|
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
March 18th 07, 04:04 AM
posted to alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
|
|||
|
|||
C-172 VFR On-top
First time I ever flew VFR on-top. We were at 6500 fl (MSL). Sure was pretty
and no turbulence. (I've never posted a pic to this newsgroup before - hope it comes out ok) 
|
|
#2
March 18th 07, 04:54 AM
posted to alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
|
|||
|
|||
|
C-172 VFR On-top - resized - just a little
Harry wrote:
First time I ever flew VFR on-top. We were at 6500 fl (MSL). Sure was pretty and no turbulence. (I've never posted a pic to this newsgroup before - hope it comes out ok) Of course, we're all jealous. I resized the pic down to 1024 wide. Anywhere from 900 to 1280 wide will fit on a typical screen with no trouble - and is small enough for dial-up users to download easily. Nice pic though, love to see any others that you're proud of. -- Cheers Dave Kearton
|
|
#3
March 18th 07, 05:09 AM
posted to alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
|
|||
|
|||
|
C-172 VFR On-top - resized - just a little
On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 15:24:53 +1030, "Dave Kearton"
wrote: Harry wrote: First time I ever flew VFR on-top. We were at 6500 fl (MSL). Sure was pretty and no turbulence. (I've never posted a pic to this newsgroup before - hope it comes out ok) Of course, we're all jealous. I resized the pic down to 1024 wide. Anywhere from 900 to 1280 wide will fit on a typical screen with no trouble - and is small enough for dial-up users to download easily. Nice pic though, love to see any others that you're proud of. "King Sydney"?
|
|
#4
March 18th 07, 05:11 AM
posted to alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
|
|||
|
|||
|
C-172 VFR On-top - resized - just a little
Chuck (in SC) wrote:
On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 15:24:53 +1030, "Dave Kearton" wrote: Harry wrote: First time I ever flew VFR on-top. We were at 6500 fl (MSL). Sure was pretty and no turbulence. (I've never posted a pic to this newsgroup before - hope it comes out ok) Of course, we're all jealous. I resized the pic down to 1024 wide. Anywhere from 900 to 1280 wide will fit on a typical screen with no trouble - and is small enough for dial-up users to download easily. Nice pic though, love to see any others that you're proud of. "King Sydney"? errr Queen Adelaide ? -- Cheers Dave Kearton
|
|
#5
March 18th 07, 06:17 AM
posted to alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
|
|||
|
|||
|
C-172 VFR On-top - resized - just a little
"Dave Kearton" wrote in news:QC3Lh.84127
: Harry wrote: First time I ever flew VFR on-top. We were at 6500 fl (MSL). Sure was pretty and no turbulence. (I've never posted a pic to this newsgroup before - hope it comes out ok) Of course, we're all jealous. I resized the pic down to 1024 wide. Anywhere from 900 to 1280 wide will fit on a typical screen with no trouble - and is small enough for dial-up users to download easily. Nice pic though, love to see any others that you're proud of. What Dave said. The closest I get to flying these days is the elevator ride to the third floor... Bob ^,,^
|
|
#6
March 18th 07, 12:42 PM
posted to alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
|
|||
|
|||
|
C-172 VFR On-top - resized - just a little
"Dave Kearton" wrote in message ... Harry wrote: First time I ever flew VFR on-top. We were at 6500 fl (MSL). Sure was pretty and no turbulence. (I've never posted a pic to this newsgroup before - hope it comes out ok) Of course, we're all jealous. I resized the pic down to 1024 wide. Anywhere from 900 to 1280 wide will fit on a typical screen with no trouble - and is small enough for dial-up users to download easily. Nice pic though, love to see any others that you're proud of. -- Cheers Dave Kearton Dave, thank you! I mean that sincerely. I didn't like how big it was and appreciate your reducing it and now I know what to do in the future :-). If there was a way of deleting and reposting it, I would in a heart beat. Harry
