Using the magenta circles

[Ace Pilot]

A friend recently asked me to explain the magenta circles seen around
numerous airports on sectionals. It got me to thinking about how
useful they are. Personally, if the weather isn't good enough to fly
VFR in Class E airspace, I'm not going to fly VFR, even if it is legal
in Class G airspace. So, for me, it is pointless knowing where the
boundary is between Class E and Class G airspace.

But I was curious to know if there are pilots that take full advantage
of this distinction. Does anyone actually make use of the Class E/G
boundaries depicted on sectionals? If so, how? I suspect the most
common use is doing T&Gs in the pattern below 700 feet AGL when the
weather is marginal. Other uses?

[Richard Russell]

On 2 Apr 2004 05:53:20 -0800, (Ace
Pilot) wrote:

>A friend recently asked me to explain the magenta circles seen around
>numerous airports on sectionals. It got me to thinking about how
>useful they are. Personally, if the weather isn't good enough to fly
>VFR in Class E airspace, I'm not going to fly VFR, even if it is legal
>in Class G airspace. So, for me, it is pointless knowing where the
>boundary is between Class E and Class G airspace.
>
>But I was curious to know if there are pilots that take full advantage
>of this distinction. Does anyone actually make use of the Class E/G
>boundaries depicted on sectionals? If so, how? I suspect the most
>common use is doing T&Gs in the pattern below 700 feet AGL when the
>weather is marginal. Other uses?


The magenta line doesn't indicate a boundary between E and G space.
The magenta indicates Class E with a floor of 700 feet. The outside
of this magenta area is Class E with a floor of 1200 feet. A blue
line indicates the border between Class E with a floor of 1200 feet
and Class G. No pure Class G where I am. I can only find that under
the other classes. Note: I am not a CFI and could easily be wrong
about this.
Rich Russell

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Richard Russell" > wrote in message
...
>
> The magenta line doesn't indicate a boundary between E and G space.
> The magenta indicates Class E with a floor of 700 feet. The outside
> of this magenta area is Class E with a floor of 1200 feet.
>

And also a Class G area with a ceiling of 1200' AGL, so the magenta vignette
does indicate a boundary between Class E and G airspace.


>
> A blue line indicates the border between Class E with a floor of 1200 feet
> and Class G.
>

Not where it abuts Class E airspace with a floor 700' AGL.


>
> No pure Class G where I am. I can only find that under
> the other classes.
>

What Class G airspace doesn't fit that description?

[C J Campbell]

"Richard Russell" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> The magenta line doesn't indicate a boundary between E and G space.
> The magenta indicates Class E with a floor of 700 feet. The outside
> of this magenta area is Class E with a floor of 1200 feet. A blue
> line indicates the border between Class E with a floor of 1200 feet
> and Class G. No pure Class G where I am. I can only find that under
> the other classes. Note: I am not a CFI and could easily be wrong
> about this.
> Rich Russell

He was talking about magenta circles, which indicates to me that he is
talking about class E airspace that goes to the surface. Either that, or he
is talking about class C airspace. Beyond that, I have a tough time figuring
out what he is talking about. The magenta shaded lines that indicate class E
to 700 feet are rarely circles, although I can think of a few airports in
eastern Washington that are like that. We do have some class G boundaries
around here, particularly over the Olympic Peninsula.

There are people who try to remain in class G airspace in order to stay VFR,
including those in the pattern, but I have found it to be impractical in
many respects. If it is that bad you spend too much time dodging clouds to
get any serious pattern work done. The terrain around here is very
mountainous, which severely restricts how far you can fly and stay VFR in
weather like that. In this area it seems mostly useful to seaplanes and
charter pilots flying around the San Juan Islands.

