Interesting. My newsreader inexplicably split this thread in two --
apparently it was so unpalatable? I never even saw this "sub-thread" till
now.

Anyway, sorry I missed responding to this one till now:

Jay started out by stating that sticking a wing into a puffy cloud
(apparently cumulus) the size of a semi while flying VFR at an altitude
reserved for IFR traffic is not a violation of the FARs. Anyone agree with
that?

The story was written for maximum effect as a narrative. Altitudes and
cloud sizes may not be accurate, and objects may appear to be closer than
they are. In any event, I was not at an IFR altitude.

Jay then stated that, since clouds aren't defined, he can make up his own
definition. Anyone agree with that?

Wrong. I asked that since clouds are not precisely defined, what
constitutes a cloud? You responded with an incredibly lame dictionary
quotation, which does NOT address the issue at hand.

If your dictionary definition is the one we should all use, most of us would
rarely fly.

When presented with a dictionary definition, Jay argued that, since it
wasn't precise enough to suit him, he should be allowed to make up his own
definition. Anyone agree with that?

The broad dictionary definition of "cloud" simply isn't precise enough for
VFR rules. It's a simple concept, really -- we need more precision than the
broad definition provides. This is why thoughtful men have come up with
terms like "cumulous" and "cirrus" -- to differentiate cloud types from one
another.

I simply asked for a definition that will provide for spatial as well as
visual guidance, when flying as a VFR pilot. Right now we've mostly agreed
that a cloud is a "cloud" if it cannot be seen *through* -- but we haven't
agreed on whether a cloud is a "cloud" if it cannot be seen *around*. This
is really the crux of the issue, and it's one that hard-liners simply can't
seem to get their minds around.

Worse, if the FAA goes ahead and defines "cloud" the way they have proposed,
our agreed upon "not a cloud if it can be seen through" will be out the
window. It will simply be illegal to fly VFR in any area of visible
moisture or ice crystals -- which is defining "cloud" WAY too broadly, IMHO.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"