"Going for the Visual"

Yes, there was an article like that.
But didn't it turn out that the article was a fabrication?
I think it was one of those "It could have happened..." stories.
That sort of journalism appalls me.
---JRC---

"Ray Andraka" wrote in message =
...
Uhh, I'd check that one. A year or two ago there was an article in =
IFR or IFR
Refresher about this subject. FAA busted some guy who cancelled when =
clear of
the clouds because he was not legal for VFR. IIRC, the guy busted had =
like 750
and 6+. The gist of the article was that unless you were in legal VFR =
you can't
cancel in the air.
=20
Otis Winslow wrote:
=20
Careful on that one.

"Jim Weir" wrote in message
...

I don't know about the rest of ye all, but the real world out here =
is to
be
vectored as low as the controller can give you, get the airport in =
sight,
and
"cancelling IFR". That way the 1000 & 3 does not apply.

Jim

=20
--
--Ray Andraka

Ray Andraka wrote in
:

Uhh, I'd check that one. A year or two ago there was an article in
IFR or IFR Refresher about this subject. FAA busted some guy who
cancelled when clear of the clouds because he was not legal for VFR.
IIRC, the guy busted had like 750 and 6+. The gist of the article was
that unless you were in legal VFR you can't cancel in the air.

Depends on where you are. In Class E, you need 1000/3 to be VFR. In Class
G, it's legal. If you're landing to an uncontrolled airport with a Class E
surface area, you need to wait until you're on the ground. If you're out
in the boonies with a 1200', or even a 700', floor, you should be ok
cancelling in the air, as long as you're below the floor of the Class E
airspace.

--
Regards,

Stan

On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 13:31:23 -0500, "O. Sami Saydjari"
wrote:

A while back, I was with an experienced pilot, IMC, descending to land
at my home airport. The airport is not in an environment where ATC will
give vectors to final. As we approached, ATC asked which approach we
wanted. He said that he was "going for the visual." The ceilings were
right at the Minimum Safe altitude (MSA)--3000. I think ATC said that we
could descend to 3000 and report airport in sight.

Is this request of "going for the visual" usual?

Is it the norm if ceilings are above MSA?

-Sami
N2057M, Piper Turbo Arrow III

It has nothing to do with MSA. Basically, weather needs to be at least
1000/3, and the pilot needs to have the airport or an a/c to follow in
sight.

AIM 5-4-20. Visual Approach

a. A visual approach is conducted on an IFR flight plan and authorizes
a pilot to proceed visually and clear of clouds to the airport. The pilot
must have either the airport or the preceding identified aircraft in sight.
This approach must be authorized and controlled by the appropriate air
traffic control facility. Reported weather at the airport must have a
ceiling at or above 1,000 feet and visibility 3 miles or greater. ATC may
authorize this type approach when it will be operationally beneficial.
Visual approaches are an IFR procedure conducted under IFR in visual
meteorological conditions. Cloud clearance requirements of 14 CFR Section
91.155 are not applicable, unless required by operation specifications.

b. Operating to an Airport Without Weather Reporting Service. ATC will
advise the pilot when weather is not available at the destination airport.
ATC may initiate a visual approach provided there is a reasonable assurance
that weather at the airport is a ceiling at or above 1,000 feet and
visibility 3 miles or greater (e.g. area weather reports, PIREPs, etc.).

=======================

Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
...

It has nothing to do with MSA. Basically, weather needs to be at least
1000/3, and the pilot needs to have the airport or an a/c to follow in
sight.

AIM 5-4-20. Visual Approach

a. A visual approach is conducted on an IFR flight plan and authorizes
a pilot to proceed visually and clear of clouds to the airport. The pilot
must have either the airport or the preceding identified aircraft in
sight.
This approach must be authorized and controlled by the appropriate air
traffic control facility. Reported weather at the airport must have a
ceiling at or above 1,000 feet and visibility 3 miles or greater. ATC may
authorize this type approach when it will be operationally beneficial.
Visual approaches are an IFR procedure conducted under IFR in visual
meteorological conditions. Cloud clearance requirements of 14 CFR Section
91.155 are not applicable, unless required by operation specifications.

This tells you when you can commence and continue the visual approach. I
think the question was more on the lines of the appropriate communications
with ATC when you think there's a visual in your future, but you can't be
certain yet.

-- David Brooks

Ron Rosenfeld wrote:



It has nothing to do with MSA. Basically, weather needs to be at least
1000/3, and the pilot needs to have the airport or an a/c to follow in
sight.

While the 1000/3 applies because you have to have VFR to get a visual
the ceiling needs to be higher than that because there are no MVA's that
are even as low as 1000 feet. So practically speaking the ceiling needs
to be higher than the MVA for that area.

"Newps" wrote in message
news7Ddc.110245$JO3.77994@attbi_s04...

While the 1000/3 applies because you have to have VFR to get a
visual the ceiling needs to be higher than that because there are no
MVA's that are even as low as 1000 feet. So practically speaking
the ceiling needs to be higher than the MVA for that area.


An aircraft can sight the field through a broken layer and be cleared for a
visual approach.

On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 19:49:41 GMT, Newps wrote:

While the 1000/3 applies because you have to have VFR to get a visual
the ceiling needs to be higher than that because there are no MVA's that
are even as low as 1000 feet. So practically speaking the ceiling needs
to be higher than the MVA for that area.

It only has to be reported as 1000/3 at the airport, not at your present
position.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

Ron Rosenfeld wrote:
On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 19:49:41 GMT, Newps wrote:


While the 1000/3 applies because you have to have VFR to get a visual
the ceiling needs to be higher than that because there are no MVA's that
are even as low as 1000 feet. So practically speaking the ceiling needs
to be higher than the MVA for that area.


It only has to be reported as 1000/3 at the airport, not at your present
position.

That's true but if the ceiling really is only 1000 you ain't gettin' in.

"Newps" wrote in message
news:JfTdc.114206$JO3.80855@attbi_s04...

That's true but if the ceiling really is only 1000 you ain't gettin' in.


That's not necessarily true. A ceiling is the height above the surface of
the lowest layer of clouds or obscuring phenomenon that is reported as
broken, overcast, or obscuration. A broken layer covers 5/8 to 7/8 of the
sky, aircraft can sight the field with a broken layer at 1000 feet and be
cleared for a visual approach.

On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 14:10:50 GMT, Newps wrote:

That's true but if the ceiling really is only 1000 you ain't gettin' in.

If you restrict the "ceiling" to "overcast" conditions, I would agree. But
that often is not the case.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)