Not allowed to cancel?

jimhorner

jimhorner

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Oct 28, 2012
Messages
893
Location
Santa Clara
Display Name
Display name:
Jim Horner
Okay, I had an interesting situation today that puzzles me, and I wanted to see what others think about it.

I filed IFR from San Jose (KSJC) to Reid Hillview airport (KRHV) this morning. I was going for the purpose of flying Young Eagles at an EAA Young Eagles event at KRHV. These two airports are only about 6nm from each other, but the ceilings at SJC were 900 overcast, so the only way to get out was IFR. SJC is a class C, and RHV is a class D.

The ATIS for RHV was reporting overcast at 900 ft, but when I got over it (by that time ATC had me at 5000 ft), it was obvious that the marine layer had pulled back, and RHV was obviously VFR, although the ATIS had not yet been updated. NORCal approach had me switch to another controller, and when I called them up, I informed them that I had the airport in sight, it was VFR, and I was going to cancel IFR.

Now here is where it got weird. The approach controller said he couldn’t allow me to do that. He said that since RHV was reporting below VFR minimums, I had to stay IFR, and he vectored me around the long way to join the approach??

Can they do that? I’m PIC, and I should be able to cancel at any time when I’m in VFR conditions, right? How is it that they can refuse cancellation, just based on an old ATIS report?

Doesn’t seem right to me...

Maybe I should have asked for a contact approach?

The Young Eagles event went well, BTW. I flew a total of 14 kids, and they all had a great time. My first passenger’s mom was in the tower working ground control. Evidently she had requested me specifically for her daughter’s young eagle flight, not sure why. That was nice. When the mom told her daughter on the radio to have a nice flight, the kid’s grin was a mile wide. When I flew back to SJC this afternoon (full VFR by then), the mom, who was working tower at the time, thanked me for the experience and said her daughter had a blast. Love doing the Young Eagles flights.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
The ATIS may have been inaccurate, but it was the official weather for the airport at that time. My understanding is that ATC cannot accept a cancellation if the reported weather is below VFR minimums for the airport.

As far as a visual or contact approach, seems like either one would have been reasonable, but my experience is that sometimes controllers tend to shy away from those in "marginal" weather because of the number of pilots who can't find the airport like they thought they could, which puts the controllers in a bit of a bind figuring out what to do with them.

:cool: on the Young Eagles flights!
 
From an ATC standpoint, if the reported ceiling is less than 1,000 ft, they consider the airport closed to VFR traffic as a corollary to 91.155(c)
 
The weather for deciding VFR or IFR for takeoff or landing where controlled airspace exists to the surface is dictated by the reported weather, not what you experience in flight. See Part 91 and the definition of ceiling in Part 1.

Hypothetically you should have been able to request a contact approach, or to go Special VFR. The controller can't offer either one unless you ask for it.
 
jimhorner said:
Okay, I had an interesting situation today that puzzles me, and I wanted to see what others think about it.

I filed IFR from San Jose (KSJC) to Reid Hillview airport (KRHV) this morning. I was going for the purpose of flying Young Eagles at an EAA Young Eagles event at KRHV. These two airports are only about 6nm from each other, but the ceilings at SJC were 900 overcast, so the only way to get out was IFR. SJC is a class C, and RHV is a class D.

The ATIS for RHV was reporting overcast at 900 ft, but when I got over it (by that time ATC had me at 5000 ft), it was obvious that the marine layer had pulled back, and RHV was obviously VFR, although the ATIS had not yet been updated. NORCal approach had me switch to another controller, and when I called them up, I informed them that I had the airport in sight, it was VFR, and I was going to cancel IFR.

Now here is where it got weird. The approach controller said he couldn’t allow me to do that. He said that since RHV was reporting below VFR minimums, I had to stay IFR, and he vectored me around the long way to join the approach??

Can they do that? I’m PIC, and I should be able to cancel at any time when I’m in VFR conditions, right? How is it that they can refuse cancellation, just based on an old ATIS report?

Doesn’t seem right to me...

Maybe I should have asked for a contact approach?

