IMC Radio Messages

[stuartforrest]

Please dont reply to this telling me I am not qualified etc etc because the "IMC is a get me home rating blah blah blah". I am interested in specific help. I intend to use my IMC until there is a viable IFR rating for the private pilot and I intend to do regular practice which I believe makes me safer than an IFR qualified pilot who hardly ever flies.

For background I have recently passed my IMC rating (10 IMC hours ago) and Night Rating to add to my long held VFR licence. I fly a Bonanza A36 that is very well equipped and I know how to work the equipment!

I was returning from Scotland yesterday and after a bumpy ride up there VFR which made one of the kids sick I decided to go VFR on-top for the return journey. I climbed VFR through a hole and levelled off at Flight level 80 which was the correct quadrantal and was talking to Scottish Info and had a radar service.

During the conversation he asked "are you VFR or IFR" so I replied IFR and that was that. I got an excellent service that kept me clear of Prestwick and did an approach into Blackpool. The flight was super smooth and in sunshine.

This has happened to me twice recently when lfying IMC.

My question is what should my answer have been. Should I have said

I am IFR
I am VFR on-top
I am VFR India Mike Charlie

or something else. Several people have told me several different things but I am still unsure. Like everything in flying there are so many things to learn that I may have missed this during my training so I would appreciate your pprune posters sharing your wisdom with me.

[IO540]

In the UK, with an IMCR you can fly VFR above a solid layer, so if you are in VMC you have the choice of VFR or IFR.

It's normally better to reply "IFR" because you are more likely to get a radar service, and a handover to the next radar unit.

Then, if you do enter IMC, you remain legal. Makes life simple.

The only strong reason for flying "VFR" (that I can think of) is if above 2000kg, to avoid IFR charges. I know of people who fly big twin turboprops, up to FL195 in France/Spain like that. It's a bit of a mick-take but if it's Class D...

The other thing is that if you want to arrive IFR i.e. on an IAP. One is going to get a "better reception" if one was IFR on the way there... if for example you go to Cranfield, VFR, and tell them you'd like an ILS they will tell you rather bluntly they are busy with instrument training and if you really really still want the ILS you can have it but they will charge you for it (meaning: "go away, come back VFR and report when you have found Woburn Abbey"). Whereas if you flew there IFR they can't do that.

No doubt 10 people will now jump in, saying how much they wish the UK had the same airspace structure as France/USA/etc (Class E nearly everywhere) all flight in IMC should need an IFR clearance, and all real pilots should have a JAA IR

[stuartforrest]

Thanks for that. I feel much clearer. I did suspect I would get all those replies as you can tell from my first paragraph.

I am glad I am not doing anything too wrong. Thats always a good start.

I certainly did get an excellent service but I was worried that if I said IFR I needed to have filed a flight plan etc.

[IO540]

No need to file an ICAO flight plan for IFR within the UK. And for controlled airspace departure/transit/arrival, the radio call does the job.

[Fuji Abound]

IO540

I am not sure that is correct.

Rules 24 and 27 specify the minimum visibility and separation from cloud in terms of horizontal and vertical distance required to permit VFR operations.

I thought the rules also specify at or below 3,000 feet in sight of the surface.

If that is so you might well be in VMC above a layer but depending on your separation or altitude never the less required to declare IFR.

800 feet above the base and you are IFR.

[Flap40]

Originally Posted by stuartforrest

My question is what should my answer have been. Should I have said
I am IFR
I am VFR on-top
I am VFR India Mike Charlie

The ANO states:- ‘Instrument Meteorological Conditions' means weather precluding flight in compliance with the Visual Flight Rules; so your third option is impossible.

As IO540 has said, an IMC rating removes the requirement to be in sight of the surface so my answer would be "IFR" or "VFR". there is no need to mention the on top bit.

Flight plans are covered in the AIP Enr 1.10.
Basically they are not required for IFR outside controlled airspace.
They are required for IMC or night inside controlled airspace unless SVFR.
They are required for IFR in controlled airspace even when VMC.

It also says that:
1.2.2 Flight plans fall into three categories:
(a) Full flight plans: the information filed on Form CA48/RAF 2919;
(b) Repetitive Flight Plans (see paragraph 5);
(c) Abbreviated Flight Plans: the limited information required to obtain a clearance for a portion of flight (eg: flying in a Control
Zone, crossing an Airway) filed either by telephone prior to take-off or by RTF when airborne. The destination aerodrome
will be advised of the flight only if the flight plan information covers the whole route of the flight.

