions without a clearance legally so long as he is in VFR conditions by entry of controlled airspace (such as ground fog on field and clear above). Is that true?
Click to expand...

Yes, it's true, if you actually have VFR conditions when you enter controlled airspace. You won't be 1000 feet above cloud if you reach Class E airspace at 700' AGL.

Maybe departing a class G field?
Click to expand...

It would have to be a field in Class G airspace, controlled airspace reaches the surface at all other fields.

Letting aside the advisability of doing so, could a VFR rated pilot do the same legally?
Click to expand...

No, it's an IFR operation.
 
douglas393 said:
"Letting aside the advisability of doing so" and the constant questioning of the issue. To me it looks like he is looking for a loophole, so he can legitimize flying in less than safe conditions.

If I am wrong, I apologize.
Click to expand...
I took it as a search for knowledge and understanding. I don't think someone asking about the details of the difference between murder and manslaughter automatically means they are planning on killing someone. But that's just me.
 
When I was based at Harrison, AR (KHRO) I was still a VFR pilot. The weather & fog there was really interesting due to the terrain, proximity to water, etc and it would almost always clear South to North in the summer. Pilots would often take-off when they could see the top of the tower that was perched on top of Gaither Mountain. That tower was 4 miles south and the top was exactly 1000' above the field. Almost always, the visibility would get better as one continued south.

But, it might be close to 0/0 North, East and West...immediately North, East and West.

Therefore, the pilots who departed once they could see the top of "Gaither Tower" easily maintained VFR weather minimums per PAR 91.155 since visibility was over 3 SM and they maintained 500'/1000'/2000' cloud clearance (HRO was Echo).

Once, when a pilot was picking up flight following, Memphis Center remarked "HRO is reporting IFR conditions" to which the pilot replied "The top of 'Gaither Tower' was clearly visible when I departed, that tower is over 4 miles from the field and the top is 1,000 above field elevation". MEM replied "good enough for me".

Question to Ron, how is it not legal if the pilot maintains legal VFR clearance from clouds and has legal VFR visibility in his direction of flight at all times?
 
timwinters said:
When I was based at Harrison, AR (KHRO) I was still a VFR pilot. The weather & fog there was really interesting due to the terrain, proximity to water, etc and it would almost always clear South to North in the summer. Pilots would often take-off when they could see the top of the tower that was perched on top of Gaither Mountain. That tower was 4 miles south and the top was exactly 1000' above the field. Almost always, the visibility would get better as one continued south.

But, it might be close to 0/0 North, East and West...immediately North, East and West.

Therefore, the pilots who departed once they could see the top of "Gaither Tower" easily maintained VFR weather minimums per PAR 91.155 since visibility was over 3 SM and they maintained 500'/1000'/2000' cloud clearance (HRO was Echo).
Click to expand...

But did they comply with FAR 91.119 at all times?
 
Easily since the elevation of the airport is well above the town (about 200') and one doesn't fly over the town on a southbound departure anyway. There's no other congestion in the area to speak of or that couldn't be easily avoided.
 
Last edited:
Raise your hand if you have flown VFR with AWOS calling LIFR.


*raises hand


Who else? I have flown in good VMC (CAVU actually) with AWOS reporting something like a 1/4 and 2.

I am happy to disregard an AWOS when I KNOW it to be wrong.
 
SkyHog said:
How is it an owt? If you take off into IMC as an instrument rated pilot into class g, then break out at like 500ft and enter class e at 1200 ft, what far was been broken?

Edit: 91.13. Cheeky FAA bastards. The catch all strikes again.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and whatever the judge thinks is careless and reckless is the final answer.

Oh, you flew IFR/IMC at night in a single? 91.13 violation. I'm waiting for that one.
 
SkyHog said:
How is it an owt? If you take off into IMC as an instrument rated pilot into class g, then break out at like 500ft and enter class e at 1200 ft, what far was been broken?
Click to expand...

FAR 91.155. You were 700 feet above cloud when you entered Class E airspace, the required minimum is 1000 feet.
 
Ok

A few different scenarios have been mentioned and that is good to discuss if nothing more than a refresher.

It was mentioned I may be looking for a loophole which is not really the case. Occasionally I will depart an airport similar as described in the op. I am instrument rated and current. Some of those flights will be a very short distance and in a situation as described in the op, going through the steps required for IFR seem to have little benefit. I will not depart VFR if I feel unsafe doing so. I am just trying clarify when I really need to pick up the IFR to remain legal.
 
It is not possible to be on an IFR clearance in uncontrolled airspace.
 
dmspilot said:
It is not possible to be on an IFR clearance in uncontrolled airspace.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, then I wonder how I flew IFR, on a clearance, in various portions of the Upper Peninsula, where the G space goes to 14,500?
 