|
|
#7
March 18th 07, 01:22 PM
posted to alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
|
|||
|
|||
|
C-172 VFR On-top
Harry wrote
First time I ever flew VFR on-top. We were at 6500 fl (MSL). Sure was pretty and no turbulence. Harry, technically, you were not VFR-ON-TOP. In the USofA,Aircraft flying under VFR are "VFR-OVER-THE-TOP". However, you were not actually "OVER-THE- TOP" since that inferrs an underlying cloud condition that obscures the ground, and that was obviously was not the case in your picture. Lots of ground visible in the lower left corner. From the AIM: VFR over-the-top, with respect to the operation of aircraft, means the operation of an aircraft over-the-top under VFR when it is not being operated on an IFR flight plan. Over-the-top means above the layer of clouds or other obscuring phenomena forming the ceiling. IFR over-the-top, with respect to the operation of aircraft, means the operation of an aircraft over-the-top on an IFR flight plan when cleared by air traffic control to maintain “VFR conditions” or “VFR conditions on top”. Bob Moore ATP, CFI
|
|
#8
March 18th 07, 02:17 PM
posted to alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
|
|||
|
|||
|
C-172 VFR On-top
"Bob Moore" wrote in message 46.128... Harry wrote First time I ever flew VFR on-top. We were at 6500 fl (MSL). Sure was pretty and no turbulence. Harry, technically, you were not VFR-ON-TOP. In the USofA,Aircraft flying under VFR are "VFR-OVER-THE-TOP". However, you were not actually "OVER-THE- TOP" since that inferrs an underlying cloud condition that obscures the ground, and that was obviously was not the case in your picture. Lots of ground visible in the lower left corner. From the AIM: VFR over-the-top, with respect to the operation of aircraft, means the operation of an aircraft over-the-top under VFR when it is not being operated on an IFR flight plan. Over-the-top means above the layer of clouds or other obscuring phenomena forming the ceiling. IFR over-the-top, with respect to the operation of aircraft, means the operation of an aircraft over-the-top on an IFR flight plan when cleared by air traffic control to maintain "VFR conditions" or "VFR conditions on top". Bob Moore ATP, CFI Bob, your absolutely correct, however, that bit of ground visibility was the exception not the rule. 80% of that flight was over solid cloud cover :-).
|
|
#9
March 18th 07, 02:34 PM
posted to alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
|
|||
|
|||
|
C-172 VFR On-top
"Bob Moore" wrote in message 46.128... Harry wrote First time I ever flew VFR on-top. We were at 6500 fl (MSL). Sure was pretty and no turbulence. Harry, technically, you were not VFR-ON-TOP. In the USofA,Aircraft flying under VFR are "VFR-OVER-THE-TOP". However, you were not actually "OVER-THE- TOP" since that inferrs an underlying cloud condition that obscures the ground, and that was obviously was not the case in your picture. Lots of ground visible in the lower left corner. From the AIM: VFR over-the-top, with respect to the operation of aircraft, means the operation of an aircraft over-the-top under VFR when it is not being operated on an IFR flight plan. Over-the-top means above the layer of clouds or other obscuring phenomena forming the ceiling. IFR over-the-top, with respect to the operation of aircraft, means the operation of an aircraft over-the-top on an IFR flight plan when cleared by air traffic control to maintain "VFR conditions" or "VFR conditions on top". I didn't see the OP, but based on what you quoted from it nothing suggests he was not operating IFR.
|
|
#10
March 18th 07, 09:30 PM
posted to alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
|
|||
|
|||
|
C-172 VFR On-top - resized - just a little
Harry wrote:
Dave, thank you! I mean that sincerely. I didn't like how big it was and appreciate your reducing it and now I know what to do in the future :-). If there was a way of deleting and reposting it, I would in a heart beat. Harry You're very welcome Harry. -- Cheers Dave Kearton
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