The Young Eagles event went well, BTW. I flew a total of 14 kids, and they all had a great time. My first passenger’s mom was in the tower working ground control. Evidently she had requested me specifically for her daughter’s young eagle flight, not sure why. That was nice. When the mom told her daughter on the radio to have a nice flight, the kid’s grin was a mile wide. When I flew back to SJC this afternoon (full VFR by then), the mom, who was working tower at the time, thanked me for the experience and said her daughter had a blast. Love doing the Young Eagles flights.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Controller was wrong. The pilot is the sole authority on cancelling IFR
 
MauleSkinner said:
The ATIS may have been inaccurate, but it was the official weather for the airport at that time. My understanding is that ATC cannot accept a cancellation if the reported weather is below VFR minimums for the airport.

As far as a visual or contact approach, seems like either one would have been reasonable, but my experience is that sometimes controllers tend to shy away from those in "marginal" weather because of the number of pilots who can't find the airport like they thought they could, which puts the controllers in a bit of a bind figuring out what to do with them.

:cool: on the Young Eagles flights!
Click to expand...
No visual approaches allowed in (reported) IFR weather either. Need to be well versed with contact approaches imo. Not so bad for part 91 perhaps.
 
I know the ceiling has to be 500' above the MVA to vector someone for a VA, but when someone cancels IFR I thought you had to terminate IFR services. Pretty sure that was the rule when I controller, but been out of ATC a long time now, rules may have changed. Now perhaps this airspace had other local procedures in place, I dunno. Yes, tower could have denied you a landing clearance IF it were IFR.
 
Last edited:
luvflyin said:
Controller was wrong. The pilot is the sole authority on cancelling IFR
Click to expand...

That is what I thought. Yes, I can see approach not clearing me to land VFR at what they believe is an airport below minimums, but how do they have the authority to not accept my cancellation?

Tower might not clear me to land if the airport is below mins, but I’m surprised that approach wouldn’t accept my cancellation.

Weird...

And, as I was making my approach from way the heck out, the ATIS changed to sky clear. Arrgh.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
midlifeflyer said:
Technically true. But then they could deny entry into the Class D. Practical net effect is the same in this case.
Click to expand...

But wouldn’t that be the tower doing the denying and not approach? Tower owns the Class D, not approach, right? And tower knew it was VFR, because they updated the ATIS when I was on final. Sky clear. How could approach deny my cancellation?

Think I’ll give NORCal a call...



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
I would’ve said “cancelation received, Reid Hillview is reporting IFR, ceiling 900 ft, say request.”
 
jimhorner said:
But wouldn’t that be the tower doing the denying and not approach? Tower owns the Class D, not approach, right? And tower knew it was VFR, because they updated the ATIS when I was on final. Sky clear. How could approach deny my cancellation?

Think I’ll give NORCal a call...



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Report back what they say. It will be interesting.

My guess is that the distinction between Approach and Tower is inconsequential. They talk to each other.
 
jimhorner said:
But wouldn’t that be the tower doing the denying and not approach? Tower owns the Class D, not approach, right? And tower knew it was VFR, because they updated the ATIS when I was on final. Sky clear. How could approach deny my cancellation?

Think I’ll give NORCal a call...



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Not really. Most Towers don’t have IFR control authority. Via Letters of Agreement with Approach or Center they often have delegated to them initial separation of subsequent departures and departures vs arrivals and sometimes Special VFR operations. Approach doesn’t ask the Tower for permission to clear an airplane for an Approach. They do it and tell the Tower it’s coming. You likely could have gotten in VFR even before it got on the ATIS. There is not an FSS at RHV and I doubt very much if there is NWS office there with an observer who reports the weather. The controllers there will be LAWRS certified. That’s Limited Aviation Weather Reporting Station. They determine the ceiling and they don’t have to wait until the ATIS is recorded and acknowledged by Approach to conduct operations based on their observation.
 
Velocity173 said:
I would’ve said “cancelation received, Reid Hillview is reporting IFR, ceiling 900 ft, say request.”
Click to expand...

