On Sat, 01 Jul 2006 13:37:40 GMT, Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

Why do you want to do this anyway? In areas below radar coverage VFR-On-Top
has nothing to offer. You aren't provided any separation or traffic
advisories but you're still tied to a route. Why not just go VFR?

First of all, thanks for the reference on my question as it answered it
perfectly. I was planning a flight from KMBO to KEDN today.

Several reasons why I wanted to do the original scenerio.

Winds aloft from 3,500 to 5000 made for a 15 minute difference in flight
time. Had I gone to 7000 feet to ensure radar coverage, it would have
added another 5 minutes. With passengers, that extra 20 minutes would have
been significant difference.

Going the victor highways would have added about 20 minutes as compared to
direct.

Most importantly, I love the second pair of eyes for traffic advisories.
Sure, I could do flight following VFR, but since I am already in the
system, might as well stay in the system without the risk of being dropped.

And the most fun of it all, it's nice to see my flight path at
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N...752Z/KMBO/KEKY
when I return home. Another way of keeping track of my flight time :-)
Website doesn't track VFR flight following too well.

As it turned out, couldn't launch today as I think something went south
with my starter or whatever engages the propeller (Bendex?)

Allen