The only time I use the magenta circles is to let me know when I am
approaching the airport. Unfortunately, a lot of the airports around here
don't do a good job of maintaining the circles, and they can be hard to see
at night or in poor visibility. Although the trees on the circle were
generally logged off when the magenta was first applied, some of these areas
have not been maintained since and are completely reforested. It is very
difficult to pick out the remains of the magenta circle on the forest floor.
I prefer the lighted circles which you bring up with PCL. It feels good to
come home to a nice ring of magenta lights late at night after a long day's
flying. :-)

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
>
> He was talking about magenta circles, which indicates to me that he is
> talking about class E airspace that goes to the surface.
>

Class E surface areas are depicted by segmented magenta circles. He
referred to Class G airspace below 700', so he was clearly talking about
magenta vignette.


>
> Either that, or he is talking about class C airspace. Beyond that, I have
a
> tough time figuring out what he is talking about. The magenta shaded lines
> that indicate class E to 700 feet are rarely circles, although I can think
of
> a few airports in eastern Washington that are like that.
>

It depends where you are, but circular magenta vignette is common.

[Ron Natalie]

"Ace Pilot" > wrote in message =
> But I was curious to know if there are pilots that take full advantage
> of this distinction. Does anyone actually make use of the Class E/G
> boundaries depicted on sectionals? If so, how? I suspect the most
> common use is doing T&Gs in the pattern below 700 feet AGL when the
> weather is marginal. Other uses?

Those circles aren't to keep VFR pilots safe when the weather is marginal.
They are to lower the floor of controlled airspace for the benefit of IFR
pilots.

This accomplishes two things:
1. Allows ATC to provide control to lower altitudes, primarily
separation from other IFR aircraft.
2. Makes sure any there is sufficient visibility / cloud clearance
for visual separation techniques to be used between any
VFR aircraft that might be present.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
>
> Those circles aren't to keep VFR pilots safe when the weather is marginal.
> They are to lower the floor of controlled airspace for the benefit of IFR
> pilots.
>
> This accomplishes two things:
> 1. Allows ATC to provide control to lower altitudes, primarily
> separation from other IFR aircraft.
> 2. Makes sure any there is sufficient visibility / cloud clearance
> for visual separation techniques to be used between any
> VFR aircraft that might be present.
>

Changing weather has no effect on the floor of controlled airspace.

[Richard Russell]

On Fri, 02 Apr 2004 16:26:52 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
> wrote:

>
>"Richard Russell" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> The magenta line doesn't indicate a boundary between E and G space.
>> The magenta indicates Class E with a floor of 700 feet. The outside
>> of this magenta area is Class E with a floor of 1200 feet.
>>
>
>And also a Class G area with a ceiling of 1200' AGL, so the magenta vignette
>does indicate a boundary between Class E and G airspace.
>
>
>>
>> A blue line indicates the border between Class E with a floor of 1200 feet
>> and Class G.
>>
>
>Not where it abuts Class E airspace with a floor 700' AGL.
>
>
>>
>> No pure Class G where I am. I can only find that under
>> the other classes.
>>
>
>What Class G airspace doesn't fit that description?
>

I noted that Class G exists under the controlled spaces. I should
have been more clear but my intent was to delineate vertical
separations, not horizontal.

Also, when referring to "pure" Classs G I should have been more clear
although I would be surprised if you didn't understand my intent. The
Class G that I was referring to is where it is G up to the 14,000'
Class E threshold (and of course the A above).
Rich Russell

[Richard Russell]

On Fri, 2 Apr 2004 08:40:43 -0800, "C J Campbell"
> wrote:

>
>"Richard Russell" > wrote in message
...
>>
>>
>> The magenta line doesn't indicate a boundary between E and G space.
>> The magenta indicates Class E with a floor of 700 feet. The outside
>> of this magenta area is Class E with a floor of 1200 feet. A blue
>> line indicates the border between Class E with a floor of 1200 feet
>> and Class G. No pure Class G where I am. I can only find that under
>> the other classes. Note: I am not a CFI and could easily be wrong
>> about this.
>> Rich Russell
>
>He was talking about magenta circles, which indicates to me that he is
>talking about class E airspace that goes to the surface. Either that, or he
>is talking about class C airspace. Beyond that, I have a tough time figuring
>out what he is talking about. The magenta shaded lines that indicate class E
>to 700 feet are rarely circles, although I can think of a few airports in
>eastern Washington that are like that. We do have some class G boundaries
>around here, particularly over the Olympic Peninsula.
snipped


I'm not sure what he meant by circles either, but I took it to mean
the large Class E vignettes that are generally made up of sections of
circles in a sort of unrefined cloudlike shape. I don't know about
the rest of the country, but in the east they're all over the place.
Rich Russell

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Richard Russell" > wrote in message
...
>
> I noted that Class G exists under the controlled spaces. I should
> have been more clear but my intent was to delineate vertical
> separations, not horizontal.
>

Magenta vignette denotes a vertical separation between Class E and Class G
airspace.