Dang, your a nice guy. I’d of said squawk VFR, good day. Just kidding of course. But if the controller was busy enough with higher priorities that giving service to VFR aircraft at the time was not appropriate, it would be a valid response. Assuming of course it wasn’t in C or B sky
 
Last edited:
Kritchlow said:
No visual approaches allowed in (reported) IFR weather either. Need to be well versed with contact approaches imo. Not so bad for part 91 perhaps.
Click to expand...
You are correct...a visual would not be available.

Contact approaches (and cruise clearances, for that matter) are valuable tools when they can be used effectively.
 
Less than 3 miles reported. So what did you want to do, cancel IFR and request Special VFR?
 
I once watched a 182 fly his VOR approach for 22 minutes (yes, 22 minutes--and there weren't enough clouds for me to ever lose sight of him) while I held over the VOR...I was a minute too late to get there first. ;) The field was reported IFR, so they couldn't issue anything else. Had to wait until he was on the ground and canceled before I got my approach clearance.

I almost beat him to the ramp, though.:D
 
Clip4 said:
Less than 3 miles reported. So what did you want to do, cancel IFR and request Special VFR?
Click to expand...

Where are you getting that the vis was less than 3 miles? I only see a reference that the ceiling was reported as 900 feet.
 
You can cancel ifr. But you cannot land. Your call
 
MauleSkinner said:
The ATIS may have been inaccurate, but it was the official weather for the airport at that time. My understanding is that ATC cannot accept a cancellation if the reported weather is below VFR minimums for the airport.

As far as a visual or contact approach, seems like either one would have been reasonable, but my experience is that sometimes controllers tend to shy away from those in "marginal" weather because of the number of pilots who can't find the airport like they thought they could, which puts the controllers in a bit of a bind figuring out what to do with them.

:cool: on the Young Eagles flights!
Click to expand...
The full approach or a contact were his options. The controller would have denied the visual.
 
not exactly the same scenario but we were at KHKY (Class D) for breakfast about a month ago and when we went to leave, checked atis and it claimed 1/4m vis and low ceilings, and it was a bright sunny day. I called 'em up and they said yeah, atis is wrong, cleared for takeoff.
 
Pretty sure in the OP's case that the ATIS is the official wx, not what the pilot happens to be reporting out his window (like what the other posters said).. so to me at least it would make sense that he wouldn't accept a cancellation request when flying into an airport that is, as far as he knows, solid IFR. Velocity's response was probably more appropriate, but either way I'm not surprised. I mean, it makes sense... imagine the slippery slope that could land people in.. say someone "reports VFR" and flies a visual approach into an airport reporting IFR.. what's going to happen when separation is lost, a collision happens, etc. Lawyers and insurance would have a field day with that. Mind you also, VFR <> VMC

btw
Flying into L52 this past weekend it was very hazy with a marine layer burning off but it was VFR, one minute weather was reporting 5 miles, clear skies, haze. I was on an IFR flight plan. At around 7 miles the airport came into view and I requested cancellation. ATC response was interesting. I picked up the one minute weather about 15 miles out, and advised with the same controller that I had it. Then at 7 miles out I requested cancellation and he came back with "confirm one minute weather and field is VFR" and I responded with "one minute weather was reporting 5 miles haze clear skies, field in site. Cancelling IFR and if conditions change will advise for clearance request into San Luis Obispo" he copied my cancellation request and approved me for a freq change. So he wanted to be sure we had the weather and it was in fact VFR and were not planning any kind of scud running antics.. or he just wanted something for his tapes. Either way, even at an uncontrolled field it wasn't a simple cancellation

Personally, outside of what the regulations say, the controllers also probably are not interested in tooling around with a guy who *thinks* he can make it in VFR only to find himself out of sorts and having to give vectors, or worse, have the guy end up as a pile of rubble. We just had the other thread about that guy who was trying to remain VFR but ended up in the spiraling dive killing himself and those on board with him

PS, if the airport has an approach, and you are already on an IFR flight plan, why not shoot it? It might add 5, maybe 10 minutes tops to your route in most cases, and even if you can't log it (no safety/VFR) you'll still get some valuable practice...
 
