vfr on top

[Myname]

What are the advantages of vfr-on-top in the real world? I understand the
ifr to vfr-on-top then cancel, but what about other uses?

[Steven P. McNicoll[_2_]]

Myname wrote:
>
> What are the advantages of vfr-on-top in the real world? I understand
> the ifr to vfr-on-top then cancel, but what about other uses?
>

Well, what are the advantages of IFR to VFR-on-top then cancel?

[Mxsmanic]

Myname writes:

> What are the advantages of vfr-on-top in the real world? I understand the
> ifr to vfr-on-top then cancel, but what about other uses?

The main advantage is that it allows a pilot to choose his altitude at his
discretion, within broad limits, rather than request approval for every change
of altitude from ATC.

[[email protected]]

On Feb 15, 4:11*am, "Steven P. McNicoll" >
wrote:
> Myname wrote:
>
> > What are the advantages of vfr-on-top in the real world? I understand
> > the ifr to vfr-on-top then cancel, but what about other uses?
>
> Well, what are the advantages of *IFR to VFR-on-top then cancel?

To legally punch a cloud deck.

I have done this several times on a 50NM trip where it was VFR at my
destination.

It's easier to cancel in the air with KJAN once I am 1000 foot above
the cloud deck then to have to call FSS to cancel my IFR.

I would only be with Memphis center a mere 3 to 5 minutes before
initiating a descent below radar coverage so I can't cancel with them
on the ground.

[A Guy Called Tyketto]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Myname writes:
>
>> What are the advantages of vfr-on-top in the real world? I understand the
>> ifr to vfr-on-top then cancel, but what about other uses?
>
> The main advantage is that it allows a pilot to choose his altitude at his
> discretion, within broad limits, rather than request approval for every change
> of altitude from ATC.

You can already do that with VFR w/flight following.

BL.
- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! :) | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFLf4VLyBkZmuMZ8L8RAvhqAJwPt2twDJ17gZuIASVZMz r2jz3nDACfbybn
41Yw8FCdcXUnRaeVLoSN0ts=
=pFbw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Mxsmanic]

A Guy Called Tyketto writes:

> You can already do that with VFR w/flight following.

Not if you have to fly through clouds to get to your cruising altitude. While
you have the option of cancelling IFR once you are in VMC, ATC is not required
to provide flight following, whereas it is required to accommodate IFR.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

On Feb 15, 11:03*am, " > wrote:
> On Feb 15, 4:11*am, "Steven P. McNicoll" >
> wrote:
>
> > Myname wrote:
>
> > > What are the advantages of vfr-on-top in the real world? I understand
> > > the ifr to vfr-on-top then cancel, but what about other uses?
>
> > Well, what are the advantages of *IFR to VFR-on-top then cancel?
>
> To legally punch a cloud deck.
>
> I have done this several times on a 50NM trip where it was VFR at my
> destination.
>
> It's easier to cancel in the air with KJAN once I am 1000 foot above
> the cloud deck then to have to call FSS to cancel my IFR.
>
> I would only be with Memphis center a mere 3 to 5 minutes before
> initiating a descent below radar coverage so I can't cancel with them
> on the ground.
>

That's not "IFR to VFR-on-top then cancel", that's IFR to punch
through a cloud deck then cancel upon reaching VFR conditions. You're
not VFR-on-top until you've been cleared to maintain VFR-on-top and
you can't be cleared to maintain VFR-on-top until you've reported
reaching VFR-on-top.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

On Feb 15, 4:21*am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Myname writes:
> > What are the advantages of vfr-on-top in the real world? I understand the
> > ifr to vfr-on-top then cancel, but what about other uses?
>
> The main advantage is that it allows a pilot to choose his altitude at his
> discretion, within broad limits, rather than request approval for every change
> of altitude from ATC.
>

You can do that under VFR with even broader limits on altitude and the
additional advantage of altering your route at your discretion.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

On Feb 20, 1:46*am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> A Guy Called Tyketto writes:
>
> > You can already do that with VFR w/flight following.
>
> Not if you have to fly through clouds to get to your cruising altitude. While
> you have the option of cancelling IFR once you are in VMC, ATC is not required
> to provide flight following, whereas it is required to accommodate IFR.
>

Required to accommodate IFR? If traffic or SUA does not allow the
issuance of that IFR clearance to climb through the clouds it's not
going to be issued.

