Filing IFR for flight outside of controlled airspace?
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
Claiming to be IFR in VFR conditions as an excuse to get a 'better' service or 'more attention' is reprehensible in my humble opinion.
Any pilot can choose to fly IFR under VMC in Class G airspace if so wished and he/she can elect to ask for a Radar service irrespective of in flight conditions. He/she might not get one in Class G, or any service at all, but that's the luck of the draw.
However, if you put further restraints on yourself, that's your perogative.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ContactTower.
Most jets are VMC flying at FL390 but they are flying IFR in CAS.
Do not muddle VMC, IMC, VFR and IFR.
The first two are conditions the second are flight rules
Pace
Most jets are VMC flying at FL390 but they are flying IFR in CAS.
Do not muddle VMC, IMC, VFR and IFR.
The first two are conditions the second are flight rules
Pace
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Hither and Thither
Posts: 575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As others have said, if you want a RIS or RAS, request it; the controller will tell you if he is unable to provide it. At our unit FIS's are just that: very low priority and unlikely to get much apart from 'report leaving the frequency'.
Someone requesting a radar service is a higher priority and we will do our level best to provide a radar service, even if it is limited. ATC recognise it's importance in raising safety levels for all concerned, so should you.
And on weather conditions - one's persona VMC is another persons IMC, and vice versa. It is all about the perception of the pilots concerned. It is no good saying 'Pilot A said he was VFR, therefore anyone else in the area saying they are IMC is wrong, and therefore must also be VMC in that area'. However if a pilot says he is IMC it gives you the heads up that all may not be gin clear in an area.
Back to the original question, you can also address the IFR plan to units that you will talk to OCAS (as well as the IFPS). Sometimes these will be picked up at the units that you will be wanting to talk to them, but is not guaranteed to, as a strip would not be printed out automatically )not departure or destination) and the FPL may not be seen/acted on unless the ATCA is looking out for such details.
Someone requesting a radar service is a higher priority and we will do our level best to provide a radar service, even if it is limited. ATC recognise it's importance in raising safety levels for all concerned, so should you.
And on weather conditions - one's persona VMC is another persons IMC, and vice versa. It is all about the perception of the pilots concerned. It is no good saying 'Pilot A said he was VFR, therefore anyone else in the area saying they are IMC is wrong, and therefore must also be VMC in that area'. However if a pilot says he is IMC it gives you the heads up that all may not be gin clear in an area.
Back to the original question, you can also address the IFR plan to units that you will talk to OCAS (as well as the IFPS). Sometimes these will be picked up at the units that you will be wanting to talk to them, but is not guaranteed to, as a strip would not be printed out automatically )not departure or destination) and the FPL may not be seen/acted on unless the ATCA is looking out for such details.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you've fallen into the old trap of mixing up terminology - there's no such thing as 'VFR conditions' and you presumably mean VMC.
If one is operating under VFR then one has to be operating in VMC. The fact that others are flying under VFR and asking for a FIS would indicate that the conditions are VMC as well. Unless of course our intrepid hero is accusing others of illegal flight?
So as I said, claiming to be IFR in VMC in order to get a better service is in my humble opinion reprehensible. While the controller is busy giving our friend a full radar service, the service to others asking for a FIS and a zone crossing is reduced needlessly.
Sometimes people sit and complain how they don't get zone crossings due to controller workload........
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
Us Instructors get to learn all about it you know.
Do you have to be an instructor then to get to learn this stuff.
Us Instructors get to learn all about it you know.
Do you have to be an instructor then to get to learn this stuff.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>So as I said, claiming to be IFR in VMC in order to get a better service is in my humble opinion reprehensible. While the controller is busy giving our friend a full radar service, the service to others asking for a FIS and a zone crossing is reduced needlessly.<
Bose
Sometimes an IFR aircraft reduces the workload for the RC. ie he can slot an IFR aircraft in with his other IFR traffic and know that the aircraft will be at a set level and navigating to a set point.
he does not have such precision with VFR traffic some which may not be transponding at all and hence has to treat them with more caution.
As an example I can more easely get a crossing clearance through Birmingham IFR than if I ask for a VFR crossing. At least IFR i can be coordinated with other IFR traffic VFR i will either be told to remain clear or given a crossing only when traffic allows.
