VFR in IMC - Kasper Aviation

[VSF]

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regu ... #s-602.114

Looks like the VFR weather minimum rules still talk about distances from clouds.

[tvguru]

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regu ... #s-602.114

Looks like the VFR weather minimum rules still talk about distances from clouds.

I must say I'm surprised this was a debatable point. I didn't think I'd need to dig out the CAR, I was expecting an "oh right".

Cover you butts everyone, know the rules, follow the rules. The pilots are the first to have the finger pointed at and worse, the first to the accident scene.

[tipsails]

Here are a few things to keep in mind when flying VFR in a control zone:

There is no minimum reported ceiling for VFR flight in a control zone. It is left up to the pilot to ensure he can maintain at least 500 ft below cloud and legal altitude above ground regardless of the METAR reported ceiling.
Canadian Aviation Regulation (CAR) 602.14 still applies. For example, if you are over a “built-up area”, you will need to maintain at least 1 000 ft above obstacles.
In a control zone, you must have both 3 mi. flight visibility and 3 mi. ground visibility (if reported).
ATC, FSS or CARS will tell you that “IFR OR SVFR IS REQUIRED” any time the ground visibility is below 3 mi. It’s the pilot’s responsibility to ensure you can comply with all the minima, so if any of the other five are a problem, you need SVFR or IFR.

It's poorly worded but it leaves it up to the interpretation of the pilot. Grey area so to speak. Should you be entering a control zone for the purpose of landing you technically don't need to adhere to the 500 feet AGL rule. Not to say it should be the norm but I've only been notified of "IFR or SVFR required" when the METAR is reporting under on NM. Never have I hear this when the ceiling is below 1000 feet.

Source; https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/ ... 2-6281.htm

[tvguru]

Here are a few things to keep in mind when flying VFR in a control zone:

There is no minimum reported ceiling for VFR flight in a control zone. It is left up to the pilot to ensure he can maintain at least 500 ft below cloud and legal altitude above ground regardless of the METAR reported ceiling.
Canadian Aviation Regulation (CAR) 602.14 still applies. For example, if you are over a “built-up area”, you will need to maintain at least 1 000 ft above obstacles.
In a control zone, you must have both 3 mi. flight visibility and 3 mi. ground visibility (if reported).
ATC, FSS or CARS will tell you that “IFR OR SVFR IS REQUIRED” any time the ground visibility is below 3 mi. It’s the pilot’s responsibility to ensure you can comply with all the minima, so if any of the other five are a problem, you need SVFR or IFR.

It's poorly worded but it leaves it up to the interpretation of the pilot. Grey area so to speak. Should you be entering a control zone for the purpose of landing you technically don't need to adhere to the 500 feet AGL rule. Not to say it should be the norm but I've only been notified of "IFR or SVFR required" when the METAR is reporting under on NM. Never have I hear this when the ceiling is below 1000 feet.

Source; https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/ ... 2-6281.htm

Thanks for that.

I would argue that it doesn't leave the interpretation up to the pilot, but up to the tribunal whether or not the whole time you were in the control zone you were landing. Technically you're first joining the circuit even if it's straight in on final, then you are landing.

About 4 or 5 years back FSS would always call it IFR in the zone when the ceiling was <1000', but their policy changed.

My only point is don't be in the gray, don't leave anything up to anyone else. If I ever have to go in front of the tribunal or a judge I don't want them to have an opportunity to interpret. It is you and your career on the line.

[Firebird67]

Can some one tell me if that ja8 or what ever it is can fly into known ice with no protection on that aircraft I can't see that legal? Watched them land when Medivacs were going missed... Or is lcl frz drizzle not considered known icing now?

[Redneck_pilot86]

Here are a few things to keep in mind when flying VFR in a control zone:

There is no minimum reported ceiling for VFR flight in a control zone. It is left up to the pilot to ensure he can maintain at least 500 ft below cloud and legal altitude above ground regardless of the METAR reported ceiling.
Canadian Aviation Regulation (CAR) 602.14 still applies. For example, if you are over a “built-up area”, you will need to maintain at least 1 000 ft above obstacles.
In a control zone, you must have both 3 mi. flight visibility and 3 mi. ground visibility (if reported).
ATC, FSS or CARS will tell you that “IFR OR SVFR IS REQUIRED” any time the ground visibility is below 3 mi. It’s the pilot’s responsibility to ensure you can comply with all the minima, so if any of the other five are a problem, you need SVFR or IFR.