[Mxsmanic]

Steven P. McNicoll writes:

> Required to accommodate IFR? If traffic or SUA does not allow the
> issuance of that IFR clearance to climb through the clouds it's not
> going to be issued.

ATC cannot deny service to IFR flights once a clearance has been issued, so
once you've started your IFR flight they cannot cut you off. Flight following,
on the other hand, is at the discretion of ATC, based on the controllers'
workload and other considerations. So, while you're guaranteed to continue
getting IFR services once you've got them, if you cancel IFR and then request
flight following, there's no guarantee that you'll get it.

[Mxsmanic]

Steven P. McNicoll writes:

> You can do that under VFR with even broader limits on altitude and the
> additional advantage of altering your route at your discretion.

But without the guaranteed services of a preexisting IFR clearance. You could
ask for a pop-up IFR clearance if you have to reenter IMC, but there's no
guarantee that you'll get it, or at least no guarantee that you'll get it
immediately. By staying IFR you don't have to worry about that. Being
VFR-on-top lets you keep the security of IFR while allowing a bit more
VFR-style flexibility.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

On Feb 20, 12:38*pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Steven P. McNicoll writes:
> > Required to accommodate IFR? *If traffic or SUA does not allow the
> > issuance of that IFR clearance to climb through the clouds it's not
> > going to be issued.
>
> ATC cannot deny service to IFR flights once a clearance has been issued, so
> once you've started your IFR flight they cannot cut you off. Flight following,
> on the other hand, is at the discretion of ATC, based on the controllers'
> workload and other considerations. So, while you're guaranteed to continue
> getting IFR services once you've got them, if you cancel IFR and then request
> flight following, there's no guarantee that you'll get it.
>

Read my message again.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

On Feb 20, 12:40*pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Steven P. McNicoll writes:
> > You can do that under VFR with even broader limits on altitude and the
> > additional advantage of altering your route at your discretion.
>
> But without the guaranteed services of a preexisting IFR clearance. You could
> ask for a pop-up IFR clearance if you have to reenter IMC, but there's no
> guarantee that you'll get it, or at least no guarantee that you'll get it
> immediately. By staying IFR you don't have to worry about that. Being
> VFR-on-top lets you keep the security of IFR while allowing a bit more
> VFR-style flexibility.
>

You're drifting too far off the issue here. What are the advantages
of IFR to VFR-on-top then cancel over IFR to VFR then cancel?

[A Guy Called Tyketto]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Mxsmanic > wrote:
> A Guy Called Tyketto writes:
>
>> You can already do that with VFR w/flight following.
>
> Not if you have to fly through clouds to get to your cruising altitude. While
> you have the option of cancelling IFR once you are in VMC, ATC is not required
> to provide flight following, whereas it is required to accommodate IFR.

I never said that ATC was required to provide flight following.
What I said is that you as the pilot have the option of changing your
altitude if you are VFR w/flight following, just by notifying ATC that
you are going to change your altitude.

What you said above implies that if you had FEW120 BKN200,
you'd have to pick up IFR to get through the first layer to fly VFR at
14500. That doesn't even remotely make sense.