Kenny Phillips said:
Wouldn't it really be "Reid Hillview is reporting IMC..."?
Click to expand...
IMC <> IFR

In my experience I've heard on the radio twr say "field is IFR, say intentions" to both arriving VFR traffic and planes planning to depart VFR. Never heard "field is IMC." IMC has to do with the physical weather conditions, but IFR / VFR are the actual rules around when a field must go IFR depending on distance from clouds visibility, etc. In the case of controlled operations it's the Rules that are crticial. Theoretically one could fly into an a IFR field without ever actually going into a cloud...
 
Tantalum said:
I've heard on the radio twr say "field is IFR, ... Never heard "field is IMC."
Click to expand...
Maybe because fields don't fly by reference to instruments but they do abide by rules? :)
 
Kenny Phillips said:
Wouldn't it really be "Reid Hillview is reporting IMC..."?
Click to expand...

They’re referring to specific ceiling and ground visibility (VFR,MVFR,IFR,LIFR) being reported for the airfield that govern the operation and not the conditions of flight (VMC / IMC).
 
Last edited:
Obviously I was not there and am not looking at a chart, but this is too simple. Folks are making this more complicated than it really is.... was. Personally, and this is me only, I am not expecting others to do as I do, I would have done the entire flight SVFR unless something was in the way like mountains or towers or really tall giraffes.

And again, I am not looking at a chart. How much of this occurred in Class C airspace.??

Change destinations to a field reporting VFR. After leaving Class C, cancel IFR. Call the original destination and ask for a special if able to do so without infiltrating Class C.

Or do the approach, (I always need practice) land, give a PIREP.
 
eman1200 said:
not exactly the same scenario but we were at KHKY (Class D) for breakfast about a month ago and when we went to leave, checked atis and it claimed 1/4m vis and low ceilings, and it was a bright sunny day. I called 'em up and they said yeah, atis is wrong, cleared for takeoff.
Click to expand...

Pretty darn close to the same scenario. It would have been something like "yeah, we're cuttin a new ATIS now, report downwind."
 
Tantalum said:
RE: contact approach. Probably the best option in this case if it was IFR but you wanted to get in without flying the approach, assuming you had the requisite minima

Pretty funny, a long time ago AOPA did an article about instrument flying, they call contact approaches "scary"

https://web.archive.org/web/20100521060414/http://www.aopa.org/pilot/features/ii_9808.html

View attachment 66722
Click to expand...
The reality is that a contact approach is almost identical to arriving via SVFR...same flight conditions, same expectation of finding an airport that you can’t see yet.

Based on past discussions here, if you did a poll on SVFR, you’d get people who “do it all the time”, people who consider it dangerous and irresponsible, and pretty much everything in between. I don’t have a problem doing either one, but I’ve flown with pilots who refuse to do either one.
 
luvflyin said:
Pretty darn close to the same scenario. It would have been something like "yeah, we're cuttin a new ATIS now, report downwind."
Click to expand...

yeah, we were heading out and I was nervous they were gonna ground us.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Based on past discussions here, if you did a poll on SVFR, you’d get people who “do it all the time”, people who consider it dangerous and irresponsible, and pretty much everything in between. I don’t have a problem doing either one, but I’ve flown with pilots who refuse to do either one.
Click to expand...
Yup. And as with everything the variables that go into all of these have a big impact. My thing with SVFR is... if you are not IR, then you're sort of playing with fire.. and if you are IR, then why not just file and cancel later if needed. Seems like a funky niche market but to each their own
 
Tantalum said:
Yup. And as with everything the variables that go into all of these have a big impact. My thing with SVFR is... if you are not IR, then you're sort of playing with fire.. and if you are IR, then why not just file and cancel later if needed. Seems like a funky niche market but to each their own
Click to expand...
I used to use SVFR frequently because there were no approaches (or weather reporting to allow me to shoot the approach under Part 135), so I’d shoot the approach at a nearby airport and get SVFR out of that surface area to go to my destination. I also did a lot of them in my VFR airplane.

