OK let me try and make this as simple as possible.
You are not making it simple, you are dragging the debate out by shifting your argument around to avoid answering the points made in reply to you. In my prior post I said
"I understand your point to be that it is
illegal to
depart on a VFR flight from A to B unless VMC is forecast for the entire flight."
Am I right that this is your point? If so, it isn't true.
Nevertheless, I will try and answer your most recent points.
In your Glasgow to Southampton example, you have chosen the most extreme case - one in which there is little or no uncertainty about the weather, and in which plainly a VFR flight is not going to get to Southampton. Nevertheless, I do not believe it is illegal to depart Glasgow on a VFR flight (if in VMC) aiming to fly VFR to Southampton as long as you
(a) you plan for the forecast weather - which, in this case, means plan on not getting very far enroute and needing to return
(b) ensure you maintain VMC and can maintain for a safe return
Clearly such a flight would be pointless and inefficient. You carefully use the phrase "ok" in
Are you seriously telling me that it is OK to depart for Southampton?
If by "ok" you mean "legal" then yes, I believe it is legal to depart in VMC on such a flight.
However, you then say
If you do then by your own admission you have departed on a VFR flight that will not be VFR which is illegal.
Which is nonsense. Where does it say that a VFR flight must have a weather forecast that says "it will be VFR" in order for it to be legal? You must depart in and maintain VMC to be legal, but, after departure, VMC is evaluated as an in-flight condition - not a determination before a flight has even departed that it is illegal
in principle because IMC is forecast enroute or at the intended destination.
Weather forecasts are inherently unpredictable and imprecise. The "legal point" you have invented would be unworkable and unreasonable in almost any scenario other than one of
certainty of IMC along any possible route and level. The sensible thing, given this uncertainty, is how aviation law actually works
- you have to get the weather forecasts and determine what kind of conditions you may encoutner
- you have to maintain VMC in flight
- you have to ensure adequate fuel reserves to land safely maintaining VMC
This means it is legal to depart and see if a VFR flight can be completed in the actual conditions that prevail, as long as VMC and adequate fuel reserves can be met.
I am not debating what is wise, or ok, or prudent etc. You wrote "illegal" in the last quote above from your post, and that is all I am debating.
a) is simple a lack of knowledge / practice / training.
b) Is plain stupid and illegal.
Before you tell us again why it is illegal, and since you are so vociferous on the subject, please show us the legal reference. You say Bookworm needs more training (probably I do to). Fine, imagine we do and want to learn VFR aviation law and flight planning the DFC way. Where is the reference that will educate us? I don't even need an ANO paragraph, even a line in a flight training book or publication that says "it is illegal to depart on a VFR flight unless VFR is forecast for the entire intended route".
You won't, because there is no such reference.
If you want to make points about good practice in VFR flight planning and the risks of inadvertent VFR into IMC flight (or even worse, deliberate VFR into IMC) then please do. There are very many important points to be made. I suspect I probably would agree with them. But they don't need the added confusion you create by making up aviation laws. Sorry, this provokes the forum debater in me.