Example: I know (or strongly suspect) that the tops at at 6000. I call
Ground and tell them that I want an IFR clearance to VFR-on-top. No flight
plan filed. Ground says "Whizbang 1234X is cleared to (nearby VOR), climb
and maintain 7000, if not on top at 7000 advise. Squawk 3456." Great time
saver.

Example: I am in Spokane, or somewhere else where it is severe clear and I
want to go to Seattle or somewhere that I know is VFR. I file an IFR flight
plan with VOT in the altitude block. I am cleared to operate VOT and cleared
for takeoff. Because I am on an IFR flight plan, I make all required reports
and stay in communication with Center until I can see over the tops of the
mountains that there is nothing on the other side but white puffy stuff. I
say "Center, Whizbang 3456 requests a hard altitude." Center gives me an IFR
altitude. Voila....I am back to "normal" IFR for the rest of the trip. I
used to carry packages from SEA to OAK and back in the middle of the night
and used VOT more often than not.

Bob Gardner

"Ron Garret" wrote in message
...
Subject line says it all. In light of the fact that VFR on top subjects
you to both VFR and IFR constraints, why would anyone ever choose to fly
VFR on top? I can only think of two possible reasons:

1. There happens to be clear air at a +500 foot altitude and not at the
corresponding even-thousand altitude (though how would know that without
popping up 500 feet to have a look is still a mystery).

2. You can get a more direct routing because of the less restrictive
separation requirements.

Have I missed a possible reason?

rg