BL.
- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! :) | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFLgEGSyBkZmuMZ8L8RAj+1AJ4sCO3v3gE5bo2UQzapjZ NXFK7uBACgoY4q
iroyDPgz0+u2Ia8YvQMwOK4=
=XZrI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[A Guy Called Tyketto]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Steven P. McNicoll > wrote:
> On Feb 15, 4:21?am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
>> Myname writes:
>> > What are the advantages of vfr-on-top in the real world? I understand the
>> > ifr to vfr-on-top then cancel, but what about other uses?
>>
>> The main advantage is that it allows a pilot to choose his altitude at his
>> discretion, within broad limits, rather than request approval for every change
>> of altitude from ATC.
>>
>
> You can do that under VFR with even broader limits on altitude and the
> additional advantage of altering your route at your discretion.
>

Thank you for this, Stephen. This completely backs up what I've
been saying.

BL.
- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! :) | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFLgEIWyBkZmuMZ8L8RApi9AKCqDb+05K77EQC36YcaSx qAvmgefACfTzph
HWCr4z+n/zl9Uoa1OZQH44A=
=MF1s
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Steven P. McNicoll[_2_]]

A Guy Called Tyketto wrote:
>
> I never said that ATC was required to provide flight following.
> What I said is that you as the pilot have the option of changing your
> altitude if you are VFR w/flight following, just by notifying ATC that
> you are going to change your altitude.
>

You do not need to notify ATC that you are going to change altitude when VFR
with flight following.

[Mxsmanic]

Steven P. McNicoll writes:

> You're drifting too far off the issue here. What are the advantages
> of IFR to VFR-on-top then cancel over IFR to VFR then cancel?

VFR-on-top is still flight under IFR. Cancelling IFR and switching to VFR is
not. If you anticipate that some remaining portion of the flight will require
IFR, it makes sense to remain under IFR with VFR-on-top, rather than cancel
it.

[Mike Adams[_2_]]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote:

> A Guy Called Tyketto wrote:
>>
>> I never said that ATC was required to provide flight following.
>> What I said is that you as the pilot have the option of changing your
>> altitude if you are VFR w/flight following, just by notifying ATC
>> that you are going to change your altitude.
>>
>
> You do not need to notify ATC that you are going to change altitude
> when VFR with flight following.
>
>

It may not be a firm requirement, but it is recommended. AIM section 4-1-15 paragraph b.2 says: "Pilots
should also inform the controller when changing VFR cruising altitude. "

http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/ATpubs/AIM/Chap4/aim0401.html#4-1-15

[Steven P. McNicoll[_2_]]

Mike Adams wrote:
> "Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote:
>
>> A Guy Called Tyketto wrote:
>>>
>>> I never said that ATC was required to provide flight following.
>>> What I said is that you as the pilot have the option of changing
>>> your altitude if you are VFR w/flight following, just by notifying
>>> ATC that you are going to change your altitude.
>>>
>>
>> You do not need to notify ATC that you are going to change altitude
>> when VFR with flight following.
>>
>>
>
> It may not be a firm requirement, but it is recommended. AIM section
> 4-1-15 paragraph b.2 says: "Pilots should also inform the controller
> when changing VFR cruising altitude. "
>
> http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/ATpubs/AIM/Chap4/aim0401.html#4-1-15
>

So, then, definitely not a firm requirement.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

On Feb 20, 3:17*pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Steven P. McNicoll writes:
> > You're drifting too far off the issue here. *What are the advantages
> > of *IFR to VFR-on-top then cancel over IFR to VFR then cancel?
>
> VFR-on-top is still flight under IFR. Cancelling IFR and switching to VFR is
> not. If you anticipate that some remaining portion of the flight will require
> IFR, it makes sense to remain under IFR with VFR-on-top, rather than cancel
> it.
>

We're not talking about operating VFR-on-top. The question is, "What
are the advantages of IFR to VFR-on-top then cancel over IFR to VFR
then cancel?" Once you cancel you're VFR in each case.

[[email protected]]

On Feb 20, 10:43*am, "Steven P. McNicoll" >
wrote:

> That's not "IFR to VFR-on-top then cancel", t

Your terminology flat out wrong...... Based on the question you
asked, my scenario answered your question. You said VFR ON TOP.