>
> Also, when referring to "pure" Classs G I should have been more clear
> although I would be surprised if you didn't understand my intent.
>

One can respond to your words, but not to your intent.


>
> The Class G that I was referring to is where it is G up to the 14,000'
> Class E threshold (and of course the A above).
>

14,500

[Peter Duniho]

"Richard Russell" > wrote in message
...
> Also, when referring to "pure" Classs G I should have been more clear
> although I would be surprised if you didn't understand my intent.

Steve only "reads between the lines" when it suits him. His main goal is to
criticize and disagree, so the general rule is, if he can disagree with what
you wrote, he'll read it that way, and if he can disagree with what you
meant, he'll read it that way.

If you Google a bit, you'll see what I mean. You can find several posts
from a while back where he invested a large effort telling me what I meant,
rather than what I said, just the opposite of what he's doing here with you.

Don't let it bother you. It's just par for the course for Usenet. He
actually has a clue most of the time, so if you get past his annoying
habits, there's real information to be had.

Pete

[BTIZ]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
> m...
> >
> > Those circles aren't to keep VFR pilots safe when the weather is
marginal.
> > They are to lower the floor of controlled airspace for the benefit of
IFR
> > pilots.
> >
> > This accomplishes two things:
> > 1. Allows ATC to provide control to lower altitudes, primarily
> > separation from other IFR aircraft.
> > 2. Makes sure any there is sufficient visibility / cloud clearance
> > for visual separation techniques to be used between any
> > VFR aircraft that might be present.
> >
>
> Changing weather has no effect on the floor of controlled airspace.
>

There he goes again...

But I did not think he said anything about changing the floor of the
airspace for weather, he stated that the lower floor provides transistions
for IFR pilots to get close to the airport, and CLEAR OF VFR traffic in
marginal weather, that should be remaining in Class G and not Class E where
the approach may dump them off.

BT

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"BTIZ" > wrote in message
news:vJqbc.69606$1I5.24219@fed1read01...
>
> But I did not think he said anything about changing the floor of the
> airspace for weather, he stated that the lower floor provides transistions
> for IFR pilots to get close to the airport, and CLEAR OF VFR traffic in
> marginal weather, that should be remaining in Class G and not Class E
where
> the approach may dump them off.
>

He said; "Those circles aren't to keep VFR pilots safe when the weather is
marginal. They are to lower the floor of controlled airspace for the
benefit of IFR pilots."

[mike regish]

Exactly.

Even I knew what he said as well as what he meant.

mike regish

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
nk.net...
>
> "BTIZ" > wrote in message
> news:vJqbc.69606$1I5.24219@fed1read01...
> >
> > But I did not think he said anything about changing the floor of the
> > airspace for weather, he stated that the lower floor provides
transistions
> > for IFR pilots to get close to the airport, and CLEAR OF VFR traffic in
> > marginal weather, that should be remaining in Class G and not Class E
> where
> > the approach may dump them off.
> >
>
> He said; "Those circles aren't to keep VFR pilots safe when the weather is
> marginal. They are to lower the floor of controlled airspace for the
> benefit of IFR pilots."
>
>

[Richard Kaplan]

"Ace Pilot" > wrote in message
om...

> common use is doing T&Gs in the pattern below 700 feet AGL when the
> weather is marginal. Other uses?

1. The altitude where controlled airspace begins can be a factor for an IFR
pilot selecting an airport at which to fly an instrument approach if he is
concerned about airplanes legally flying a traffic pattern 1 foot below him
when he breaks out of a cloud.

