Departing VFR in fog
 

The SATCO of a controlled airfield which lies outside Controlled Airspace recently commented (in another place) that they get a lot of VFR departures in IMC (he particularly mentioned fog) from the >2T brigade.

I asked him whether he thought that there were any benefits to departing IFR in shallow fog, where the entire flight was outside controlled airspace.

I haven't had a response, presumably because he has been away, but can anyone here help?

I am thinking of the Oxford/Cranfield/Biggin/Filton world, in, say, R350, with tops at around 150' and no other weather. There is a take-off alternate and both destination and alternate are CAVOK.

But Timothy, if you don't depart IFR you don't get that warm fuzzy feeling from knowing that you've contributed to the NATS Fund for the UpKeep and Taking-care of IT... no hang on that can't be right the acronym is supposed to be FDPS... ;)

Timothy

For departures, it's entirely down to you as the PIC and whatever your CAA approved company op's manual says, or failing that, the restrictions that may pertain to your individual licence or ratings for the aeroplane.
As ATCOs or the Airport Authority, we cannot stop you departing because the RVR is below a certain level, the decision is yours.

It's always down to you to fly in accordance with your licence, and although we may report the facts if you do look as though you are doing something that is not safe, we can't stop you doing it - I have no desire to be a policeman, but I wonder how many lives would have been saved if we could just delay someone for that critical short while.

What you must bear in mind is that the CAA have issued each airfield in the UK where there is an instrument approach procedeure, with RVR minima for each type of approach. i.e if you want to do an NDB approach at Norwich and the with a CAA approach minima of RVR 900m and the RVR is 1000m, you cannot legally commence the approach.

As an experienced pilot, you will know that the UK weather is very fickle, and what can be CAVOK at the alternate can soon become fog and crap.

niknak

Thanks, but I am not really asking for a statement of the legal position, which I think I understand, nor am I discussing the arrival weather, which might be a weather system away in the S of France, I am asking specifically if anyone can think why an IFR departure in shallow fog would be better (in any terms; safety, regulation, economy, anything) than a VFR departure.

There is no reason why the IFR departure would be better.

If you wanted to depart VFR that's up to you, as it's up to you to fly within the limitations of your licence. The thing is if there were other departures at the time then no doubt the ATC unit concerned would separate you from other, IFR traffic. They would however probably appreciate a quick call when you were above the fog layer and in the clear (it's a two way street after all).

I know where you're coming from and I'm completely in agreement - why should you pay route charges for the whole flight when you're IMC for 30 seconds and VMC for the rest.

niknak: What if my company op doesn't have a manual?;)

ie, below 140kts, clear of cloud in sight of the surface, perfectly possible in 350m shallow fog.

Ironically, the potentially illegal bit would be once you pop out, but are still below 1000', in infinite vis.

Timothy,

For you at Biggin, departing IFR may cost more but Thames are obliged to give a radar service to an IFR departure (if we can't we have to tell you before you depart). May only be a Limited RIS.

The only other plus I can think of is in case you wanted to divert back immediately which means we could vector you at min sector altitude.

To fly VFR you have to have the ground in sight, as soon as you climb into fog you are no longer VFR.

No. Below 140kts, if you have the ground in sight, you are VFR, but you can be at FL75 with OVC with tops at 6000' and be VFR.

In the former case, if the visibility is 250m (a reasonable bet for R350) then you could climb to 750' and still be in sight of the surface. I am talking about 150' of shallow fog.

Alan, if I had to go back with an engine fire you would look after me on a Mayday squawk, IFR or VFR wouldn't you? Pretty please?

Dewdrop
Common misconception. Those of us with the relevant extra ratings do not have to have the ground in sight.

AlanM

Like Timothy I wouldn't be upset about not having a radar service for the first 300' of climb if I was in the knowledge that above that level it's going to be unlimited vis and no cloud above. The conditions themselves are naturally going to cut down the number of aircraft out anyway. I've departed a non-radar airfield under similar conditions in the same type that Timothy operates - the rate of climb of the aircraft (1000fpm+) makes the option perfectly acceptable.

Oh, yes, Chilli's post makes me realise that you are talking licence limitations.

If you are not instrument-rated this thread is not really relevant to you.

Here's the bit I don't get:

Minimum visibility for VFR is 1500m in class f or g. Fog is defined by its visibility being below 1000m. So how can you be VFR in Fog?

I suspect that you are confusing the definition of VMC (and hence conditions suitable for VFR) and licence limitations on those that do not hold an Instrument Rating.

One of the definitions of VMC (and hence the availability of VFR in Class G) is "Clear of cloud, in sight of the surface" provided the IAS is less than 140kts.

