Legal vs. practical cloud cover for VFR

On Feb 26, 6:00*am, Mxsmanic wrote:
At what point does VFR become too troublesome to be practical, in terms of
cloud cover? *VFR only requires that one stay a certain distance away from
clouds, but it doesn't impose any limit on the number or proximity of clouds
in the sky (unless they are so close together that one cannot maintain the
required clearance). Nevertheless, it seems to me that at some point the
clouds are so numerous and close together that flying VFR becomes more of an
irritation than a pleasure, with constant dodging of clouds and possibly
changes in altitude. It also seems that this would be a personal limit, since
it's not defined by regulations. So, what are your own limits for how much
cloud cover you'll tolerate before filing IFR or simply not flying VFR?

I've flown VFR only for over 30 years, and legal is generally
practical in my experience. Clouds are usually well layered and as
long as legal or personal ceiling and visibilities are met there's not
a problem. There can be a problem if terrain varies much along your
path and ceilings are low. Sometimes that makes it a bit difficult to
determine that it'll be OK along the entire route. One can fly in a
widely scattered layer and dodge clouds, but that's not usually
necessary because you can go above or below the layer.
--
Gene Seibel
Gene & Sue's Aeroplanes - http://pad39a.com/gene/planes.html
Because we fly, we envy no one.