So an IFR flight from (for example) Carlisle to Newcastle should only need a phone call or rt call for the entry to Newcastle's class D rather than a full CA48

[stuartforrest]

So Flap40 then you concur that I should be saying that I am IFR unless I am to remain entirely clear of controlled airspace.

[Chilli Monster]

Stuart

Nothing wrong with what you did, and everything IO540 said so far is fine. However, as an IMC "Newbie" a word of warning.

Some areas of the Scottish TMA are class 'E'. No need for a clearance VFR (whether you're above or below cloud providing you fulfill VFR criteria). If you are, or declare yourself IFR however a clearance is required.

Be aware of the Airspace you're flying in and what you can and can't do on the back of an IMC.

Fuji

Don't see your point. Providing you fulfill VFR separation from cloud you can be VFR "on top". If you're above 3000ft certain parts of those criteria are increased, but still applicable.

Where does the "800ft above the base" come in?

[aluminium persuader]

Don't forget -

Outside controlled airspace, the type of service you receive will be the type of service you ask for, unless the controller is for some reason unable to provide it.

Flight Information Service (FIS)
Radar Information Service (RIS)
Radar Advisory Service (RAS)

FIS & RIS you can have whether IFR or VFR. With RIS you will get tfc info but no avoiding action, therefore you want to be in flight conditions where you will be able to see the traffic and avoid it, eg VMC on top.

With RAS, which you can receive ONLY if IFR (regardless of whether IMC or VMC) you will be given avoiding action aiming to establish separation of at least 5 miles.

ap

[Lister Noble]

I am a student and am now confused!
I understood that a VFR pilot can ask for RAS as long as he flies in VMC and does not accept instructions to fly into IMC conditions.
The radar controller should be advised immediately of any instructions that are not acceptable to the VFR pilot.
This is from the latest (2004) Thom Aviation Law text book.
Is this incorrect,or am I misreading the above posts?
Lister

[Send Clowns]

You had the choice, but IMHO made the best one. In my recent experience if you are actually trying to travel long distance within the UK, or travelling abroad, IFR is simpler. This doesn't always work in Europe, France is a good example, as they are reluctant to clear you IFR outside controlled airspace and the routes can therefore be tortuous unless you insist. In the UK it is treated as quite normal, even for me on a callsign of an AOC operator. A friend of mine was doing so and was told to squawk 7000 and call en-route frequency. Not so surprising, except was flying a 737-800 and had 179 passengers!

[Chilli Monster]

Originally Posted by Lister Noble

I am a student and am now confused!
I understood that a VFR pilot can ask for RAS as long as he flies in VMC and does not accept instructions to fly into IMC conditions.
The radar controller should be advised immediately of any instructions that are not acceptable to the VFR pilot.

A pointless exercise which is only going to make you look really stupid when I downgrade the service. That's why it's for IFR only.

[Keef]

I don't think you can be given an RAS if you are VFR (that may be "No controller will give you one"). He will expect to vector you around the sky to avoid other traffic, and that's not the time to say "sorry, I can't go into cloud".

I've flown under RAS, and it's hard work. You'll cover a lot of sky. RIS is a lot better unless the airspace is busy, in which case...

[Fuji Abound]

"Don't see your point. Providing you fulfill VFR separation from cloud you can be VFR "on top". If you're above 3000ft certain parts of those criteria are increased, but still applicable.

Where does the "800ft above the base" come in?"

My point was that if you are 800 feet above solid cloud but in VMC can you fulfill the VFR criteria. If you cannot you presumably can only be IFR.

In the same way if you are at our below 3,000 feet above cloud in VMC you are not in sight of the surface. Can you fulfill the VRF criteria?

[IO540]

Yes, the "sight of surface" requirement (of a UK issued PPL) for VFR disappears if you have an IMCR or an IR. It also doesn't exist for most foreign PPLs, and doesn't exist in most foreign airspace.

I think (and I am going to get jumped on for saying this) one needs to be more practical about this stuff.