CM

I have no problem with you going VFR matey!! As an ATCO we don't police what you do outside controlled airspace to that extent.

Timothy - of course we would look after you (as we always do:))

But if you had a problem when there was patchy fog around and you WEREN'T visual it may take a while to get you over to us and vectored back (obviously you would be the priority traffic).

On the Biggin Hill scenario, what is the difference in price for a VFR/IFR (radar monitored) departure? You have oodles more experience and hours than me so only you can decide what is best.

Have fun (and watch out for the Epsom traffic!!)

Eh What !! I nip under my rock for a couple of days and look what happens.

Timothy, I do not want to get into legalities on this issue but for those not wishing to thumb through the books this is what the Rules of the Air has to say.

Flight outside controlled airspace

Rule 26
(1) An aircraft flying outside controlled airspace at or above flight level 100 shall remain at least 1500 metres horizontally and 1000 feet vertically away from cloud and in a flight visibility of at least 8 km.

(2)
(a) Subject to sub-paragraph (b), an aircraft flying outside controlled airspace below flight level 100 shall remain at least 1500 metres horizontally and 1000 feet vertically away from cloud and in a flight visibility of at least 5 km.

(b) Sub-paragraph (a) shall be deemed to be complied with if:

(i) the aircraft is flying at or below 3000 feet above mean sea level and remains clear of cloud and in sight of the surface and in a flight visibility of at least 5 km;

(ii) the aircraft, other than a helicopter, is flying at or below 3000 feet above mean sea level at a speed which according to its air speed indicator is 140 knots or less and remains clear of cloud and in sight of the surface and in flight visibility of at least 1500 metres; or

(iii) in the case of a helicopter the helicopter is flying at or below 3000 feet above mean sea level flying at a speed, which having regard to the visibility is reasonable, and remains clear of cloud and in sight of the surface.

Now in my thinking the lowest form of VFR outside CAS is in sub-para ii) which requires a flight vis of 1500 metres. So technically can you take off VFR in something less than that?

As other ATCOs have posted we are not policemen and I am not going to go into mega form filling on every occasion someone leaps off VFR in any sort of crud. I have been tempted to do so myself sometimes but the thought of what happens in a single engine aeroplane if it all go's quiet after lift off tends to keep me drinking coffee til things improve. :uhoh:

Things get more interesting when someone departs VFR in the murk and is then NOT on top of cloud. That is more commonplace around Biggin than the shallow fog scenario. Now I have launched someone VFR who is now IFR and I have certain added responsibilities as an ATCO, like ringing up AlanM and appologising for the pop-up IFR:{

That's what I was getting at SATCO, so unless I have misunderstood, you cannot legally depart VFR in any circumstances where visibility is less than 1500m, regardless of your licence limitations; can you?

Ah - but the in flight vis is different to the reported vis - so techincally yes! I know that the reported met vis is the lowest seen, but you could judge it to be legal (if departing outside CAS)

Similar as an airfield in a Control Zone - you have to have the correct met criteria to take off and land. However, only you can say what the in flight weather is where you are so a transit is allowed (and choice of VFR/SVFR!!!)

(did you get the PM I sent you SATCO KB re: LCY fun day!!?!?)

I don't think that there's any doubt that a departure in fog (< 1000m vis) is not VFR. The more interesting point is what operation benefit being IFR would confer.

The value of departing IFR in class G in good VMC is very limited: ATC provide separation from other participating IFR traffic, though most of the traffic about is likely to be VFR or non-participating.

Departing IFR with 8/8 ST/SC base 500ft tops 5000ft in a vis of 3000 m has rather more value. You probably won't see the traffic that you're likely to hit, thus having ATC separate you from other arrivals and departures while you're within, say, 15 miles of the field is worth having.

But departing IFR in shallow fog? The only thing you're likely to hit that you don't have the opportunity of seeing for yourself is someone attempting to use the runway at the same time. But separation in using the runway is part of the good ol' vanilla aerodrome control service provided to VFR flights too. Being IFR rather than VFR is, from an operational point of view, pretty much valueless.

That's what I understood as the point of Timothy's initial question, though I think some misunderstanding has cropped up as to whether it's legal to depart VFR in fog (by which I mean a vis forward from the cockpit of < 1000m). It's definitely not legal. It's just that it doesn't appear to do any harm to anyone except NATS shareholders...

....certainly makes my life easier if you go VFR!

:)

(don't forget that the London/London City Zones are PPR today and tomorrow due to the Epsom Derby - as they will be during Ascot week) More details in the AIC.