>Claiming to be IFR in VFR conditions < I do not understand how you can claim to be IFR in VFR conditions? You either are flying to IFR rules or VFR rules the VMC part is irrelevant .
And no I have never been an instructor only a 3500 hr type rated ATP so prob dont know much at all
Pace
Bose
Sometimes an IFR aircraft reduces the workload for the RC. ie he can slot an IFR aircraft in with his other IFR traffic and know that the aircraft will be at a set level and navigating to a set point.
he does not have such precision with VFR traffic some which may not be transponding at all and hence has to treat them with more caution.
As an example I can more easely get a crossing clearance through Birmingham IFR than if I ask for a VFR crossing. At least IFR i can be coordinated with other IFR traffic VFR i will either be told to remain clear or given a crossing only when traffic allows.
>Claiming to be IFR in VFR conditions < I do not understand how you can claim to be IFR in VFR conditions? You either are flying to IFR rules or VFR rules the VMC part is irrelevant .
And no I have never been an instructor only a 3500 hr type rated ATP so prob dont know much at all
Pace
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an example I can more easely get a crossing clearance through Birmingham IFR than if I ask for a VFR crossing. At least IFR i can be coordinated with other IFR traffic VFR i will either be told to remain clear or given a crossing only when traffic allows.
I have no desire to get into a peeing competition on licences and ratings either. I do have a type rating or 2 or my own and can match you for hours.....
Take it or leave it.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bose
>I have no desire to get into a peeing competition on licences and ratings either. I do have a type rating or 2 or my own and can match you for hours.....
Take it or leave it. <
I am aware from previous postings that you are an experienced pilot with a lot of hours but am equally sure you didnt quite mean what you posted and that has to be clarified for some who may not be as knowledgable or experienced. Many of my own postings have been misread or misunderstood so dont take offence.
>I have no desire to get into a peeing competition on licences and ratings either. I do have a type rating or 2 or my own and can match you for hours.....
Take it or leave it. <
I am aware from previous postings that you are an experienced pilot with a lot of hours but am equally sure you didnt quite mean what you posted and that has to be clarified for some who may not be as knowledgable or experienced. Many of my own postings have been misread or misunderstood so dont take offence.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an example I can more easely get a crossing clearance through Birmingham IFR than if I ask for a VFR crossing. At least IFR i can be coordinated with other IFR traffic VFR i will either be told to remain clear or given a crossing only when traffic allows.
I can think of occasions when crossing CAS at height and on a long route the controllers seem much more inclined to give a clearance on the occasions they are turning other traffic away. However has this more to do with your altitude and their realisation that if you are on route from A to B it is a nice courtesy not to make you divert around CAS. Moreover because usually there is so much less "high" traffic clearing you through presents them with less problems.
I suppose my point therefore is that do you more easily get a clearance because of what you are doing rather than becasue you are IFR?
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am aware from previous postings that you are an experienced pilot with a lot of hours but am equally sure you didnt quite mean what you posted and that has to be clarified for some who may not be as knowledgable or experienced. Many of my own postings have been misread or misunderstood so dont take offence.
As I said before, when a controller is busy providing IFR separation for a zone crossing when clearly from the comments made the conditions would dictate VFR it takes away from others and we end up with the all to often 'stay clear from CAS' or unable to accept due to controller workload.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bose
I take your point especially when one guy is flying something like a Cessna 150 IFR in VMC because he can do.
But increase the complexity and speed range of the aircraft and it becomes a safety factor to Fly IFR ! ie seperating the slow and faster stuff.
Aircraft which requires the captain to have his eyes inside more because the aircraft is more complex or where his view is restricted by engines will also be safer in an IFR invironment whether in IMC or VMC.
So maybe we should be categorising aircraft as VMC machines or IMC machines. A VMC machine which has IFR capability should not fly IFR in VMC while maybe an IMC machine should fly IFR in VMC if you get my gist.
Pace
I take your point especially when one guy is flying something like a Cessna 150 IFR in VMC because he can do.
But increase the complexity and speed range of the aircraft and it becomes a safety factor to Fly IFR ! ie seperating the slow and faster stuff.
