Bookworm
You have to apply lateral thinking to get to a VFR exemption from the Rule
Rule 40 states:
Use of radio navigation aids
40 (1) Subject to paragraph (2), the commander of an aircraft shall not make use of any radio navigation aid without complying with such restrictions and appropriate procedures as may be notified in relation to that aid unless authorised by an air traffic control unit.
(2) The commander of an aircraft shall not be required to comply with this rule if he is required to comply with rule 31.
So if we jump to Rule 31 :
Flight plan and air traffic control clearance
31(1) In order to comply with the Instrument Flight Rules, before an aircraft either takes off from a point within any controlled airspace or otherwise flies within any controlled airspace the commander of the aircraft shall cause a flight plan to be communicated to the appropriate air traffic control unit and shall obtain an air traffic control clearance based on such flight plan.
(2)Not included - not relevant to this thread.
(3) (a) subject to sub-paragraph (b), the commander of the aircraft shall fly in conformity with:
(i) the air traffic control clearance issued for the flight, as amended by any further instructions given by an air traffic control unit; and
(ii) (aa) the instrument departure procedures notified in relation to the aerodrome of departure unless he is otherwise authorised by the appropriate air traffic control unit; and
(bb) the holding and instrument approach procedures notified in relation to the aerodrome of destination unless he is otherwise authorised by the appropriate air traffic control unit.
(b) The commander of the aircraft shall not be required to comply with subparagraph (a) if
(i) he is able to fly in uninterrupted Visual Meteorological Conditions for so long as he remains in controlled airspace; and
(ii) he has informed the appropriate air traffic control unit of his intention to continue the flight in compliance with Visual Flight Rules and has requested that unit to cancel his flight plan.
So, if someone files IFR with any portion of flight in CAS, but then cancels to go VFR (perhaps doing so with an En Route ATC agency or a FIS service, not necessarily the airfield ATC unit), they do not need to comply with Rule 31 Para 3 (a) but only Rule 31 Para 3 (b). By complying with the relevant part of Rule 31, they can be exempt from Rule 40
It may not be the intention, but the relevant part of Rule 31 doesn't state that you have to remain in CAS at the point where you are using the navaid, does it ??
In other words, I could depart from Bristol IFR (in CAS), comply with relevant clearances until clear of CAS, cancel IFR and go VFR with London Info, and then make a VFR approach using the navaids at Shoreham (which is closed). It would all be down the the legal interpretation of what would be an 'appropriate ATS unit' to cancel the IFR plan with, thus allowing me exemption from Rule 31 Para 3 (a) and subsequently Rule 40. I would argue that London Info is an 'appropriate' unit to do so with. I suspect the CAA mean it to be an appropriate ATS unit related to the navaid, but as this is not implicitly stated, it is arguable in court.
For someone flying VFR the whole way, or flying IFR wholly outwith CAS before going VFR whilst still outside CAS, it is perhaps not as clear cut, but there are certainly things a good aviation lawyer could pick up on to argue with
