VFR flight on-top

[Krallu]

Hello.

Somebody knowing the rules for on-top VFR flying with the new JAR rules?

According to the old rules in Sweden there was 150 hours total to have before allowed to fly on-top. But now the JAR rules doesn't have any such rule. Is it the old rules that are in charge then or aren't there any rquirements for flying on-top VFR now any longer?

Thanks!

[topcat450]

If sweden is the same as the UK...VFR on top is a no-no without either an IMC (UK only rating) or IR.

The normall PPL restricts you to being 'within sight of the surface'...you may have some grandfather rights in your particular country but under JAA - I wouldn't count on it.

[Krallu]

Sweden

Hi!

Ok. But in Sweden according to the old rules you are allowed to fly on-top if you have total 150 hours and if the clouds is below BKN at start aerodrome and destination.

But now with the new rules its a bit confusing. Because the new rules doesn't say anything about on-top. So is it then allowed without the 150 hours or is the old rules still the one to be followed or is on-top completly forbidden?

[topcat450]

I would assume it's forbidden unless the swedish CAA have specifically said you can ...as with a regular JAA licence you can't fly VFR on-top, so if your licence is now a JAA one, you probably can't. It maybe worthwhile getting a final yes or no from your authority themselves.

[david viewing]

As someone who flies in UK and US this interests me. Although VFR on top is standard for a US PPL, I can't do it in the US because of my restrictive UK licence despite having completed a US BFR and having an FAA reciprocal licence. So I wonder if anyone can answer these questions that arise:

1) Is there any good reason for this restriction in the UK (or JAA) when the same is considered acceptable in the much more rugged USA?

2) Is VFR on top in the UK defined in terms of cloud cover? Is flying above the merest wisp of cloud considered 'on top'? what about scattered or broken conditions when the ground is clearly visible below?

3) If I get a stand alone FAA PPL, can I use it to legally fly 'on top' in UK?

Sorry there's no Swedish connotation.
David.

[jezbowman]

From what I understand you're still in sight of the surface while above no more that 4/8 cloud.

I thought the French are still allowed to do VFR on top so their licenses must read differently (i.e. no "in sight of the surface" phrase).

Krallu - what does your license say in the privilages or limtations section? Or perhaps you could check out the Swedish Avaiation Authority website?

Why we don't allow it here - don't really know. But my thinking is it's a really bad idea anyway without a IR or IMC. What if the cloud base thickens and you cannot find a way through? Or you return to a position where is was okay but now isn't? You're forced into IMC, breaking the privs of the licesnse.

And in a country the size of the UK with so much CAS you need to be really careful when ontop to avoid busting it, probably not such a problem in the US or France, hence why they allow it.

And before someone makes the argument that your less likely to bust CAS on radio nav, think about the amount of training the average PPL gets on radio nav!

Get an IMC or IR and be safe! (I have neither and wouldn't DREAM of flying on top! Starting my IMC rating this winter though....)

[FlyingForFun]

Legally, my understanding is that you must be "in sight of the surface". That means that if the clouds are 7/8s you're still legal, as long as you can see the surface. Of course, this doesn't mean that it's safe or sensible, just legal.

As for why, I think it's quite unusual, in the UK at least, to find the kind of weather where VFR on top is likely to be useful - it would be quite rare to find weather where you could get on top of the clouds, and get back down below them again, safely. On the other hand, in other countries I can image fly across a range of mountains where you can safely get to, say, 10 or 12 thousand feet well before the mountains, fly over the top of the mountain clouds out of sight of the surface, and descend on the other side. I don't believe the UK PPL syllabus includes enough radio nav work to be able to fly out of sight of the surface safely, but this could easilly be changed if the authorities wanted to do so.

Now, a question: is the "in sight of the surface" rule a restriction on my license, or a restriction as part of VFR? Put another way, if I have an IMC rating, can I legally fly VFR on top?

One case where this might be useful would be if I'd flown IFR to get on top of the clouds, but then the airspace didn't allow me to follow the quadrant rule (which I must follow if I'm IFR above 3000'). Another would be if I was flying an aircraft which is not certified for IFR flight - could I fly that aircraft VFR-on-top?

FFF
--------------

[Flyin'Dutch']

With a vanilla PPL you can not fly other than in direct view of the surface. Full stop.

If such is allowed on a FAA PPL in the USA (which I doubt but will look in the FAR/AIM as soon as I get home) you would still not be allowed to do this in the UK, just as a French PPL would not be allowed to do it here or a UK PPL over in France.

You will either need an IMC rating in the UK or an IR elswhere.

I don't think there is a sharp definition with regard to the amount of cloudcover you can fly over and still claim to be in sight of the surface.

As with so many things, there is no policeman on the corner of every cloud, but be prepared to have your case ready if things go to pot.

FD

[Keef]

As I understand it, there are differences between ICAO CAA JAA and France as regards VFR on top.

I know three definitive rules:
A French PPL can fly VFR on top (but has to get up and down in VMC).
In the UK, you need an IMC rating or an IR to fly VFR on top. A UK PPL is bound by that rule outside the UK - so can't fly VFR on top in France without an IR (IMC not being valid there).
In the US, you need an IR to fly VFR on top.