2. In areas with unusual and predictable weather patterns, i.e. a very thin
marine fog layer, some pilots depart IMC in Class G airspace in anticipation
of breakout out on top into VMC conditions before entering controlled
airspace -- not necessarily wise but legal nonetheless.


--
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

[Richard Russell]

On Fri, 02 Apr 2004 18:52:43 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
> wrote:

>
>"Richard Russell" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> I noted that Class G exists under the controlled spaces. I should
>> have been more clear but my intent was to delineate vertical
>> separations, not horizontal.
>>
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote>
>Magenta vignette denotes a vertical separation between Class E and Class G
>airspace.
>
>
That statement is indeed true but I think most VFR pilots are aware of
that. What many are not aware of is what happens horizontally at the
outer border of the magenta vignette where the Class E with a 1200'
floor begins. This is not marked on charts in the northeast and
middle atlantic areas of the country.
Rich Russell

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Richard Russell" > wrote in message
...
>
> That statement is indeed true but I think most VFR pilots are aware of
> that. What many are not aware of is what happens horizontally at the
> outer border of the magenta vignette where the Class E with a 1200'
> floor begins. This is not marked on charts in the northeast and
> middle atlantic areas of the country.
>

It isn't marked anywhere in the country any more. It used to be, but blue
vignette showing controlled airspace beginning at 1200' AGL that abutted
magenta vignette was dropped a few years ago. It's now just understood to
be there. Grab a recent Sectional Aeronautical Chart, you'll find "Class E
airspace exists at 1200' AGL unless otherwise designated as shown above" in
the legend.

[Richard Russell]

On Sat, 03 Apr 2004 17:13:41 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
> wrote:

>
>"Richard Russell" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> That statement is indeed true but I think most VFR pilots are aware of
>> that. What many are not aware of is what happens horizontally at the
>> outer border of the magenta vignette where the Class E with a 1200'
>> floor begins. This is not marked on charts in the northeast and
>> middle atlantic areas of the country.
>>
>
>It isn't marked anywhere in the country any more. It used to be, but blue
>vignette showing controlled airspace beginning at 1200' AGL that abutted
>magenta vignette was dropped a few years ago. It's now just understood to
>be there. Grab a recent Sectional Aeronautical Chart, you'll find "Class E
>airspace exists at 1200' AGL unless otherwise designated as shown above" in
>the legend.
>

I was aware of the existence and configuration of all of the Class E
types, although I must admit when I was training I had one hell of a
time trying to figure it out. There are a number of CFIs out there
that either don't clearly understand it or cannot clearly explain it.

I was not aware of the note in the legend. Thanks for pointing that
out.
Rich Russell

[Ace Pilot]

Thanks, Richard. That's somewhat along the lines I was wondering
about. However, both of the cases you listed are for IFR flights.
Makes me wonder why, if this information is more useful to the IFR
pilot than the VFR pilot, is it on sectional charts when it sounds
like it would be more useful on low level enroute charts (although,
I'll be the first to admit that I have a sectional or WAC available
when flying IFR).

"Richard Kaplan" > wrote in message >...
> "Ace Pilot" > wrote in message
> om...
>
> > common use is doing T&Gs in the pattern below 700 feet AGL when the
> > weather is marginal. Other uses?
>
> 1. The altitude where controlled airspace begins can be a factor for an IFR
> pilot selecting an airport at which to fly an instrument approach if he is
> concerned about airplanes legally flying a traffic pattern 1 foot below him
> when he breaks out of a cloud.
>
> 2. In areas with unusual and predictable weather patterns, i.e. a very thin
> marine fog layer, some pilots depart IMC in Class G airspace in anticipation
> of breakout out on top into VMC conditions before entering controlled
> airspace -- not necessarily wise but legal nonetheless.

[Ace Pilot]

That was my impression, too, CJ. And I'm in the Midwest where we don't
have to worry about mountains. I just have a hard time picturing
someone following their progress on a sectional flying under a ceiling
of 1,000 feet and dipping below 700 feet AGL everytime they approach
an airport with a magenta circle around it.