It's poorly worded but it leaves it up to the interpretation of the pilot. Grey area so to speak. Should you be entering a control zone for the purpose of landing you technically don't need to adhere to the 500 feet AGL rule. Not to say it should be the norm but I've only been notified of "IFR or SVFR required" when the METAR is reporting under on NM. Never have I hear this when the ceiling is below 1000 feet.

Source; https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/ ... 2-6281.htm

My COM states, in regards to a control zone:
i) Flight visibility, and when reported, ground visibility shall not be less than 3 miles.

ii) Distance from cloud shall not be less than at least 500' vertically and 1 mile horizontally.

iii) SVFR may be authorized by an ATC unit when the flight visibility (in the absence of a reported ground visibility), is not less than 1 mile and the airplane is operated clear of cloud with reference to the surface at all times for the purpose of allowing an aircraft to land at destination. Aircraft shall be equipped with a radio capable of comunicating with the ATC unit. When operating SVFR at night, ATC will only authorize special VFR for the purpose of allowing an aircraft to land at destination. No SVFR will be authorized for departures at night.

I dont see a way to come into a control zone in 003OVC in daylight, let alone at night. If there are companies with an allowance for 300' in a control zone, I'd be surprised. I have it for uncontrolled airspace, like most 703 operators.

My COM states, in regards to VFR in uncontrolled airspace:
Where day operations are conducted at less than 1000' AGL;
i)flight visibility must not be less than 2 miles
ii)the aircraft is operated clear of cloud,
iii)during the day, at less than 300'AGL or at a horizontal distance of less than 300' from any obstacle.

So, even in daylight, in uncontrolled airspace, I dont see how you can maintain 300 AGL and clear of cloud when the cloud is at 300 AGL.

Except when conducting a take-off or landing, no person shall operate an aircraft in VFR flight

(a) at night, at less than 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle located within a horizontal distance of three miles from the route to be flown; or

(b) where the aircraft is an aeroplane, during the day, at less than 300 feet AGL or at a horizontal distance of less than 300 feet from any obstacle.

[2R]

Or you could take the bus .

http://www.tbnewswatch.com/News/375967/ ... h%E2%80%9D
New bus line helps connect “Hub of the North”BUSINESS


By tbnewswatch.com

Sioux Lookout calls itself the Hub of the North, but the 400-kilometre drive from Thunder Bay can sometimes present barriers for people looking to get to and from the town.

That's where Kasper Mini-Bus comes in.

The newly purchased bus line runs a daily route from Thunder Bay to Sioux Lookout, with stops in Ignace and Upsala.

Complete with free Wi-Fi and a GPS tracking system, the 16 passenger bus is drawing a steady crowd every day.

From Monday to Friday, the bus departs from Thunder Bay at 9:30 a.m., and arrives in Sioux Lookout at 1:30 p.m. Central Time.

From there it picks up new passengers at 2 p.m. and arrives back in Thunder Bay around 7:30 p.m.

General Manager of the bus line, Kristian Kuznak, says the service is an important one.

The bus line owns two new Mercedes Sprinter buses, and is looking to add more routes in Northwestern Ontario in the future.

(TBT News)

[cncpc]

As long as it's done safely that's all that matters.

Safety is paramount. A good pilot knows his limits and knows when to say NO.

Hmmm...what about a bad pilot?

[SuperchargedRS]

Can some one tell me if that ja8 or what ever it is can fly into known ice with no protection on that aircraft I can't see that legal? Watched them land when Medivacs were going missed... Or is lcl frz drizzle not considered known icing now?

I fly a fully IFR FIKI PC12 and we don't even mess with anything with the word "freezing" in it.

You can probably get away with breaking TC rules left and right if you're stealthy about it.

You will not get away with breaking the rules of physics and aerodynamics however.

Playing in icing conditions, especially freezing rain,dz,etc in a nonFIKI GA8, man you're playing Russian roulette there.

[Les Habitants]

As long as it's done safely that's all that matters.

Safety is paramount. A good pilot knows his limits and knows when to say NO.

Good LORD. You made this thread worth reading alone!

Come to the states and try that sometime. You'd get your license taken away so fast you wouldn't even know where it went.

But you're right, the Mexican ILS is so much safer than the traditional NDB approach so let's do it...and bury a king air into the lake.

[ReserveTank]

It's the same discussion year after year. Nothing's going to change up North. Even dead pilots and scrap aircraft won't change it.