You can't be VFR on top WITHOUT an IFR clearance. VFR on TOP is IFR.

Once you cancel IFR, you no longer are VFR on top. So what you say
above is absolutely an impossible scenario.

There is specific terminology for VFR traffic that you are not picking
up on and that is VFR OVER the top.

That is build in for VFR. VFR rules require contact with the ground
OR maintain 1000 feet above the cloud deck and fly VFR OVER the top
with your departure and destination being VFR for the flight to be
legal.

And even then you don't report to ATC that you are VFR over the top,
it's just simple flight following.

In my answer to you, , I file IFR, fly through the cloud, get VFR on
top and cancel IFR. Once I cancel IFR, I have the option of electing
flight following and maintaining VFR OVER the top. In this case, you
could drop me for workload consideration.

You can't drop me if I am VFR ON TOP as I am IFR until I cancel.

[[email protected]]

On Feb 20, 1:36*pm, "Steven P. McNicoll" >
wrote:

> What are the advantages
> of *IFR to VFR-on-top then cancel over IFR to VFR then cancel?

You should know the answer to this.

You watch me closer and provide REQUIRED separation when I am VFR on
top. You can't drop me when I am VFR on top as it's still IFR.

[[email protected]]

On Feb 21, 7:21*am, " > wrote:
> On Feb 20, 1:36*pm, "Steven P. McNicoll" >
> wrote:
>
> > What are the advantages
> > of *IFR to VFR-on-top then cancel over IFR to VFR then cancel?
>
> You should know the answer to this.
>
> You watch me closer and provide REQUIRED separation when I am VFR on
> top. *You can't drop me when I am VFR on top as it's still IFR.

Correction to the above thinking this through. Separation would be
VFR rules. Duh, hence VFR on top. The rest still stands.

VFR on top is an IFR clearance and ATC cannot drop me until they hear
those magic words cancel IFR. That is the benefit of VFR on top.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

On Feb 21, 7:17*am, " > wrote:
> On Feb 20, 10:43*am, "Steven P. McNicoll" >
> wrote:
>
> > That's not "IFR to VFR-on-top then cancel", t
>
> Your terminology flat out wrong...... *Based on the question you
> asked, my scenario answered your question. *You said VFR ON TOP.
>

"IFR to VFR-on-top then cancel" is not my terminology, it's the OP's,
Myname. Your response did not answer the question I directed to him.


>
> You can't be VFR on top WITHOUT an *IFR clearance. *VFR on TOP is IFR..
>

Correct.


>
> Once you cancel IFR, you no longer are VFR on top. * So what you say
> above is absolutely an impossible scenario.
>

And that's why I asked the question.


>
> There is specific terminology for VFR traffic that you are not picking
> up on and that is VFR OVER the top.
>

We're not talking about that.


>
> That is build in for VFR. *VFR rules require contact with the ground
> OR maintain 1000 feet above the cloud deck and fly VFR OVER the top
> with your departure and destination being VFR for the flight to be
> legal.
>
> And even then you don't report to ATC that you are VFR over the top,
> it's just simple flight following.
>

Flight following is not a requirement of VFR over-the-top operations.


>
> In my answer to you, , I file IFR, fly through the cloud, get VFR on
> top and cancel IFR. *Once I cancel IFR, I have the option of electing
> flight following and maintaining VFR OVER the top. *In this case, you
> could drop me for workload consideration.
>

But why request VFR-on-top if all you want to do is punch a cloud deck
and cancel upon reaching VFR conditions? Why ask for something you
don't intend to use?


>
> You can't drop me if I am VFR ON TOP as I am IFR until I cancel.
>

Correct.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

On Feb 21, 7:21*am, " > wrote:
> On Feb 20, 1:36*pm, "Steven P. McNicoll" >
> wrote:
>
> > What are the advantages
> > of *IFR to VFR-on-top then cancel over IFR to VFR then cancel?
>
> You should know the answer to this.
>

I do, the answer is "None."