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
> There are people who try to remain in class G airspace in order to stay VFR,
> including those in the pattern, but I have found it to be impractical in
> many respects. If it is that bad you spend too much time dodging clouds to
> get any serious pattern work done. The terrain around here is very
> mountainous, which severely restricts how far you can fly and stay VFR in
> weather like that. In this area it seems mostly useful to seaplanes and
> charter pilots flying around the San Juan Islands.
>

[Richard Kaplan]

It is on the IFR charts because -- at least in theory -- the information
helps VFR pilots determine where they can legally scud run and at what
airports they can legally fly a standard 1000-foot pattern on a marginal VFR
day. Whether that is safe or whether VFR pilots actually are aware of or
follow these rules is another matter.

The distinction between a 700-foot transition zone or a 1200-foot transition
zone basically helps VFR pilots to determine if they can fly a standard
800-foot or 1000-foot pattern on a day when there is a 1000-foot ceiling.
The answer is yes for airports with 1200-foot transition zones and no for
airports with 700-foot transition zones.

A related issue has to do with Class E Surface Areas -- generally commuter
or regional airlines are permitted only to fly at airports which have Class
E Surface Areas and thus -- at least in theory -- where it should not be
possible for an IFR airplane to break out of a cloud and find a VFR airplane
1 foot below. This means that on marginal VFR days it is at least
theoretically safer for an IFR pilot to land at an airport with a Class E
Surface Area than with Class G airspace on the surface.

--
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

[john price]

The difference between class E and G airspace is that ATC
cannot control traffic in class G (thus... it's uncontrolled)...
By lowering the floor of the class E (in which ATC can control
aircraft) over small airports, IFR flights can remain under
ATC control to a lower altitude, thus facilitating the IFR
approach process...

The fact that VFR minimums in class G are 1 mile and
clear of clouds is not to encourage VFR pilots to go fly
in that, but to make it legal for instrument pilots to complete
approaches where the visibility minimums are 1 mile in the
class G airspace... Ever wondered why SVFR minimums are
1 mile and clear of clouds... Same reason...


John Price
CFII/AGI/IGI
http://home.att.net/~jm.price


"Ace Pilot" > wrote in message
om...
> A friend recently asked me to explain the magenta circles seen around
> numerous airports on sectionals. It got me to thinking about how
> useful they are. Personally, if the weather isn't good enough to fly
> VFR in Class E airspace, I'm not going to fly VFR, even if it is legal
> in Class G airspace. So, for me, it is pointless knowing where the
> boundary is between Class E and Class G airspace.
>
> But I was curious to know if there are pilots that take full advantage
> of this distinction. Does anyone actually make use of the Class E/G
> boundaries depicted on sectionals? If so, how? I suspect the most
> common use is doing T&Gs in the pattern below 700 feet AGL when the
> weather is marginal. Other uses?

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"john price" > wrote in message
...
>
> The fact that VFR minimums in class G are 1 mile and
> clear of clouds is not to encourage VFR pilots to go fly
> in that, but to make it legal for instrument pilots to complete
> approaches where the visibility minimums are 1 mile in the
> class G airspace...
>

VFR minimums have nothing to do with IFR approaches.

[Richard Kaplan]

"john price" > wrote in message
...

> The fact that VFR minimums in class G are 1 mile and
> clear of clouds is not to encourage VFR pilots to go fly
> in that, but to make it legal for instrument pilots to complete
> approaches where the visibility minimums are 1 mile in the
> class G airspace...

With visibility of 1 mile I would never cancel IFR until I am on the ground.
Thus how would the VFR weather rules affect my flight other than by settting
cloud distance requirements for VFR airplanes in Class E airspace?


--
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

[Ron Natalie]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message ink.net...
>
> "Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
> m...
> >
> > Those circles aren't to keep VFR pilots safe when the weather is marginal.
> > They are to lower the floor of controlled airspace for the benefit of IFR
> > pilots.
> >
> > This accomplishes two things:
> > 1. Allows ATC to provide control to lower altitudes, primarily
> > separation from other IFR aircraft.
> > 2. Makes sure any there is sufficient visibility / cloud clearance
> > for visual separation techniques to be used between any
> > VFR aircraft that might be present.
> >
>
> Changing weather has no effect on the floor of controlled airspace.
>
>
I never said it did.