BillTIZ said:
Class G airspace, 1 mile visibility and clear of clouds is VFR. Many areas Class G is ground up to 700 to 1200ft AGL. Out here in the wild west, Class G to 14,500 MSL, 1 mile VIS and clear of clouds.
Click to expand...

In the daytime and below 10,000.

Those large Class G areas below 14,500 are being disassembled, bit by bit. Some are already gone but the charts haven't yet caught up.
 
EdFred said:
Hmmm, then I wonder how I flew IFR, on a clearance, in various portions of the Upper Peninsula, where the G space goes to 14,500?
Click to expand...
I guess it depends on how you interpret the phrase being "on an IFR clearance in uncontrolled airspace."

Class G to 14,500 aside, I've also flown in uncontrolled airspace having received an IFR clearance many times - during takeoff from non-towered airports with Class G surface areas.

BTW, fascinating part of the country, the UP. I'm used to the idea that there is high Class G and are no Victor airways over areas of the Rockies where Class G goes to 14,400 and above due to terrain, but it looks strange seeing airways avoiding high Class G where the highest elevations are around 3,000'.
 
midlifeflyer said:
I guess it depends on how you interpret the phrase being "on an IFR clearance in uncontrolled airspace."

Class G to 14,500 aside, I've also flown in uncontrolled airspace having received an IFR clearance many times - during takeoff from non-towered airports with Class G surface areas.

BTW, fascinating part of the country, the UP. I'm used to the idea that there is high Class G and are no Victor airways over areas of the Rockies where Class G goes to 14,400 and above due to terrain, but it looks strange seeing airways avoiding high Class G where the highest elevations are around 3,000'.
Click to expand...

Well, in the cases I've been on a clearance in the class G, I was still in RADAR contact, and still talking to ZMP. I was between IMT and 6Y9 when I cancelled near Perch Lake. If you look on the sectional you can see I was inside the G for quite a few miles, and ZMP never let me go.

I also got a clearance over the phone departing 6Y9 on the route out of there, and through that same little section of G. I was also heading into ISQ from the south, and was still on a clearance in that little section of G. I never got any sort of indication that my clearance would be suspended until I got through either section.
 
roncachamp said:
FAR 91.155. You were 700 feet above cloud when you entered Class E airspace, the required minimum is 1000 feet.
Click to expand...

I disagree . I read the airspace rules to apply to "within the referenced airspace".

A cloud at 600' in class g doesn't require 1000' clearance to enter class e at 700'.
At 700' in class e, then you need 1000' over any clouds you encounter in that class e space ..

Of course, that is my opinion, and has not been tested in court .

But who and why would it be challenged ?
 
nosehair said:
I disagree . I read the airspace rules to apply to "within the referenced airspace".

A cloud at 600' in class g doesn't require 1000' clearance to enter class e at 700'.
At 700' in class e, then you need 1000' over any clouds you encounter in that class e space ..

Of course, that is my opinion, and has not been tested in court .

But who and why would it be challenged ?
Click to expand...

As you read the rules there's essentially no purpose in establishing controlled airspace below the minimum IFR altitude.
 
roncachamp said:
Yes, it's true, if you actually have VFR conditions when you enter controlled airspace.
Click to expand...
The FAA Chief Counsel and NTSB disagree if there is an instrument procedure in/out of the airport. See the legal case above.

You won't be 1000 feet above cloud if you reach Class E airspace at 700' AGL.
Click to expand...
That compounds the offense by adding a 91.155 violation to the 91.13 violation on which they hung Mr. Murphy.
 
SkyHog said:
How is it an owt? If you take off into IMC as an instrument rated pilot into class g, then break out at like 500ft and enter class e at 1200 ft, what far was been broken?

Edit: 91.13. Cheeky FAA bastards. The catch all strikes again.
Click to expand...
You'd also be in violation of 91.155 by being VFR in Class E only 700 above the underlying cloud deck.
 
nosehair said:
I disagree . I read the airspace rules to apply to "within the referenced airspace".
Click to expand...
The FAA doesn't read the rules the same way you do. As discussed in the Murphy case, they don't want folks popping out of the clouds right into the path of someone operating IFR on a clearance in controlled airspace.
 
Ron Levy said:
The FAA Chief Counsel and NTSB disagree if there is an instrument procedure in/out of the airport. See the legal case above.

That compounds the offense by adding a 91.155 violation to the 91.13 violation on which they hung Mr. Murphy.
Click to expand...

As I recall, the Murphy case didn't even mention the distance from clouds when entering class E airspace, which is what they should have used, IMO.
 
Palmpilot said:
As I recall, the Murphy case didn't even mention the distance from clouds when entering class E airspace, which is what they should have used, IMO.
Click to expand...
I agree -- 91.155 bust. Had they done that, rather than charging "IFR without a clearance," I think they would have had him on that as well as 91.13.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top