Epsom Supp AIC Entry
Ascot Supp AIC Entry

Grrrr! Thanks for that Alan. I was planning to be in the City Zone tomorrow afternoon, and the notice is useful. Damned horses... :*

Hey Bookie :)

I didn't say that you COULDN'T fly in the zone - just get the phone number from the AIC and if you PPR then it is OK.....subject to other traffic!!

I am on Saturday from 1330 so pm me with your callsign if you have PPR'd

Alan,

Just to put you in the picture, if I depart IFR from Biggin for, say Edinburgh, it will cost me about EIGHTY MOTHER F:mad: ING POUNDS.

If I am in the fog for fifteen seconds, that works out at £320 a minute :p

I strongly object to paying Eurocharges when I get no (or very little) service. For example, if I fly at night, after the entire LARS system shuts down, and never use the radio, I still have to pay NATS, a private company that has provided me with no service whatsoever.

I have no problem at all paying for flight on airways (though why I should and a TB20 shouldn't is beyond me), but the current system of making people like me pay a fortune for the whole journey if there is any hint of IFR at any point on the route is what leads us to take risks to avoid the charges.

The really silly thing is that the best way of not paying charges is to file an otherwise spurious VFR flight plan, thus making NATS do a whole lot of unnecessary work in order that they make no income!

The system is broke, but the chances of anyone fixing it are zilch, so I and the rest of us have to continue to buck it.

One very simple solution would be to release non-AOC aircraft below 5,700Kg from the charges.

Now...TAKE COVER, while TC_LTN explodes :}

SOLUTION!!!!

With todays computer systems this could be the way forward. You are given a squawk - and the computer tracks for how long you keep the sqauwk (certain ones for RIS/RAS/FIS)

Then you get a bill in the post for the service you received and it will work out how long/distance etc

ONE DAY I WILL BE CHIEF EXEC AND YOU WILL ALL BE IN TROUBLE!!


P.S. "Language Timothy!!!" - been waiting for years to say that mate.

Let's not divert from the main thread fella!!

The simple answer is:

If it's foggy why try to find a way to depart with increased risk?

Don't let commercial or other pressures influence safety!

I have to say that I agree - what's money compared with the consequences if you had a problem?

But this brings us full circle, does it add to safety to depart IFR under those circumstances?

Nothing I have heard makes me think so.

And the money is the difference between being able to afford it or not. £40 an hour is more than many people pay to fly in total...and it is being added onto my bill with no apparent benefit.

It adds to safety to not to depart at all if to do so would pose additional risk?

As the wise pilot says "it's far better being on the ground wishing to be in the air than being in the air wishing to be on the ground!".

If Timothy is making a private pleasure flight with absolutely no commercial pressure then there is absolutely no reason why he can not wait until the fog has cleared giving both legal and more enjoyable weather to fly in.

If on the other hand Timothy needs to get to Edinburgh for a business meeting then he is profiting from the trip and therefore can decide which is going to reduce that profit more - delay for VMC or pay Nav charges.

Having decided to pay Nav charges why not make the best use of the expense and make use of the services provided in return for payment of those charges - London FIS, Scottish FIS, Volmet, VOR/DME navaids are available at all times.

I think that this is penny pinching to be honnest. How much does it cost to fly the aircraft to and from Edinburgh?

Regards,

DFC

To be honest Timothy, I am amazed at how anti NATS route charges this has become (nowt to do with me guv!)

At the end of the day, you are an ex professional pilot, who displays expectionally good airmanship and ability. I am guessing here but you must spend a few £ keeping your IFR equipped twin and IFR rating current - not too mention lots of £ on a business trip from BIG-EDI. Why not use it!!

What's a few extra £ for an IFR departure, guaranteed radar service, a radar handover, and peace of mind.

I don't wish to harp on about push-on-itis and CFIT but there are loads of reports of low and high houred pilots getting it wrong - and keeping AAIB busy.

It's only money fella!!!

AlanM
How about because it's not guaranteed?

Let's move the scenario away from Biggin Hill. How about (as we need a controlled airport for the question to arise) Plymouth to Prestwick - on a weekend.

Get airborne from Plymouth. Non-radar airfield, no nearby radar unit. The weather scenario involved means an IFR departure would not benefit the aircraft at all (REMEMBER - this was the original question - NOT whether it was legal). Heading north. The next available ATC unit (I'm not including London info here because they can't separate, therefore they don't come into the IFR v VFR equation) would be Ronaldsway (non-NATS) and the next after that Prestwick (non-NATS).

DFC
And the above route, with the levels involved, rather negates everything you've suggested.

So - just because we put 'I' instead of 'V' on the flight plan we've paid £80 to NATS via Eurocontrol - and what have we got for it?

