Special VFR

[poke-her player]

that's not min VFR, 300' and clear of cloud is min VFR. sometimes the Wx is to bad to go IFR but still good to go VFR. With the approach ban in effect and vis required at over a mile, it's legal and usually safe to request a special to get into an airport that would otherwise have an approach ban which means the operator now has a smaller fuel reserve which means the plane can legally carry more weight.

I love the CARs.

either way yes CFIT is an issue in aviation but 3 miles would not really be considered Min VFR

[GilletteNorth]

SVFR procedures now leaves the determination of whether the ceiling will affect flight within the zone in the pilot's hands. However, the rule requiring pilots to maintain 500 ft AGL and 500 ft clear of cloud did not change. The SVFR rule change was made to allow flight within the zone without having to request SVFR when the conditions allowed it. I'm seeing pilots using the rule change now to transit the zone when it's obvious the conditions are not appropriate.

[poke-her player]

I'm seeing pilots using the rule change now to transit the zone when it's obvious the conditions are not appropriate.

I don't know what conditions you consider inappropriate but I would be quite interested to know what commercial flight experiance you have and where you gained that experiance?

[Jonathan]

I'm seeing pilots using the rule change now to transit the zone when it's obvious the conditions are not appropriate.

I observe the same thing, but also with arrivals and departures. Many times ceiling was around 600ft and crew departed / arrived anyway without SVFR. How can this be possible?

[GilletteNorth]

Pilots do not issue the METAR. I'M the one doing the weather observing and reporting the conditions within my control zone. I'm not a commercial pilot. What I AM is a FSS with years of experience observing weather conditions. If you are a pilot, it's fairly obvious what conditions I'm referring to. I can easily see low clouds that are overcast and quite stable and uniform in their height above the ground. I have many methods of determining that cloud height quite accurately. I can also watch supposedly VFR aircraft transitting my zone within sight underneath those very same clouds. All it will take is one or two instances of an IFR aircraft doing the approach and popping out under the cloud deck coming too close to or even colliding with a low flying VFR aircraft transitting the zone without having requested SVFR when it should have, for the decision that changed the method of applying the SVFR rule to be reversed again.

I should mention that the rule concerning 500ft AGL and clear of cloud does not apply to departing/arriving aircraft. You may be less than 500 ft AGL but still have the requirement to remain clear of cloud during arrival/departure.

Here's an example of my concern. My control zone has a 5nm radius and has a water aerodrome 3 nm south of the main airport. That means during conditions of an overcast ceiling below 1000 ft, an aircraft coming in from the north to land at the waterbase must fly 8 nm under low cloud to get to the waterbase. There is higher and lower terrain in the vicinity. If there ever is a crash I wonder if Transport Canada will allow someone to argue that they needed to fly a low level 8 nm long final. They usually circle to line up into wind within the last 2 nm which is the actual landing phase. What comes before is called transitting.

[Bushav8er]

Remedial training seems to be in order.

1) What airspace are you operating in? Towards? AIM 2.8
2) What are the VFR weather limits for those Classes of airspace? AIM 7.7.3
3) What is the minimum enroute altitude? AIM 5.5 Min Alt - VFR /AIM 5.6 Min Alt - Overflying Aerodrome

An airport with a dashed line around it is a 'control zone' and weather limits for such are 3 mi, 1m and 500' clear of cloud and 500' agl. You can not apply the 500' from cloud and no agl rule for class E as it is based at 2200' agl! The zone maybe class E but it IS A CONTROL ZONE! (AIM 7.7.3 Fig 2.7) Request the Special.
Additionally, if you are transiting a 'zone' you are deemed OVER an airport and that has to happen at 2000'. Please stay clear if you do not have to be there.

[Jonathan]

I should mention that the rule concerning 500ft AGL and clear of cloud does not apply to departing/arriving aircraft. You may be less than 500 ft AGL but still have the requirement to remain clear of cloud during arrival/departure.

That's right but when they have departed, or before they start their "arrival phase", they must be 500ft AGL and 500ft from clouds. Therefore in order for a pilot to depart or arrive when ceiling is below 1000 ft, the ceiling MUST be higher outside the airport so when they are not in arrival or departure phase, ceiling is 1000ft or higher.

[Bushav8er]

I should mention that the rule concerning 500ft AGL and clear of cloud does not apply to departing/arriving aircraft. You may be less than 500 ft AGL but still have the requirement to remain clear of cloud during arrival/departure.

That's right but when they have departed, or before they start their "arrival phase", they must be 500ft AGL and 500ft from clouds. Therefore in order for a pilot to depart or arrive when ceiling is below 1000 ft, the ceiling MUST be higher outside the airport so when they are not in arrival or departure phase, ceiling is 1000ft or higher.

