Without visual reference to the surface
Moderator: drseti
Re: Without visual reference to the surface
I flew to Seattle from Eastern Washington a couple of weeks ago and, as usual, I was on top at 10,000' over the pass, on flight follow and could see Mt Rainier poking up out of the clouds off my wing. When it broke up on the west side, I descended VFR to below the clouds. I always keep a road under me per my GPS and am confident I could descend through the clouds in an emergency. I think that is OK.
Ernie
CFI, LSRM-A
CFI, LSRM-A
Re: Without visual reference to the surface
Are you a Sport Pilot or Private Pilot? Oh nevermind, I just saw "CFI" in your signature.bitten192 wrote:I flew to Seattle from Eastern Washington a couple of weeks ago and, as usual, I was on top at 10,000' over the pass, on flight follow and could see Mt Rainier poking up out of the clouds off my wing. When it broke up on the west side, I descended VFR to below the clouds. I always keep a road under me per my GPS and am confident I could descend through the clouds in an emergency. I think that is OK.
You are clearly more than qualified to make a flight like that. As a SP, I'd be very wary of it.
Andy Walker
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot ASEL, LSRI
2007 Flight Design CTSW E-LSA
Athens, GA
Sport Pilot ASEL, LSRI
2007 Flight Design CTSW E-LSA
- CharlieTango
- Posts: 1000
- Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 10:04 am
- Location: Mammoth Lakes, California
Re: Without visual reference to the surface
In the west flying on top was a non event years ago, what changed? It seems far safer today with weather and SV and terrain in the cockpit.
On my leg from Alturas to Portland I can easily be on top for over an hour.
On my leg from Alturas to Portland I can easily be on top for over an hour.
Re: Without visual reference to the surface
What changed is that when a healthy and experienced pilot decides to let his or her (totally useless) third class medical certificate lapse, he or she obviously loses basic flying skills!CharlieTango wrote:In the west flying on top was a non event years ago, what changed?
The opinions posted are those of one CFI, and do not necessarily represent the FAA or its lawyers.
Prof H Paul Shuch
PhD CFII DPE LSRM-A/GL/WS/PPC iRMT
AvSport LLC, KLHV
[email protected]
AvSport.org
facebook.com/SportFlying
SportPilotExaminer.US
Prof H Paul Shuch
PhD CFII DPE LSRM-A/GL/WS/PPC iRMT
AvSport LLC, KLHV
[email protected]
AvSport.org
facebook.com/SportFlying
SportPilotExaminer.US
-
- Posts: 999
- Joined: Mon Apr 08, 2013 2:48 pm
- Location: WV Eastern Panhandle
Re: Without visual reference to the surface
...and becomes a walking (flying) timebomb, far more liable to keel over any second than when they carried a valid medical in their wallet.drseti wrote:What changed is that when a healthy and experienced pilot decides to let his or her (totally useless) third class medical certificate lapse, he or she obviously loses basic flying skills!CharlieTango wrote:In the west flying on top was a non event years ago, what changed?
- Bruce
Re: Without visual reference to the surface
And what is the data reference to back your assertion up?Merlinspop wrote:"...and becomes a walking (flying) timebomb, far more liable to keel over any second than when they carried a valid medical in their wallet." . . .
Re: Without visual reference to the surface
I think it was more tongue in cheek humor, at least I hope it was.Wm.Ince wrote:And what is the data reference to back your assertion up?Merlinspop wrote:"...and becomes a walking (flying) timebomb, far more liable to keel over any second than when they carried a valid medical in their wallet." . . .
- FastEddieB
- Posts: 2880
- Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:33 pm
- Location: Lenoir City, TN/Mineral Bluff, GA
Re: Without visual reference to the surface
Sarchasm - the intellectual gap between the person who makes a sarcastic joke and those who don't get it.Wm.Ince wrote:And what is the data reference to back your assertion up?Merlinspop wrote:"...and becomes a walking (flying) timebomb, far more liable to keel over any second than when they carried a valid medical in their wallet." . . .
-
- Posts: 999
- Joined: Mon Apr 08, 2013 2:48 pm
- Location: WV Eastern Panhandle
Re: Without visual reference to the surface
Being the holder of a long-expired medical, my tongue was solidly planted in my cheek.FastEddieB wrote:Sarchasm - the intellectual gap between the person who makes a sarcastic joke and those who don't get it.Wm.Ince wrote:And what is the data reference to back your assertion up?Merlinspop wrote:"...and becomes a walking (flying) timebomb, far more liable to keel over any second than when they carried a valid medical in their wallet." . . .
- Bruce
-
- Posts: 105
- Joined: Fri May 02, 2014 5:54 pm
- Location: GBR - Great Barrington, MA
Re: Without visual reference to the surface
If you can see the ground through the holes in the cloud cover you can fly.
- FastEddieB
- Posts: 2880
- Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:33 pm
- Location: Lenoir City, TN/Mineral Bluff, GA
Re: Without visual reference to the surface
That is my take as well.rgstubbsjr wrote:If you can see the ground through the holes in the cloud cover you can fly.
Seems almost intentionally vague. It would have been easy to make it a prohibition to fly over a broken layer (though that would have sucked). Or even an overcast layer (which the existing language hints at, but does not say).
Re: Without visual reference to the surface
The hole in the cloud was at 9000' where Mt Rainier was poking out. I could see ground on Mt Rainier that was 9000' above sea level all the way to the top of the mountain at 14,400'.rgstubbsjr wrote:If you can see the ground through the holes in the cloud cover you can fly.
Ernie
CFI, LSRM-A
CFI, LSRM-A
- FastEddieB
- Posts: 2880
- Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:33 pm
- Location: Lenoir City, TN/Mineral Bluff, GA
Re: Without visual reference to the surface
Let's not be silly...
That would be visual reference to a surface, not visual reference to the surface
Clear?
That would be visual reference to a surface, not visual reference to the surface
Clear?
- CharlieTango
- Posts: 1000
- Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 10:04 am
- Location: Mammoth Lakes, California
Re: Without visual reference to the surface
Are you saying that the visible surface has to be directly below you? If not how far from directly below?FastEddieB wrote:Let's not be silly...
That would be visual reference to a surface, not visual reference to the surface
Clear?
Terrain that rises above the layer does much to keep you oriented. There are countless valleys bordered by high terrain in the west, some are small and some are 100 miles across. Are you saying they are all off limits to cross? Can I fly over fog?
Re: Without visual reference to the surface
I would say the conditions have to be such that the view of the surface allows:
Those conditions seem to fit within the ICAO definition.the visual references must be adequate for the pilot to assess horizontal flight path and vertical flight path."
dave