Possible admendments to VFR operations under VMC?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Out there some where?
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Possible admendments to VFR operations under VMC?
Have any fellow Ppruners read, or heard about a possible introduction by the CAA to admend the VFR whilst under VMC?
As everyone knows - at the present time a PPL(H) & (A) pilot can operate under Visual Flight Rules in Visual Meteorological Conditions providing a minimum distance from cloud of atleast 1,500 metres horizontally is kept and 1,000 feet vertically and in sight of the ground.
Apparantly, if true, the new admendment will state that a PPL(H) & (A) pilot would NOT be able to operate under VFR in VMC if the cloud base is 800 feet agl or lower (relevant to the aerodrome, airport, area and transit route) and if the visibilty is less than 3k.
Taking in to consideration that a helicopter may operate in conditions with less than 1,500 flight visibility, provided that forward speed allows sufficient collision-avoidance time in prevainling conditions, I can only assume the above also applies.
Please don't shoot the messenger. I'm just trying to clarify whether it is true for my own interest?
Captain Cop!
As everyone knows - at the present time a PPL(H) & (A) pilot can operate under Visual Flight Rules in Visual Meteorological Conditions providing a minimum distance from cloud of atleast 1,500 metres horizontally is kept and 1,000 feet vertically and in sight of the ground.
Apparantly, if true, the new admendment will state that a PPL(H) & (A) pilot would NOT be able to operate under VFR in VMC if the cloud base is 800 feet agl or lower (relevant to the aerodrome, airport, area and transit route) and if the visibilty is less than 3k.
Taking in to consideration that a helicopter may operate in conditions with less than 1,500 flight visibility, provided that forward speed allows sufficient collision-avoidance time in prevainling conditions, I can only assume the above also applies.
Please don't shoot the messenger. I'm just trying to clarify whether it is true for my own interest?
Captain Cop!
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is certainly an old suggestion that may find its way onto the 'statutes' shortly.
However, I understand that it would not apply to operation within an aerodrome and hence low level training can still take place in poor conditions.
I thought the vis restriction was 1.5k but I could be wrong
However, I understand that it would not apply to operation within an aerodrome and hence low level training can still take place in poor conditions.
I thought the vis restriction was 1.5k but I could be wrong
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Age: 71
Posts: 1,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can't find a link at the moment, but I believe it was out for formal consultation from the Belgrano. My recollection is that it was not just going to apply to PPLs but all pilots. The BHAB were consulting about it too, I think.
The 800 ft sounds a bit high for heles.
The 800 ft sounds a bit high for heles.
The One Your Mother Warned You About
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Wherever they pay me
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have in front of me a letter from Peter Norton of BHAB. The gist of it is that PPL (H) holders will be restricted to a horizontal visibility of no less than 1500m, unless they hold an instrument rating. It follows that flights conducted in viz of less than 1500m must be made under IFR and in consequence the aircraft will require a basic scale of instruments, even when the flight is to be conducted by visual reference. Additionally, in circumstances where IFR compliance is required, the holder of a UK PPL(H) must be instrument rated in line with JAR FCL requirements.
Nothing in the letter about heights AAL. The CAA has published a letter of intent and the Regulatory Impact Assesment (RIA) has been published on the CAA website. www.caa.co.uk follow the links >Safety Regulation>General Aviation>Information.
I haven't seen the letter of intent or RIA but, as far as I'm aware the changes apply to PPL holders only. Lets face it from 1500m viz to totally IFR can happen b
quick. I still wonder at CPL/ATPL holders being allowed to operate VFR in 800m!
Peter's letter was dated 7th Feb 2007 so the CAA site may have changed by now.
Nothing in the letter about heights AAL. The CAA has published a letter of intent and the Regulatory Impact Assesment (RIA) has been published on the CAA website. www.caa.co.uk follow the links >Safety Regulation>General Aviation>Information.