Actually the rule concerning 500ft AGL and clear of cloud does not apply because you are in a Class E Control Zone. They can be less than 500' BUT the ceiling still has to be 1000' (VFR) to allow the 500' cloud clearance, otherwise a Special to depart/arrive IS required. If the airspace they are entering on departure from the 'zone' is Class G and they intend to remain below 2200' agl, all they need is 'clear' of cloud (plus required vis). If they intend to climb above 2200' the ceiling would have to be 2700' to allow them to be the 500' clear (below) of cloud. Don't forget that a 'transition zone' may be around the airport basing the class E at 700' agl; class G below.

The only time clear of cloud applies is when the airspace & airport lay in class G which is topped at 2200' agl.

[W0XOF]

[poke-her player]

I'm not a commercial pilot. What I AM is a FSS with years of experience observing weather conditions. If you are a pilot, it's fairly obvious what conditions I'm referring to

yep, and remember those Wx limits drop the second we leave the control zone so the only thing standing between a legal flgiht acomplished and a phone call from transport enforcment is people in your position.

The only time clear of cloud applies is when the airspace & airport lay in class G which is topped at 2200' agl.

so if I'm 100 miles north of Yellow knife at FL170 what class of airspace am I in?

edited for the quote button

[poke-her player]

Just for shits and giggles can some one tell me why there are distances from cloud at night?

[Bushav8er]

so if I'm 100 miles north of Yellow knife at FL170 what class of airspace am I in?

You have to ask? Class G and only because you (I assume) are nowhere near airways or airports which is what the Class E surrounds. Remember, again, we are talking about Special VFR and that means Control Zones.

Just for shits and giggles can some one tell me why there are distances from cloud at night?

Because if they didn't S P E L L* I T * O U T people like you would think that at night its okay to enter cloud just because you can't see them. Its TCs way of saying; day or night - same rules apply BUT you need more vis at night. I think too that TAFs, METARs and GFAs apply - you should have in idea where you'll find cloud - avoid it.

Now please stop trying to stir the sh*t and let those that don't get it, and want to learn, do so without dumb comments - thanks.

[poke-her player]

Now please stop trying to stir the sh*t and let those that don't get it, and want to learn, do so without dumb comments - thanks.

alright you busted me.......I know there's a pretty picture of Airspace and the different rules for vis anyone have a link to it?

[Bushav8er]

Fair question - here's the link -

http://www.tc.gc.ca/publications/BIL/TP ... P6010B.PDF

[W0XOF]

Bushav8er, I for one appreciate all the time you put in on this. Did it ever feel like beating a dead horse ? No need to reply.

[GilletteNorth]

I should mention that the rule concerning 500ft AGL and clear of cloud does not apply to departing/arriving aircraft. You may be less than 500 ft AGL but still have the requirement to remain clear of cloud during arrival/departure.

Sorry if I accidentally misinformed anyone. I looked in the CARs and read that section in the uncontrolled airspace rules section and should have gotten it right. I guess I got confused having read the rule and thinking the aircraft has to decend below 500 ft at some point to land. But it goes to show I was correct in thinking pilots should not be transitting the control zone to land without having 500 and 500.

[GilletteNorth]

GilletteNorth: All it will take is one or two instances of an IFR aircraft doing the approach and popping out under the cloud deck coming too close to or even colliding with a low flying VFR aircraft transitting the zone without having requested SVFR when it should have, for the decision that changed the method of applying the SVFR rule to be reversed again.

and it starts... (AOR filed yesterday)

Aircraft1 IFR-inbound for runway XX. Numerous VFR aircraft waiting for SVFR to enter and exit the control zone. Aircraft2 (vfr) first reported 20 E inbound, an airport advisory was passed including the IFR traffic and the ceiling at 500 feet (visibility was 8 miles). Aircraft2 proceeded inbound for landing runway XX without requesting SVFR and joined a 4 nm final with Aircraft1 procedure turn inbound. Aircraft1 stated he would have to miss because he didn't have traffic in sight. Aircraft1 broke out of cloud at the VOR and advised he had traffic in sight and would cancel IFR and circle for runway XX. Traffic information was passed and updated frequently between the Aircraft1 and Aircraft2. Aircraft1 landed safely runway XX. The pilot for Aircraft1 expressed concern at the presence of Aircraft2 in IMC weather.

[Bushav8er]

GilletteNorth: All it will take is one or two instances of an IFR aircraft doing the approach and popping out under the cloud deck coming too close to or even colliding with a low flying VFR aircraft transitting the zone without having requested SVFR when it should have, for the decision that changed the method of applying the SVFR rule to be reversed again.

and it starts... (AOR filed yesterday)

Aircraft1 IFR-inbound for runway XX. Numerous VFR aircraft waiting for SVFR to enter and exit the control zone. Aircraft2 (vfr) first reported 20 E inbound, an airport advisory was passed including the IFR traffic and the ceiling at 500 feet (visibility was 8 miles). Aircraft2 proceeded inbound for landing runway XX without requesting SVFR and joined a 4 nm final with Aircraft1 procedure turn inbound. Aircraft1 stated he would have to miss because he didn't have traffic in sight. Aircraft1 broke out of cloud at the VOR and advised he had traffic in sight and would cancel IFR and circle for runway XX. Traffic information was passed and updated frequently between the Aircraft1 and Aircraft2. Aircraft1 landed safely runway XX. The pilot for Aircraft1 expressed concern at the presence of Aircraft2 in IMC weather.