This was the whole point of Timothy's original question for those that haven't quite grasped it yet!

Eurocharges add about 25% to the DOC.

On the question of going airways if you are paying EC, yes in principal, but I then have to fly further, am subject to slot delays and have less flexibility in weather avoidance.

Quick straw poll. Does anyone here pay EC (themselves) and advocate paying them?

One advantage of departing IFR (although it really depends how 'public spirited' you are as to whether you view it as such) is that you do your small part towards funding the LARS service which, as you state, you will take advantage of whether VFR or IFR. At least you are contributing to a service that you may be able to take advantage of. I would suggest it is more appropriate for you to assist with it's funding than British Airways who rarely, if ever, use the service yet, under the present funding formula, end up footing the majority of the bill.

Perhaps, the LARS service itself would be more comprehensive if the charges were set at a realistic level and directed at all those who wish to take advantage of the service or would all those recipients be as reluctant to pay as you?

I find a degree of irony in the fact that you are complaining about the charge yet you are one of the few people who, in the case of LARS, is actually paying for a service that you use!

You have the kit and the qualifications to go airways and therefore 'make use' of the 80 quid you are complaining about paying yet that STILL isn't good enough for you!!! :confused: :rolleyes:

What is the point? :confused:

Chilli Monster

I hear what you are saying, and obviously I cannot speak for Plymouth, but Timothy's home base is Biggin Hill.

An IFR departure outside CAS from BIG IS guaranteed a radar service. We have no option - it is part of the service provision between Biggin and NATS. It is in our MATS pt 2 and if we are unable to provide a radar service (due workload etc) we must inform the pilot BEFORE departure so he may delay/accept a FIS/FAS!! (Does Luton HAVE to provide a radar service to Elstree IFR departures joining airways??) I am sure the same is true for places ATSU's outside CAS with radar.

Anyway - it's all swings and roundabouts - you don't pay for the service of pleasure flying in the London Zones and getting a RIS with Thames when you depart VFR! Surely it all evens itself out.

We are not a something-for-nothing provider any more. We (NATS) are in the harsh commercial world now matey.

Oh god - this has changed to a route charges topic. Something I have NO knowledge or interest in!!! EJECT!

No - in this particular circumstance you've become a 'nothing for something provider. (And I know all about the 'Harsh, Commercial World' - I work for the other lot ;) )

I think the problem is you're not expanding your mind to the problem. Stop thinking provincially and think outside the 'Biggin / Thames' box.

Once you get outside of your part of the world, at weekends - there's Jack S**t in terms of service provision over a vast amount of the country - yet once that 'I' goes on the flight plan you get screwed for nothing.

Put it another way. You go to a restaurant, you order a meal. You get an aperitif, but nothing else. Two hours later you're given a bill for all three courses, drinks and coffee which you're then expected to pay before you leave.

How would you feel?

I agree with the above, but if you're going to provide a service outside regulated airspace then it's time we stopped this 'piece-meal' approach to ATC that we in Britain are so good at.

If you're going to charge then place a levy on everyone and provide a service everywhere. If you can't provide everywhere then either a) don't provide at all or b) leave it up to individual units whether they participate in some form of service, with no LARS funding.

OK - lets talk about this other world outside my box!!

So if you file IFR you have to pay for an IFR service if you stay outside CAS irrespective as to whether or not you get a radar/any service?

And anyway.....

That is a great description of where we are with the airlines and LARS. They help fund it so what do they get in return?

I agree with VA here.... I am not sure what the point of this thread is!

Timothy is complaining about having to pay nav charges because he puts I in the flight plan when flying non-airways from Biggin to Edinburgh while the only bit of IMC flying will be done during the first minute.

Why on earth is this guy filing a flight plan? - none of the LARS units and the London FIR person will not get a copy (unlesss he addresses it directly and then they will probably ignore it).

Book out from Biggin IFR. Talk to whoever one likes enroute just like any other VFR flight and make a VFR clearance request to Edinburgh. If the fog is only 500ft deep there will be no need for a radar service from Thames.

Thus - no flight plan - no enroute nav charges. and a legal flight to boot.

---

Chilli,

How does the pilot find his way legally from Plymouth to Prestwick? The Volmet is available on the ground in Prestwick so no doubt it is available mush further away as 5000ft plus!

Regards,

DFC

And get charged route charges :) .

It's not just on the basis of the submission of the flight plan. Aerodromes are also required to submit copies of logs with whether aircraft departed IFR or VFR. On the basis of these route charges are incurred.

Sorry, you're going to have to explain this one to me as I (and I expect many others) haven't got a clue what you're talking about!

A deeply flawed understanding of the System, I fear.