scud flying VFR @ 500 ft AGL question

pilotod

pilotod

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Dec 10, 2011
Messages
232
Location
Erie, CO
Display Name
Display name:
eyeflying
I know this is probably answered in another thread but....

What if I'm flying VFR and need to go to 500 ft AGL to stay under the cloud layer and I'm flying over a populated area? Do I have to ask for approval to do that if I'm outside a controlled area? And if I wanted to land at a class E I think I'm supposed to ask for a special VFR. I was just thinking if I was flying today around north of Denver.
 
Are you asking from a safety perspective o from a legal perspective? At 500' over a populated area do you think you're in a position to safely land if you lose your engine?
 
Legal but also best method if it ever happens.

gprellwitz said:
Are you asking from a safety perspective o from a legal perspective? At 500' over a populated area do you think you're in a position to safely land if you lose your engine?
Click to expand...
 
500' AGL above a "populated" area is legal?
 
Not legal nor smart. Nothing around Denver really classifies as an "unpopulated" area by the FAA's interpretation.
 
ok, this was just a what if question.
 
I thought it was 1000' over densily populated areas....500' from a farmer in his field was what I was tought.
 
If the pilot in this situation is IFR rated, they should immediately call for a pop-up IFR clearance and get out of trouble. If they are only VFR, they should turn around because presumably at some point in the past things were better and they had continued into deteriorating conditions.
 
yep, but let's say the clouds came down behind you as well and you're close to where you want to land....say 5 miles. Let's say you turned around and the cloud layer there was even worse so you decide to go back to your original heading. Basically what do you do? And I'm not IFR certfied.

Gubbins said:
If the pilot in this situation is IFR rated, they should immediately call for a pop-up IFR clearance and get out of trouble. If they are only VFR, they should turn around because presumably at some point in the past things were better and they had continued into deteriorating conditions.
Click to expand...
 
right. but it's either fly illegally in a cloud (with no IFR cert) or fly illegally at 500 ft.

Red Air Rambo said:
I thought it was 1000' over densily populated areas....500' from a farmer in his field was what I was tought.
Click to expand...
 
Well the 500' over a populated or urban area is a no no but I'd consider your hypothetical and emergency situation. I'd also think that you are more likely end up auguring it in to a populated area if you end up VFR into IMC than flying 500' in VMC over a populated area. In that situation I'd say the pilot needs to immediately contact ATC and get to the nearest airport.
 
ATC cannot waive 91.119. If you get into that situation, you'd better declare an emergency, do whatever it takes to survive, and deal with the FSDO later when you get safely on the ground. Just be advised that their questions will be how you allowed yourself to get into a situation where the only way to survive was to declare an emergency and break the rules, so do your level best to avoid finding yourself in that situation in the first place. Y'know, "The superior pilot uses his/her superior judgment to avoid having to demonstrate his/her superior skill."
 
Last edited:
I should have made my comment a bit clearer. When I said contact ATC it was obviously to declare and emergency. I haven't heard it in a while but the old adage "Skin, Tin, Ticket" in that order.
 
thanks. The answer is to declare an emergency. I didn't think I could fly that low and get away with it....or maybe I could but that's not the legal way.
 
pilotod said:
thanks. The answer is to declare an emergency. I didn't think I could fly that low and get away with it....or maybe I could but that's not the legal way.
Click to expand...

The fact that you would even think about scares me.
 
Red Air Rambo said:
I thought it was 1000' over densily populated areas....500' from a farmer in his field was what I was tought.
Click to expand...

1,000' above the tallest object within 2,000' is what you really meant (I think).
 
AdamZ said:
I should have made my comment a bit clearer. When I said contact ATC it was obviously to declare and emergency. I haven't heard it in a while but the old adage "Skin, Tin, Ticket" in that order.
Click to expand...

The way it was told to me was "Skin, Ticket, Tin" in that order.

Edit: This was by someone who made his living flying other people's planes.
 
EppyGA said:
The fact that you would even think about scares me.
Click to expand...

Are you a candidate to work at Walmart? :D

If ya haven't thought about scud running ya prolly haven't really thought about flying in bad weather...
 
pilotod said:
I know this is probably answered in another thread but....

What if I'm flying VFR and need to go to 500 ft AGL to stay under the cloud layer and I'm flying over a populated area? Do I have to ask for approval to do that if I'm outside a controlled area? And if I wanted to land at a class E I think I'm supposed to ask for a special VFR. I was just thinking if I was flying today around north of Denver.
Click to expand...


Only E surface area I see is Ft Collins. That's the only one you'd need a SVFR clearance through. As long as you're at or below 700 ft AGL you're good to fly VFR below the transition areas. So if you got yourself in a bind and you're at 500 ft, then just turn around and get back to where you took off from. Hopefully you have a GPS with a current database that has obstruction awareness.
 
EppyGA said:
Airplane meet TV tower.
Click to expand...

Since most of our TV towers here are on mountains, it's not quite the risk folks from the flatland are used to, since the broadcasters don't need 1000'+ towers here too much, but...

There's a 558' AGL tower directly East of KFNL, the 1180' NOAA tower twins next to I-25 near KEIK, a 753' AGL just West of Pierce, CO on up toward the Wyoming border, and piles of the 250'-371' AGL variety grain silos and what-not in each town up there.

ujudy7ev.jpg


I wouldn't fly around up that-a-way at 500' AGL unless it really WAS an emergency. It's an excellent way to end up dead.

This is the local HDTV complex for the metro. Only 833' AGL. The hang gliders aren't out too often over there and are on the north side of Mount Zion, where the big "M" for the Colorado School of Mines is located. The TV towers are one mountain South.