Aircraft which requires the captain to have his eyes inside more because the aircraft is more complex or where his view is restricted by engines will also be safer in an IFR invironment whether in IMC or VMC.
So maybe we should be categorising aircraft as VMC machines or IMC machines. A VMC machine which has IFR capability should not fly IFR in VMC while maybe an IMC machine should fly IFR in VMC if you get my gist.
Pace
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bose
I take your point especially when one guy is flying something like a Cessna 150 IFR in VMC because he can do.
But increase the complexity and speed range of the aircraft and it becomes a safety factor to Fly IFR ! ie seperating the slow and faster stuff.
Aircraft which requires the captain to have his eyes inside more because the aircraft is more complex or where his view is restricted by engines will also be safer in an IFR invironment whether in IMC or VMC.
So maybe we should be categorising aircraft as VMC machines or IMC machines. A VMC machine which has IFR capability should not fly IFR in VMC while maybe an IMC machine should fly IFR in VMC if you get my gist.
Pace
I take your point especially when one guy is flying something like a Cessna 150 IFR in VMC because he can do.
But increase the complexity and speed range of the aircraft and it becomes a safety factor to Fly IFR ! ie seperating the slow and faster stuff.
Aircraft which requires the captain to have his eyes inside more because the aircraft is more complex or where his view is restricted by engines will also be safer in an IFR invironment whether in IMC or VMC.
So maybe we should be categorising aircraft as VMC machines or IMC machines. A VMC machine which has IFR capability should not fly IFR in VMC while maybe an IMC machine should fly IFR in VMC if you get my gist.
Pace
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
I understand perfectly the terminology. Us Instructors get to learn all about it you know.
Claiming to be IFR in VFR conditions as an excuse to get a 'better' service or 'more attention' is reprehensible in my humble opinion.
VFR = visual flight rules.
VMC = visual meteorological conditions.
The two terms often cause confusion amongst students, we should be careful not to mix them up.
In VMC outside CAS a pilot is quite free to choose to fly under VFR or IFR as he sees fit; there is nothing reprehensible about choosing IFR.
That's my two cents.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>The two terms often cause confusion amongst students, we should be careful not to mix them up.<
That was the point I was trying to make to Bose! If we use loose terms some of us might understand what the poster is trying to say but others who may be students or less experienced pilots may be mislead.
So it is important to correct loose terms for their sake not as a case of I know better than you
Pace
That was the point I was trying to make to Bose! If we use loose terms some of us might understand what the poster is trying to say but others who may be students or less experienced pilots may be mislead.
So it is important to correct loose terms for their sake not as a case of I know better than you
Pace
Hmm.
So, let me get this straight...
Filing part of your route in airways so that you can benefit from the services of London Control to do all your coordination and planning while you cruise in VMC in class A, that's fine? The folks in TC have hardly anything to do anyway and so you might as well force them to soak up a bit of their workload crossing the TMA at 120 kt in your Cessna.
However, IFR in VMC outside controlled airspace to allow a controller, workload permitting, to offer a better service and coordinate you as an IFR flight, that's "reprehensible".
Was that the gist of it?
Generally when I fly this way I will plan the route so that I have at least one section in CAS so the plan is entered into CFMU. I find doing this means I get hand offs into and out of the airways system and experience has shown that if you have been in the airways even for a fairly short way then things go smoothly.
Although to be fair I try to do all of my flying in the airways even short trips especially passing around London. You can't bust airspace when you are under positive control!!!!
Although to be fair I try to do all of my flying in the airways even short trips especially passing around London. You can't bust airspace when you are under positive control!!!!
So as I said, claiming to be IFR in VMC in order to get a better service is in my humble opinion reprehensible. While the controller is busy giving our friend a full radar service, the service to others asking for a FIS and a zone crossing is reduced needlessly.
Filing part of your route in airways so that you can benefit from the services of London Control to do all your coordination and planning while you cruise in VMC in class A, that's fine? The folks in TC have hardly anything to do anyway and so you might as well force them to soak up a bit of their workload crossing the TMA at 120 kt in your Cessna.
However, IFR in VMC outside controlled airspace to allow a controller, workload permitting, to offer a better service and coordinate you as an IFR flight, that's "reprehensible".