For example, no use asking for an RAS (available only to IFR traffic in Class G, IIRC) when you are in VMC. I know a plain PPL can fly IFR in VMC in Class G in the UK but they are going to vector you all over the sky. You get ludicrous doglegs, mostly around unknown non-transponding traffic, often microlights pottering about at 600ft and perhaps 4000ft below you, but the radar can't tell so they have to give you avoiding vectors. I've had it done to me once or twice, years ago, and it's a really pointless exercise. The traffic reports one gets from an RIS are just as useful in practice, especially if after a report like "contact at 12 o'clock, 1 mile, recip heading, same level", and you are sitting in IMC, you say "Gxxxx, turning right 20 degrees" and do it right away

The next thing is cloud separation if above clouds or if above a certain level (which I cannot ever remember). The rules do not apply when climbing or descending (obviously) so when do they apply? How long do you have to be flying straight and level before they begin to apply? It's slightly pointless to worry about it. If you are flying IFR, VMC on top, under say ATS direction (say in Class D) and they give you vectors, you aren't going to suddenly say "sorry, can't comply because I am only 100ft above the clouds".

Whereas something like a plain PPL flying straight into Class A at FL120 on an airways flight plan is something altogether different, quite absolute, a 4-digit fine and a licence pulled. As a result, it's never been done

[Lister Noble]

Thank you Keef.
Another question then.
When flying VFR I had difficulty locating a commercial airfield, I was given a Squawk code charlie,a radar bearing and distance to the airfield, which was brilliant ,it took me straight there safely and with no hassle.
I believe this is RIS, so I don't really need RAS for my limited requirements anyway?
Lister

[bookworm]

Originally Posted by Chilli Monster

A pointless exercise which is only going to make you look really stupid when I downgrade the service.

Not sure I agree with that. I've always felt that it was a pity that RAS is restricted to IFR.

Vectors may be refused for a variety of reasons by pilots of all qualifications. No one is going to fly through a CB, no one is going to fly into icy cloud without an out, no one is going to fly towards a gaggle of gliders that the controller doesn't see on radar, etc. Refusal of a vector that would take a non-instrument-qualified pilot into cloud is just another on the list. In most circumstances, VFR flights are conducted in a way that would allow any vectors to be accepted without flight in cloud -- the issue of terrain clearance is more likely to be problematic.

[bookworm]

Originally Posted by IO540

The traffic reports one gets from an RIS are just as useful in practice, especially if after a report like "contact at 12 o'clock, 1 mile, recip heading, same level", and you are sitting in IMC, you say "Gxxxx, turning right 20 degrees" and do it right away

The resolution and completeness of the traffic information offered is not sufficient to make any such avoiding action reliable. I reckon there's as good a chance that you'll simply turn into a collision that you would otherwise have avoided as that the manoeuvre avoids a collision.

I've said it before here, the most valuable piece of traffic information a controller can give is one that is not currently passed under a RIS: which way do I turn to increase separation?

[Chilli Monster]

Originally Posted by bookworm

Not sure I agree with that. I've always felt that it was a pity that RAS is restricted to IFR.

If you'd like to get an ATC licence with an APS rating, then try and give a RAS to everyone with the separation that you have to try and achieve under a RAS, during a typical summers weekend, I suggest that opinion would last all of a Microsecond. It's not physically possible.

If you are VFR then it's your responsibility to avoid other aircraft, not mine to tell you how to conduct your flight. Harsh, but true. Learn that fact and move on

Originally Posted by bookworm

I've said it before here, the most valuable piece of traffic information a controller can give is one that is not currently passed under a RIS: which way do I turn to increase separation?

If you can't work that out from the information you're being given then the service being given doesn't have enough data. I've never had a problem deciding - it's called having the mental picture.

You'll be wanting the aircraft flown for you next!

[Fuji Abound]

I know it is pedantic but:

I agree with an IR or IMCR the in sight of surface rule etc disappears but you have to be under on of two flight rules.

If you are not in sight of the surface at or below 3,000 feet you cannot be VFR (because I thought the rules say so). Obviously you are legal because you have an IMCR or IR and you are also in VMC becasue the base is beneath you but surely you must be IFR even though you are in VMC?

In the same way if you are only 800 feet above an undercast whilst VMC and legal because you have an IR or IMCR again at any level surely you must be IFR because you are not withiin the vertical seperation for VFR.

In other words to answer the original question the only correct answer is you are IFR unless you also meet the VFR criteria - at or above 3,000 feet and meet the vertical and horizontal seperation requirements

I agree you might well want to tell the controller you are IFR but VMC.