I don't know if Sweden has filed any "differences" from ICAO or from JAA: the only definitive way to find out is to ask!

It might be in the SE-AIP (maybe that's on the Net somewhere).

For the definitive answer, I'd ask bookworm or 2Ds.

[DFC]

The holder of a JAA PPL can fly VFR.

Flying VFR requires the pilot to remain in Visual Met Conditions (VMC).

Provided that the country where the pilot is flying considers flight above overcast cloud to be in VMC then it is legal for that pilot to fly in such circumstances.

When flying VFR on top, the weather must be such that the pilot can navigate accurately as well as descend to land;

a) At the destination

b) At any time in an aircraft should an engine failure require descent.

Thus in a single engine aircraft, and JAA PPL, flying above 8/8 Overcast cloud cover would only be legal up to the point where the engine failed and flight in IMC became imminent.

This is different to flying across water in a single engine because ditching is perfectly legal. Flying through cloud without an IR (IMC in UK) is never legal.

I have not mentioned specific countries since the JAA rules are the same in every country provided that a JAA licence (not any form of national licence old or new) is held. However, remember that while licencing rules may be harmonised, VMC criteria are not.

Regards,

DFC

[Keef]

david viewing

Sorry - didn't read your post carefully enough.

An unrestricted FAA PPL does NOT allow you to fly VFR on top. For that, you need an IR. That very question came up, both in my FAA IR written, and in the oral during the checkride. A "VFR on top" clearance is an IFR clearance, but without all the restrictions that apply to flight in IMC.

The way the US "reciprocal" PPL works is that you are governed by the more restrictive of the FAA rules or the rules that apply to your home licence. That means, mostly, that the CAA rules are the definitive ones.

My understanding of "VFR on top" is that you can't see underneath from where you are now, and couldn't get back down there in VMC right now. There's bound to be a far better definition in one of the books!

[jezbowman]

Flying through cloud without an IR (IMC in UK) is never legal.

Come to think of it, surely a forced landing is breaking the law as you don't have the land owners permission. In a Mayday (EF)situation you do whatever it takes to save life and limb. The donkey stops and you've no choice but to go through IMC - who cares about the paperwork at that stage? I don't think it's a reason not to go VFR on top though. All PPL's do some IMC traning for 'Emergency Use' only.

Thus in a single engine aircraft, and JAA PPL, flying above 8/8 Overcast cloud cover would only be legal up to the point where the engine failed and flight in IMC became imminent.

Apart from the fact he has to stay 'in sight of the surface' so he'd breaking the conditions of his license long before then.

BTW, my 4/8 came from the ICAO definition of a 'cloud base'. Not saying that is or isn't classed as the 'on top' but I guess the 'on top' may be 'on top of the clouds' as in 'above the cloud base'.

Dunno really...

[mm_flynn]

I took a look at the AIM for FAA basic PPL licence to see what it says on VFR minimums. From the extract below VFR flight above a cloud deck is legal so long as you are 1000 feet above the cloud deck.

"VFR on top" as a clearance is actually an IFR clearance (i.e. your IFR flight plan remains active but you have more flexibility to select your altitude - a bit like a "Contact Approach" which is an IFR approach (ATC seperation) but in visual conditions not flying the published procedure.


FROM THE AIM - Basic VFR Weather Minimums Airspace Flight Visibility Distance from Clouds

Class C
3 statute miles
500 feet below
1,000 feet above
2,000 feet horizontal

Class D
3 statute miles
500 feet below
1,000 feet above
2,000 feet horizontal

Class E
Less than 10,000 feet MSL
3 statute miles
500 feet below
1,000 feet above
2,000 feet horizontal

[A and C]

No new rules !!!!!!!!!

Lets not invent any more rules ........." in sight of the surface" means just that !.

IE ............you can see the surface , there are no rules about how much cloud cover there is you just have to see the surface, simple but effective.

I just wanted to get that clear before some one from the JAA thinks that putting a cloud cover limit on this rule is a good idea.

[Keef]

mm_flynn

VFR on top, in the US, is an IFR clearance. To fly on an IFR clearance, you must hold an instrument rating.

Similarly a "contact approach" - read the details of the definition! You absolutely cannot legally fly one of those on a VFR licence: the visibility is way below VFR minima. It wouldn't be a contact approach otherwise.

The 1000 feet vertically from cloud is fine if it's one cloud and/or you can see round it. Above an overcast (or mostly overcast) layer, you are not legal without an IR.

[mm_flynn]

Keef,

I agree with you. The point I was trying to make is that in the US "VFR on Top" is a specific type of IFR clearance (and you need PPL/IR to file and fly any IFR clearance).

However, in the US I belive it is perfectly legal to fly VFR without a PPL/IR above a cloud deck. Certainly when I was trained it was one of those "legal but not a good idea" items. In fact a decade ago flying VFR (i.e. not on an IFR clearance) above cloud decks and finding no hole was a prime reason for people air filing IFR flight plans to get back down (legal VFR flight above clouds - but not dumb because you can always file IFR flightplan and shoot the approach).