5esyqyde.jpg
 
I am reminded of an incident where a newly minted pilot flying on top with his GF and daughter decided he would descend through the clouds about 100 miles west of here. He almost got away with it and all was good until he hit a communication tower.

Letting yourself get into stupid situations is one thing, not talking to ATC so they can help you find a clear area to descend is another.
 
@ Nates post. It so strange for us east coasters to see sectionals that are all brown.
 
Geico266 said:
I am reminded of an incident where a newly minted pilot flying on top with his GF and daughter decided he would descend through the clouds about 100 miles west of here. He almost got away with it and all was good until he hit a communication tower.

Letting yourself get into stupid situations is one thing, not talking to ATC so they can help you find a clear area to descend is another.
Click to expand...

I think more troublesome than the actual towers are the guy wires.
 
pilotod said:
right. but it's either fly illegally in a cloud (with no IFR cert) or fly illegally at 500 ft.
Click to expand...

or land ASAP, or check weather before you head to the airport and realize today is NOT a good day to fly nor to die.

For those not in the area, Denver has been pretty much IFR for Friday and today, with temps barely above freezing.
 
pilotod said:
What if I'm flying VFR and need to go to 500 ft AGL to stay under the cloud layer and I'm flying over a populated area?
Click to expand...

VFR flight is not possible under those conditions. You must comply with §91.119 Minimum safe altitudes: General and §91.155 Basic VFR weather minimums at all times.

Do I have to ask for approval to do that if I'm outside a controlled area?
Click to expand...

No person that you could contact in that situation has the authority to grant your request.
 
Ron Levy said:
ATC cannot waive 91.119. If you get into that situation, you'd better declare an emergency, do whatever it takes to survive, and deal with the FSDO later when you get safely on the ground. Just be advised that their questions will be how you allowed yourself to get into a situation where the only way to survive was to declare an emergency and break the rules, so do your level best to avoid finding yourself in that situation in the first place. Y'know, "The superior pilot uses his/her superior judgment to avoid having to demonstrate his/her superior skill."
Click to expand...

A pilot does not have to declare an emergency in order to deviate from Part 91, he just has to be in an emergency situation.
 
AdamZ said:
I should have made my comment a bit clearer. When I said contact ATC it was obviously to declare and emergency. I haven't heard it in a while but the old adage "Skin, Tin, Ticket" in that order.
Click to expand...

You don't have to contact ATC and declare an emergency in order to exercise emergency authority to deviate from Part 91, you just have to be in an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action.
 
pilotod- you need an instrument rating. The entire airspace is setup for that. IT also setup to squeeze you out of exactly what you propose.
 
roncachamp said:
You don't have to contact ATC and declare an emergency in order to exercise emergency authority to deviate from Part 91, you just have to be in an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action.
Click to expand...

If it were me in the situation the op described, I'd probably want all the help I could get, so if I was aviating and navigating ok I'd want to communicate with ATC regardless of whether I was required.
 
pilotod said:
right. but it's either fly illegally in a cloud (with no IFR cert) or fly illegally at 500 ft.
Click to expand...

Not a viable plan. FAA statistics indicate that for non-rated VFR pilots who enter IMC the duration of that flight before losing control is measured in scant minutes.
 
Threefingeredjack said:
Not a viable plan. FAA statistics indicate that for non-rated VFR pilots who enter IMC the duration of that flight before losing control is measured in scant minutes.
Click to expand...

Do you have a link to those statistics? The ones I've seen like that were not from the FAA, and used bogus methodology.

I'm not advocating VFR into IMC, but I'm concerned that exaggerating the fatality rates can backfire, by inducing panic in inadvertent IMC situations.
 
Palmpilot said:
Do you have a link to those statistics? The ones I've seen like that were not from the FAA, and used bogus methodology.

I'm not advocating VFR into IMC, but I'm concerned that exaggerating the fatality rates can backfire, by inducing panic in inadvertent IMC situations.
Click to expand...
It was a study done by a university using valid methodology, but it was done nearly half a century ago, before PP's had to have 3 hours of training in flight solely by reference to instruments, so its validity with today's pilots is open to question. And that doesn't even begin to address the impact of the extensive use of flying video games like MSFS on the issue.
 
Ron Levy said:
It was a study done by a university using valid methodology, but it was done nearly half a century ago, before PP's had to have 3 hours of training in flight solely by reference to instruments, so its validity with today's pilots is open to question. And that doesn't even begin to address the impact of the extensive use of flying video games like MSFS on the issue.
Click to expand...

That sounds like the one I heard about. In addition to predating the 3 hour training requirement, one of the comments posted on the following YouTube posting alleges that the AI, DG and rate of climb indicators were covered for the entire experiment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXzYZjpoz_E

I certainly don't have any trouble believing that 178 seconds was the average survival time for pilots thrust into a partial panel situation with zero instrument time.
 
AdamZ said:
If it were me in the situation the op described, I'd probably want all the help I could get, so if I was aviating and navigating ok I'd want to communicate with ATC regardless of whether I was required.
Click to expand...
Several years ago I was in a situation something like the OP's scenario. I was higher than 500 AGL of course, but the clouds forced me low enough to be concerned about obstacles like towers. I thought about contacting ATC with a mayday, then decided against it. There was absolutely no help they could give me, nor could knowing about my being there be of benefit to anyone else who was legally IFR in those clouds, since I was about 2500 feet below the MEA, nowhere near an IAP approach course, and way too low for radar contact. Using my 91.3 authority I scud ran to my destination, which also happened to be the nearest airport. But I never declared to anyone.

That was also the event that caused me to promise to myself to get instrument rated. I've been almost there twice now... hopefully, third time's the charm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top