[Ron Natalie]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message nk.net...
>
> "BTIZ" > wrote in message
> news:vJqbc.69606$1I5.24219@fed1read01...
> >
> > But I did not think he said anything about changing the floor of the
> > airspace for weather, he stated that the lower floor provides transistions
> > for IFR pilots to get close to the airport, and CLEAR OF VFR traffic in
> > marginal weather, that should be remaining in Class G and not Class E
> where
> > the approach may dump them off.
> >
>
> He said; "Those circles aren't to keep VFR pilots safe when the weather is
> marginal. They are to lower the floor of controlled airspace for the
> benefit of IFR pilots."
>

Correct. The transition area lowers the floor of controlled airspace. I never
said it had anything to do with changing weather conditions. The first sentence
was to refute the hypothesis of the original poster.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
>
> I never said it did.
>

Well, if you didn't, then somebody else is posting here under the name "Ron
Natalie".

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
>
> Correct. The transition area lowers the floor of controlled airspace.
>

The floor of controlled airspace is fixed.

[Ron Natalie]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message ink.net...
>
> "Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
> m...
> >
> > Correct. The transition area lowers the floor of controlled airspace.
> >
>
> The floor of controlled airspace is fixed.
>
The transition area floor is LOWER than it would be if there were no transition area.
It's a local dropping of the controlled airspace floor from 1200 (typically) to 700.

Everybody else seems to understand what I'm saying except for you. Stop and try
to think about the real issue rather than trying to generate as much confusion as possible.

[John Galban]

(Ace Pilot) wrote in message >...
> That was my impression, too, CJ. And I'm in the Midwest where we don't
> have to worry about mountains. I just have a hard time picturing
> someone following their progress on a sectional flying under a ceiling
> of 1,000 feet and dipping below 700 feet AGL everytime they approach
> an airport with a magenta circle around it.
>

I have a hard time picturing somebody flying much higher that 700
AGL with a 1,000 ft. ceiling. It's a lot more difficult to see ahead
if you're bumping right up against the clouds. You will usually
encounter some lower hanging scud and vis isn't very good at the
ceiling boundary. It's a lot more comfortable a few hundred feet down
(assuming flat terrain).

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[Ace Pilot]

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message >...
> "Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message nk.net...
> >
> > "BTIZ" > wrote in message
> > news:vJqbc.69606$1I5.24219@fed1read01...
> > >
> > > But I did not think he said anything about changing the floor of the
> > > airspace for weather, he stated that the lower floor provides transistions
> > > for IFR pilots to get close to the airport, and CLEAR OF VFR traffic in
> > > marginal weather, that should be remaining in Class G and not Class E
> where
> > > the approach may dump them off.
> > >
> >
> > He said; "Those circles aren't to keep VFR pilots safe when the weather is
> > marginal. They are to lower the floor of controlled airspace for the
> > benefit of IFR pilots."
> >
>
> Correct. The transition area lowers the floor of controlled airspace. I never
> said it had anything to do with changing weather conditions. The first sentence
> was to refute the hypothesis of the original poster.


As the original poster, the only thing that can even be close to a
hypothesis is my suspicion that VFR pilots take advantage of the Class
E/G boundary by shooting T&Gs below 700 feet AGL. How does that first
sentence "refute" that?

And, for the record, the purpose of my post was to find out if anyone
actually made use of the information conveyed by the magenta circles,
or if most people found them as useless as I do.

[john price]

Sorry... Forgot to mention the concept of cancelling in
the air once airport is in sight... NY likes it much better
that way...