>
> You watch me closer and provide REQUIRED separation when I am VFR on
> top.
>

Wrong. No separation is provided to aircraft operating VFR-on-top
outside of Class B or Class C airspace, including the outer area, or
TRSAs.


>
> You can't drop me when I am VFR on top as it's still IFR.
>

You're canceling IFR.

[[email protected]]

On Feb 21, 8:09*am, "Steven P. McNicoll" >
wrote:

> > You can't drop me when I am VFR on top as it's still IFR.
>
> You're canceling IFR.

Reporting VFR on top is not "IFR cancellation" You have to hear the
words IFR cancellation by the pilot before I am out of the IFR
environment. I can fly 1000 miles while VFR on top but I am still
IFR.

Cancellation would be. Memphis Center, 43L reporting VFR on top, I
would like to cancel my IFR.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

On Feb 21, 9:14*am, " > wrote:
> On Feb 21, 8:09*am, "Steven P. McNicoll" >
> wrote:
>
> > > You can't drop me when I am VFR on top as it's still IFR.
>
> > You're canceling IFR.
>
> Reporting VFR on top is not "IFR cancellation" *You have to hear the
> words IFR cancellation by the pilot before I am out of the IFR
> environment. *I can fly 1000 miles while VFR on top but I am still
> IFR.
>
> Cancellation would be. *Memphis Center, 43L reporting VFR on top, I
> would like to cancel my IFR.
>

The question was, "What are the advantages of IFR to VFR-on-top then
cancel over IFR to VFR then cancel?" You're canceling IFR in each
case, we're not discussing VFR-on-top operations of any distance.

[[email protected]]

On Feb 21, 9:40*am, "Steven P. McNicoll" >
wrote:

> The question was, "What are the advantages of IFR to VFR-on-top then
> cancel over IFR to VFR then cancel?" *You're canceling IFR in each
> case, we're not discussing VFR-on-top operations of any distance.

Whatever Steve. You asked what the advantages of IFR to VFR on top and
I answered.

[Mark Hansen[_2_]]

On 2/21/2010 5:17 AM, wrote:
> On Feb 20, 10:43 am, "Steven P. McNicoll" >
> wrote:
>
>> That's not "IFR to VFR-on-top then cancel", t
>
> Your terminology flat out wrong...... Based on the question you
> asked, my scenario answered your question. You said VFR ON TOP.

Did he? Good grief Allan. You're reading what you want to see, rather
than what he wrote.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

On Feb 21, 9:52*am, " > wrote:
> On Feb 21, 9:40*am, "Steven P. McNicoll" >
> wrote:
>
> > The question was, "What are the advantages of IFR to VFR-on-top then
> > cancel over IFR to VFR then cancel?" *You're canceling IFR in each
> > case, we're not discussing VFR-on-top operations of any distance.
>
> Whatever Steve. You asked what the advantages of IFR to VFR on top and
> I answered.
>

No, I asked "what are the advantages of IFR to VFR-on-top THEN
CANCEL?" In other words, why request VFR-on-top if you don't intend
to operate VFR-on-top?

[Steven P. McNicoll]

On Feb 21, 7:55*am, " > wrote:
> On Feb 21, 7:21*am, " > wrote:
>
> > On Feb 20, 1:36*pm, "Steven P. McNicoll" >
> > wrote:
>
> > > What are the advantages
> > > of *IFR to VFR-on-top then cancel over IFR to VFR then cancel?
>
> > You should know the answer to this.
>
> > You watch me closer and provide REQUIRED separation when I am VFR on
> > top. *You can't drop me when I am VFR on top as it's still IFR.
>
> Correction to the above thinking this through. *Separation would be
> VFR rules. *Duh, hence VFR on top. *The rest still stands.
>
> VFR on top is an IFR clearance and ATC cannot drop me until they hear
> those magic words cancel IFR. *That is the benefit of VFR on top.