Was that the gist of it?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>Agreed. However we have side tracked from the original point that got me on my soap box which was about calling himself IFR in order to get a better service......<
Bose I think I know what you are getting at but not sure? I really am not trying to shoot you down!
How can someone call themselves IFR ? do you mean they are flying VFR but say they are flying IFR to get a RAS?
I can fly S/W at 3400 feet VFR and on a FIS. The weather ahead might deteriorate or I might come into an area of denser traffic and elect to fly IFR.
I might ask to change my level to FL55 ask the RAC to upgrade me to a RIS or RAS. Once past the weather or heavier traffic I might cancel IFR drop to 3400 feet VFR in VMC and down grade myself to a FIS again ? all out of CAS.
Am I calling myself IFR? No I am flying a portion of my trip IFR and to those rules.
Again I may fly towards Birmingham VFR and then ask for an IFR crossing. If successful I will be assigned a level or altitude/height on a given pressure setting will fly IFR and again cancel after clearing their zone. Am I calling myself IFR?
I think you mean that somepeople load the system by asking for an IFR clearance to get a RAS or RIS when they are in perfect weather and have no real need to fly IFR?
But "calling yourself" again is a loose and confusing term you either are or are not
Pace
Bose I think I know what you are getting at but not sure? I really am not trying to shoot you down!
How can someone call themselves IFR ? do you mean they are flying VFR but say they are flying IFR to get a RAS?
I can fly S/W at 3400 feet VFR and on a FIS. The weather ahead might deteriorate or I might come into an area of denser traffic and elect to fly IFR.
I might ask to change my level to FL55 ask the RAC to upgrade me to a RIS or RAS. Once past the weather or heavier traffic I might cancel IFR drop to 3400 feet VFR in VMC and down grade myself to a FIS again ? all out of CAS.
Am I calling myself IFR? No I am flying a portion of my trip IFR and to those rules.
Again I may fly towards Birmingham VFR and then ask for an IFR crossing. If successful I will be assigned a level or altitude/height on a given pressure setting will fly IFR and again cancel after clearing their zone. Am I calling myself IFR?
I think you mean that somepeople load the system by asking for an IFR clearance to get a RAS or RIS when they are in perfect weather and have no real need to fly IFR?
But "calling yourself" again is a loose and confusing term you either are or are not
Pace
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you mean that somepeople load the system by asking for an IFR clearance to get a RAS or RIS when they are in perfect weather and have no real need to fly IFR?
So, let me get this straight...
Filing part of your route in airways so that you can benefit from the services of London Control to do all your coordination and planning while you cruise in VMC in class A, that's fine? The folks in TC have hardly anything to do anyway and so you might as well force them to soak up a bit of their workload crossing the TMA at 120 kt in your Cessna.
However, IFR in VMC outside controlled airspace to allow a controller, workload permitting, to offer a better service and coordinate you as an IFR flight, that's "reprehensible".
Was that the gist of it?
Filing part of your route in airways so that you can benefit from the services of London Control to do all your coordination and planning while you cruise in VMC in class A, that's fine? The folks in TC have hardly anything to do anyway and so you might as well force them to soak up a bit of their workload crossing the TMA at 120 kt in your Cessna.
However, IFR in VMC outside controlled airspace to allow a controller, workload permitting, to offer a better service and coordinate you as an IFR flight, that's "reprehensible".
Was that the gist of it?
When I am IFR, I am IFR. I don't tell them I something different in order to get a 'better' service than others. Last time I looked I was required to be IFR in Class A. I use the airways under the same rules as everyone else using them and do not ask for anything different.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
Bose-X, you're still totally missing the point.
If you (or any other pilot) say you're flying IFR, then you are, provided you comply with the requirements. It's not dishonest or bad airmanship to do it, just personal choice.
If you (or any other pilot) say you're flying IFR, then you are, provided you comply with the requirements. It's not dishonest or bad airmanship to do it, just personal choice.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you (or any other pilot) say you're flying IFR, then you are, provided you comply with the requirements. It's not dishonest or bad airmanship to do it, just personal choice.
It's my opinion. You don't have to agree with it, but you are wasting your energy trying to convince me too your way of thinking just because you don't agree with mine.