I haven't seen the letter of intent or RIA but, as far as I'm aware the changes apply to PPL holders only. Lets face it from 1500m viz to totally IFR can happen b
quick. I still wonder at CPL/ATPL holders being allowed to operate VFR in 800m!Peter's letter was dated 7th Feb 2007 so the CAA site may have changed by now.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 18 Degrees North
Posts: 699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
captain cop,
my understanding of this is as follows,
a PPL(H) has never had a requirement to to be 1000 ft clear of cloud or to have 1500m, the requirement has been to be 1. clear of cloud 2. in sight of surface and 3. to fly at an airspeed commensurate with the forward visibilty.
the CAA letter of intent introduces a minimum visibity of 1500m for a PPL(H) only, a CPL(H) would still have the original requirements when flying privately, also on an AOC flight a ops manual will typicall state 1500m with 800m possible if other requirements are met, which also will not change.
this business of 800 feet cloudbase is not correct, as long as you have have 1500m and can comply with the 500 ft rule over an uncongested area, you can go. a reasonable guide might be 600ft cloudbase, but this is not a limit.
anyone care to agree or disagree?
regards
CF
my understanding of this is as follows,
a PPL(H) has never had a requirement to to be 1000 ft clear of cloud or to have 1500m, the requirement has been to be 1. clear of cloud 2. in sight of surface and 3. to fly at an airspeed commensurate with the forward visibilty.
the CAA letter of intent introduces a minimum visibity of 1500m for a PPL(H) only, a CPL(H) would still have the original requirements when flying privately, also on an AOC flight a ops manual will typicall state 1500m with 800m possible if other requirements are met, which also will not change.
this business of 800 feet cloudbase is not correct, as long as you have have 1500m and can comply with the 500 ft rule over an uncongested area, you can go. a reasonable guide might be 600ft cloudbase, but this is not a limit.
anyone care to agree or disagree?
regards
CF
Guest
Posts: n/a
For a PPL(H), I don't think for one minute that a 600' cloudbase is suitable for departure. You say that with the 500' rule, 100' is adequate for keeping out of cloud? There are many PPL holders who can't even fly within a 100' error. Not saying all but there are a few. What if their altimeter is incorrectly set? Wouldn't be first time ether. They look at 500' on Alt an OOPS, in cloud. Also flown with a couple of PPL's who quite happily kept climbing out of the circuit into cloud. It took a while for them to even realise the error of their mistake (too long to survive solo anyway) but anyone who takes off with only 100' to play with might not be the best person to be flying. It doesn't take a brave man to make a safe decision. !!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 18 Degrees North
Posts: 699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
kissmysquirrel,
I knew someone would say what you just have, I NEVER said it was sensible, I said what is LEGAL !
in the past when I have been responsible for releasing a helicopter to a PPL self fly hirer, the starting point might have been 1500ft, 5k, <15kts for a rookie, changing to 1000ft, 3k, <25kts for a more experienced person for example.
this discussion was just about what is possible, in my experience PPL owners sometimes fly in dreadful weather which could no way be described as sensible.
regards
CF
I knew someone would say what you just have, I NEVER said it was sensible, I said what is LEGAL !
in the past when I have been responsible for releasing a helicopter to a PPL self fly hirer, the starting point might have been 1500ft, 5k, <15kts for a rookie, changing to 1000ft, 3k, <25kts for a more experienced person for example.
this discussion was just about what is possible, in my experience PPL owners sometimes fly in dreadful weather which could no way be described as sensible.
regards
CF
Last edited by Camp Freddie; 21st Mar 2007 at 16:56.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: left coast canada
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My oh my how different things are between our countries. 500' - 600' AGL ceilings we would rarely get airborne any winter on the left coast of Canada. Mind you we are rarely over populated areas...
Guest
Posts: n/a
this business of 800 feet cloudbase is not correct, as long as you have have 1500m and can comply with the 500 ft rule over an uncongested area, you can go. a reasonable guide might be 600ft cloudbase, but this is not a limit.
anyone care to agree or disagree?
regards
CF
anyone care to agree or disagree?
regards
CF
You've done an instructor course with one of the best and don't think for one minute you would launch in those conditions.