If there is a reg that prohibits flying VFR above a cloud deck (in the US on an FAA PPL) I would be very interested to know about it

[Keef]

There is, in the USA, another definition, called "VFR over the top." There are many opinions about what it is and who may do it and when, but I've not been able to find it in the FAR/AIM (except in §135, which isn't relevant to us). When I've asked CFIIs about it, I've not got a straight answer.

If you want an opinion that it's OK to fly VFR over a solid cloud deck, provided you can get up (and down again) in VMC the whole way then try quoting http://www.forpilots.com/archive/rec...1/msg11404.htm
and don't blame me if it all goes sour!

There is a Canadian rating called a "VFR over the top" rating, which is a bit like a UK IMC rating - ie valid for a specific purpose and only in the country of issue. I don't know if the USA allows C-reg aircraft to use it in the US.

[DFC]

I hold a JAA licence.

There are no restrictions on that licence with regard to VMC minima.

I fly on a regular basis in UK, Ireland, France, Belgium and Holland.

When specifying VMC criteria, none of the above countries make any reference to a requirement to be in sight of the surface EXCEPT in the lower airspace 3000ft/1000ft ASFC where there is a requirement for flights to be operated in sight of the surface.

Thus taking Class G. I can be VMC in all the above countries at FL65, 140Kt provided that I remain 1000ft above all cloud and in a flight visibility of 5Km. That is it.

When dealing with VMC minima, I note that in the UK, UK PPLs and BCPLs have further requirements laid down in schedule 8 of the ANO which may be more stringent than the VMC minima.

I don't have a UK licence, thus those more stringent requirements do not apply to me when flying in the UK.

As to landing in a farmers field........well as far as I am aware, that is standard practice for engine failures which require an immediate landing. The farmer is however entitled to sue for compensation as a result.

To look at the situation slightly differently, imagine a twin which has a single engine ceiling of 4000ft flying in VMC at FL85 above a overcast cloud cover base 1000, tops 6000ft........the aircraft does not have to land following an engine failure but it does have to descend to 4000ft. Thus the pilot without IR (IMC in the UK) will be forced to fly illegally and outside their ability in the event of an engine failure.

How many VFR pilots who fly twins are trained for flight in icing conditions????

So basically as far as I am aware VMC on top for a JAA licence holder is legal.......but not good airmanship unless the pilot can cope with IMC flight legally.

Of course another advantage for me is that I can get a special VFR clearance in the UK in a visibility of 3Km without the requirement to hold an IMC rating......another restriction placed on UK licence holders without IMC!!!

I always thought that harmonisation would result in a situation where a JAA PPL has the same privileges regardless of country of issue.......seems that UK PPLs are getting a raw deal compared to foreign visitors!

Regards,

DFC

[2Donkeys]

Most of the bits of the right answer are here, but scattered between lots of posts.

Before dealing with the US, the general JAR position is this.

A JAR PPL may fly under VFR only. However in most JAA countries, the defintion of VMC includes flying above a solid layer. This means that a flight can be VFR and above a layer providing it is separated adequately from cloud. This in turn means that a non-IR JAR PPL is ordinarily allowed to fly above a covered layer.


The UK blurs the issue in a number of respects. For example a basic JAR PPL may fly IFR in the UK, outside controlled airspace, and providing it is done in VMC. The most relevant factor to this discussion though is that the UK has added an additional restriction to its implementation of the JAR PPL. A PPL holder without an IMC rating or an IR must always fly in sight of the surface. This means that in addition to flying in accordance with VFR (which even in the UK permits flight above a covered layer), a UK JAA PPL must be in sight of the surface. If they hold an IMC or IR, this restriction is dropped, and they may then enjoy the full privileges that other JAA PPL holders enjoy.


Now we come to the US.

There are two terms in use in the US. VFR-on-Top and VFR-over-the-Top.

What we are discussing here is VFR-over-the-Top. In FAA terms, this means a flight which is being conducted under VFR, and which happens to be flying over a solid layer of cloud. This is no problem for an FAA PPL, since like the normal JAA PPL, an FAA PPL must simply comply with VFR (the rules), and the US definition of VMC permits flight above a covered layer.

VFR-on-Top in the US is something different. This specific phrase is used to describe a form of IFR clearance, hence the confusion. Imagine an IFR finds itself flying along above a solid layer in otherwise wonderful conditions. If it sticks to IFR, it will constrained to fly at an IFR level, and may well be subject to routing constraints. If it requests a "VFR-on-Top" clearance, it may fly at any appropriate VFR level (being semi+500) so long as it complies with cloud separation requirements, but it continues to be under an IFR clearance, with the benefits that entails. When it is ready to come down through the cloud, it informs the controller, who descends it back into the conventional IFR system. To request and obtain a VFR-on-Top clearnce, an FAA PPL must hold an IR.

Hope this helps

2Donkeys

[Keef]

Thanks, 2D.

One more bit for DFC:

Special VFR "implementation" varies by country. In the UK, you can't accept a Special VFR clearance in less than 10nm vis unless you hold an IMC rating or an IR.

With those, it's down to 3nm.