On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 05:10:31 GMT, "Brad Z"
wrote:

Are you suggesting that flying over the water at night is not VFR? By your
logic, all night flying is not VFR, since CAR 602.114(a) states that the
aircraft must be operated with visual reference to the surface, which is
difficult over land as well when its dark. Is this why Canada has a night
rating?

There are large areas of Canada and the upper peninsula of Michigan
where the ground is absolutely invisible at night and it is strictly
"on the gauges".

I'm sure there are many other sparsely populated areas around the US
where it just isn't possible to fly at night and maintain visual
reference to the ground/surface/something.

For example, I took off from Newberry after dark. I looked up after
the runway lights disappeared under the wing and could
see...absolutely nothing. I thought I had flown into a cloud.

I immediately went on the gauges and called.
Uhhhh...Minneapolis Center, I'd like to activate my IFR flight plan.
It was cleared as filed, direct from Newberry to Midland @ 7000.
I love that "Cleared as filed. Climb to and maintain 7000, proceed on
course".

It was only after passing though 5000 I realized I could see scattered
lights on the ground. Looking back over my shoulder I could see the
lights of Newberry in the distance. By the time I reached 7000 I
could see a number of cities in the distance. It was actually a
beautiful clear evening with unlimited visibility for most of the
trip. Some where between Grayling and Houghton Lake a full moon
peaked over the Eastern horizon. What a beautiful site.

No moon, and no lights in my frame of reference. It was strictly on
the gauges from take off until I reached 5000. After that it was like
any other night flight, except periodically I'd receive a call from
Minneapolis Center. I don't remember hearing another plane on
frequency for the whole trip. I landed at Midland (3BS) right at
11:00 PM.

The point though is, had I not been instrument rated, or at least
proficient on the gauges, I would have been in deep doggie do with no
visual reference when in reality, ceiling and visibility were
unlimited.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

"Randy at Home" wrote in
message
.cable.rogers.com...
And the Canadian (CARS) perspective:

602.114 No person shall operate an aircraft in VFR flight within
controlled
airspace unless
(a) the aircraft is operated with visual reference to the surface;

In the US we just need a visual reference.

(b) flight visibility is not less than three miles;
(c) the distance of the aircraft from cloud is not less than 500 feet
vertically and one mile horizontally; and
(d) where the aircraft is operated within a control zone,
(i) when reported, ground visibility is not less than three miles, and
(ii) except when taking off or landing, the distance of the aircraft from
the surface is not less than 500 feet.

602.114 (a) in the CARS implies that visual reference to the surface is
required for VFR pilots. Flying over the ocean (or low altitude over the
Great Lakes for that matter), at night, is very likely to put that
requirement in serious doubt. IMHO, a controller wouldn't deliberately
give
a VFR pilot a vector that the pilot would have to refuse on the basis of
flying into IMC, according the definition in the regs. A pilot on an IFR
flight plan isn't subject to that. I don't think it's a hazard issue for
VFR
pilots as much as a regulation issue.

"Stuart King" wrote in message
m...
| Yes, I am qualified. I am, however, going to maintain a healthy respect
for
| all things that have killed others. A VFR pilot is also allowed to fly
over
| the water at night in the US, as long as he maintains vis/cloud
separation.
|
| I guess what I was wondering is if controllers are aware of the night
VFR
| over water hazard and if so, do they make special allowances for this.
|
| SK
| CP IA -EI EI O
|
|
| As an IFR pilot, you're qualified to fly without visual references to
the
| horizon (e.g., over the ocean, facing away from land, at night). A VFR
| pilot
| isn't (e.g., JFK Jr.). Sounds like common sense to me.
|
|