That's just swell, peachy even. But the issue ain't flight following
vs. VFR-on-top, it's IFR to VFR-on-top then cancel vs. IFR to VFR then
cancel. Why request VFR-on-top to punch through a cloud deck if you
intend to cancel IFR upon reaching VFR conditions?

[Myname]

" > wrote in news:f2a6da89-5166-4420-
:

> That is build in for VFR. VFR rules require contact with the ground
> OR maintain 1000 feet above the cloud deck and fly VFR OVER the top
> with your departure and destination being VFR for the flight to be
> legal.

You don't always have to be 1000 feet over the cloud deck to be legal vfr.
If you are in class G airspace, clear of clouds is enough. You can be 1
foot above them if you want.

[Brian Whatcott]

Myname wrote:
> " > wrote in news:f2a6da89-5166-4420-
> :
>
>> That is build in for VFR. VFR rules require contact with the ground
>> OR maintain 1000 feet above the cloud deck and fly VFR OVER the top
>> with your departure and destination being VFR for the flight to be
>> legal.
>
> You don't always have to be 1000 feet over the cloud deck to be legal vfr.
> If you are in class G airspace, clear of clouds is enough. You can be 1
> foot above them if you want.

ABOVE them? In G class?

Brian W

[[email protected]]

On Mar 15, 9:06*pm, brian whatcott > wrote:

> ABOVE them? In G class?

Sure! Near my airport is a very large body of water. It's not
unusual to see stratiform clouds form in the morning after sunrise
with bases of 300 to 500 and only a couple hundred feet thick east of
my airport and the airport be severe clear for VFR departure.

Of course class G ends at 700 at my airport so in most cases you won't
be legal to be 1 foot above them but get a little further out where
class E starts at 1200 and it's something worthy of experiencing.

Very localized conditions but they are clouds :-)

[Bob Moore]

" > wrote

> On Mar 15, 9:06*pm, brian whatcott > wrote:
>
>> ABOVE them? In G class?
> Of course class G ends at 700 at my airport so in most cases you won't
> be legal to be 1 foot above them but get a little further out where
> class E starts at 1200 and it's something worthy of experiencing.

Both of you "Johnny come lately"s have forgotten that Class G airspace
does extend up to 14,500' in some parts of the country.
We all know about the Magenta shading...don't forget the blue shading. :)

Bob Moore

[[email protected]]

On Mar 16, 8:13*am, Bob Moore > wrote:

> Both of you "Johnny come lately"s have forgotten that Class G airspace
> does extend up to 14,500' in some parts of the country.
> We all know about the Magenta shading...don't forget the blue shading. :)

Gee Bob! Thanks for the reminder of what I fly!

Class G airspace above my service ceiling in my Sundowner LOL I'm not
getting far in that neck of the woods.

[Jon Woellhaf]

For some reason, this airspace discussion reminded me of an apocryphal
conversation between an SR-71 and Center:

SR-71: Center, Blackbird 37 requests flight level 800.

Center: Blackbird 37, Center. If you can get up there, you can have it!

SR-71: Roger. Blackbird 37 descending to flight level 800.

[Brian Whatcott]

Bob Moore wrote:
> " > wrote
>
>> On Mar 15, 9:06 pm, brian whatcott > wrote:
>>
>>> ABOVE them? In G class?
>> Of course class G ends at 700 at my airport so in most cases you won't
>> be legal to be 1 foot above them but get a little further out where
>> class E starts at 1200 and it's something worthy of experiencing.
>
> Both of you "Johnny come lately"s have forgotten that Class G airspace
> does extend up to 14,500' in some parts of the country.
> We all know about the Magenta shading...don't forget the blue shading. :)
>
> Bob Moore

I see you forgot, old timer, that separations in G change above 10000....
:-)

Brian W