There was one out this way a few weeks ago with an IFR and a float driver - claimed he wasn't in cloud but that's where they 'found' him. (Uncontrolled airspace)

Glad everything ended safely but of interest is this part:

ceiling at 500 feet (visibility was 8 miles)

&

Aircraft1 broke out of cloud at the VOR and advised he had traffic in sight and would cancel IFR and circle for runway

Sorry, but he wasn't VFR either and can't/shouldn't cancel the IFR, unless he too requested - and got - the Special.

[Jonathan]

Aircraft1 IFR-inbound for runway XX. Numerous VFR aircraft waiting for SVFR to enter and exit the control zone. Aircraft2 (vfr) first reported 20 E inbound, an airport advisory was passed including the IFR traffic and the ceiling at 500 feet (visibility was 8 miles). Aircraft2 proceeded inbound for landing runway XX without requesting SVFR and joined a 4 nm final with Aircraft1 procedure turn inbound. Aircraft1 stated he would have to miss because he didn't have traffic in sight. Aircraft1 broke out of cloud at the VOR and advised he had traffic in sight and would cancel IFR and circle for runway XX. Traffic information was passed and updated frequently between the Aircraft1 and Aircraft2. Aircraft1 landed safely runway XX. The pilot for Aircraft1 expressed concern at the presence of Aircraft2 in IMC weather.

That doesn't seem right to me!

[faszkalap]

Here's a situation where you can maintain VFR with a reported vis greater than 3SM and ceiling lower than 1000ftAGL. Station elevation is 350ftASL. Ceiling is reported as 800ftAGL. An aircraft is transitting along the shoreline at 500ftASL but within the control zone. That puts him at 500ft above ground/water and 650ft below cloud. Sounds like VFR to me.

[Bushav8er]

Here's a situation where you can maintain VFR with a reported vis greater than 3SM and ceiling lower than 1000ftAGL. Station elevation is 350ftASL. Ceiling is reported as 800ftAGL. An aircraft is transitting along the shoreline at 500ftASL but within the control zone. That puts him at 500ft above ground/water and 650ft below cloud. Sounds like VFR to me.

Interesting. I suppose you could argue that point but then everyone could say the same thing; 'I was in the valley not over the hill'. I would think that TC's legal would say some thing more like this:

CARs 101 - - Interpretation: "IMC" or "instrument meteorological conditions" - means meteorological conditions less than the minima specified in Division VI of Subpart 2 of Part VI for visual meteorological conditions, expressed in terms of visibility and distance from cloud;

That means weather less then the required visibility and distance from cloud for VFR in controlled or uncontrolled airspace is IMC. Which in itself means that you don't have to be physically 'in cloud' to be legally found to be 'in cloud'.

This incidentally is the same argument TC has used for 'over' the highest obstacle under 'Minimum Altitudes and Distances' 602.14(2). If you are nearer than 2000' horizontally you are 'legally' considered to be 'over' the obstacle (or rather illegally over it). I would suspect that they would argue that the 'station' takes legal precedence in determining limits and altitudes, if you are 'in the zone'.

You do present an interesting point though.

[GilletteNorth]

Again, due to the rule change it's the pilot's responsibility to request SVFR. The aircraft that came in while the IFR was on approach probably should have asked for SVFR and would have been denied. So he doesn't ask for it because it would delay his entry into the zone. The IFR aircraft probably should have asked for SVFR prior to cancelling. The report doesn't indicate whether he did but I'd guess it didn't happen. So twice in one incident pilots probably had conditions where SVFR could have been authorized but didn't ask for it.

[av8tor604]

Regarding aircraft flying VFR when an IFR aircraft is approaching the airport IMC with CIGS below 1000ft... don't you think it is responsibility of pilot and maybe even MF operator to remind VFR pilot to REMAIN CLEAR OF THE APPROACH AREA of the IFR aircraft inbound?.... I landed just this evening VFR with 800ft CIGS while an IFR aircraft was approaching IMC... I changed runways to stay clear of the approach area/path.. if I was not able too, I would have stayed well clear if I knew I could not make it in before they got close. It should be this way anyway, regardless if airplane is IFR or VFR.... UNLESS the VFR is Nordo... then there is a problem I suppose, but what are the odds of that.. everyone has cell phones now... either way, if SVFR not required... maybe TC should make it required or change the CARs.

[W0XOF]

What's an MF operator......................

[av8tor604]

What's an MF operator......................

Mother F.... jk... Mandatory Frequency.... the "Controller"