I know I did a few before I was instrument rated, but again, if you deal properly with the variables, it should be a safe operation.
 
MauleSkinner said:
The reality is that a contact approach is almost identical to arriving via SVFR...same flight conditions, same expectation of finding an airport that you can’t see yet.
Click to expand...
Except a contact has IFR priority over SVFR.
 
Tantalum said:
Pretty sure in the OP's case that the ATIS is the official wx, not what the pilot happens to be reporting out his window (like what the other posters said).. so to me at least it would make sense that he wouldn't accept a cancellation request when flying into an airport that is, as far as he knows, solid IFR. Velocity's response was probably more appropriate, but either way I'm not surprised. I mean, it makes sense... imagine the slippery slope that could land people in.. say someone "reports VFR" and flies a visual approach into an airport reporting IFR.. what's going to happen when separation is lost, a collision happens, etc. Lawyers and insurance would have a field day with that. Mind you also, VFR <> VMC

btw
Flying into L52 this past weekend it was very hazy with a marine layer burning off but it was VFR, one minute weather was reporting 5 miles, clear skies, haze. I was on an IFR flight plan. At around 7 miles the airport came into view and I requested cancellation. ATC response was interesting. I picked up the one minute weather about 15 miles out, and advised with the same controller that I had it. Then at 7 miles out I requested cancellation and he came back with "confirm one minute weather and field is VFR" and I responded with "one minute weather was reporting 5 miles haze clear skies, field in site. Cancelling IFR and if conditions change will advise for clearance request into San Luis Obispo" he copied my cancellation request and approved me for a freq change. So he wanted to be sure we had the weather and it was in fact VFR and were not planning any kind of scud running antics.. or he just wanted something for his tapes. Either way, even at an uncontrolled field it wasn't a simple cancellation

Personally, outside of what the regulations say, the controllers also probably are not interested in tooling around with a guy who *thinks* he can make it in VFR only to find himself out of sorts and having to give vectors, or worse, have the guy end up as a pile of rubble. We just had the other thread about that guy who was trying to remain VFR but ended up in the spiraling dive killing himself and those on board with him

PS, if the airport has an approach, and you are already on an IFR flight plan, why not shoot it? It might add 5, maybe 10 minutes tops to your route in most cases, and even if you can't log it (no safety/VFR) you'll still get some valuable practice...
Click to expand...

"Pretty sure in the OP's case that the ATIS is the official wx, not what the pilot happens to be reporting out his window..." But what the Official Weather Observer is seeing out of his window is, and waiting on a new ATIS to be made is not required for Controllers to conduct operations based on that observation.

"...wouldn't accept a cancellation request..." There is no such thing as a cancellation 'request.' The pilot does it, the controller acknowledges it. The pilot is the sole authority on cancelling IFR.

What happened at Oceano was about this:

b. Resolve potential conflicts with all other
aircraft, advise an overtaking aircraft of the distance
to the preceding aircraft and speed difference, and
ensure that weather conditions at the airport are VFR
or that the pilot has been informed that weather is not
available for the destination airport. Upon pilot
request, advise the pilot of the frequency to receive
weather information where AWOS/ASOS is available.
PHRASEOLOGY−
(Call sign) (control instructions as required) CLEARED
VISUAL APPROACH RUNWAY (number);
or
(Call sign) (control instructions as required) CLEARED
VISUAL APPROACH TO (airport name)
(and if appropriate)
WEATHER NOT AVAILABLE OR VERIFY THAT YOU
HAVE THE (airport) WEATHER.
NOTE−
At airports where weather information is not available, a
pilot request for a visual approach indicates that descent
and flight to the airport can be made visually and clear of
clouds
 
eman1200 said:
not exactly the same scenario but we were at KHKY (Class D) for breakfast about a month ago and when we went to leave, checked atis and it claimed 1/4m vis and low ceilings, and it was a bright sunny day. I called 'em up and they said yeah, atis is wrong, cleared for takeoff.
Click to expand...

The restaurant hacked the ATIS hoping to keep you around until after lunch
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top