John Price
CFII/AGI/IGI
http://home.att.net/~jm.price


"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "john price" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > The fact that VFR minimums in class G are 1 mile and
> > clear of clouds is not to encourage VFR pilots to go fly
> > in that, but to make it legal for instrument pilots to complete
> > approaches where the visibility minimums are 1 mile in the
> > class G airspace...
> >
>
> VFR minimums have nothing to do with IFR approaches.
>
>

[john price]

I'll usually cancel when my home field is in sight and I know
I have it made... As long as it's safe... It's a courtesy both
to ATC and anyone else that may want to do an approach
to or depart from one of the 6 airports in the area with approaches
off of the same VOR... I know when I'm trying to get a release
and someone is on an approach to one of those airports and I'm
waiting for someone to get on the ground and cancel on the phone,
it's a bit annoying... Particularly if they forget...

John Price
CFII/AGI/IGi
http://home.att.net/~jm.price

"Richard Kaplan" > wrote in message
s.com...
>
>
> "john price" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > The fact that VFR minimums in class G are 1 mile and
> > clear of clouds is not to encourage VFR pilots to go fly
> > in that, but to make it legal for instrument pilots to complete
> > approaches where the visibility minimums are 1 mile in the
> > class G airspace...
>
> With visibility of 1 mile I would never cancel IFR until I am on the
ground.
> Thus how would the VFR weather rules affect my flight other than by
settting
> cloud distance requirements for VFR airplanes in Class E airspace?
>
>
> --
> Richard Kaplan, CFII
>
> www.flyimc.com
>
>

[Cub Driver]

>And, for the record, the purpose of my post was to find out if anyone
>actually made use of the information conveyed by the magenta circles,
>or if most people found them as useless as I do.

Well, I am conscious that if I were ever scud-running home, I would
have to get down to an uncomfortable altitude once I got within xx
miles of my home airport. That would incline me to land elsewhere, in
the unlikely event that I hadn't done so already.

That would be making use of the information, wouldn't it?


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
Viva Bush! blog www.vivabush.org

[Richard Kaplan]

"john price" > wrote in message
...

> Sorry... Forgot to mention the concept of cancelling in
> the air once airport is in sight... NY likes it much better
> that way...

Be careful there... if controlled airspace exists below 1200 feet and you
break out of the clouds at 1000 feet with the runway in sight so you cancel
IFR, you have just broken the minimum cloud separation requirement for VFR
flight.

--
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

[David Brooks]

"john price" > wrote in message
...
> Sorry... Forgot to mention the concept of cancelling in
> the air once airport is in sight... NY likes it much better
> that way...

This obviously helps if your cancelling lets the following aircraft carry on
with the approach. It also helps if you are the following aircraft, and the
pilot in front is on the ground or in sight, without having canceled.

If you do that, would it be helpful to let ATC know you're continuing the
(now, practice) approach under VFR?

-- David Brooks

[john price]

I'm talking about real approaches... With real weather...

John Price
CFII/AGI/IGI
http://home.att.net/~jm.price


"David Brooks" > wrote in message
...
> "john price" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Sorry... Forgot to mention the concept of cancelling in
> > the air once airport is in sight... NY likes it much better
> > that way...
>
> This obviously helps if your cancelling lets the following aircraft carry
on
> with the approach. It also helps if you are the following aircraft, and
the
> pilot in front is on the ground or in sight, without having canceled.
>
> If you do that, would it be helpful to let ATC know you're continuing the
> (now, practice) approach under VFR?
>
> -- David Brooks
>
>

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
>
> The transition area floor is LOWER than it would be if there were
> no transition area. It's a local dropping of the controlled airspace
> floor from 1200 (typically) to 700.
>

Correct.


>
> Everybody else seems to understand what I'm saying except for
> you. Stop and try to think about the real issue rather than trying
> to generate as much confusion as possible.
>

I understand you didn't intend to imply the floor of controlled airspace
varied with weather or type of operation. If you put more thought into your
writing you'll generate less confusion.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"David Brooks" > wrote in message
...
>
> This obviously helps if your cancelling lets the following aircraft
> carry on with the approach. It also helps if you are the following
> aircraft, and the pilot in front is on the ground or in sight, without
> having canceled.
>
> If you do that, would it be helpful to let ATC know you're continuing
> the (now, practice) approach under VFR?
>

No.