I'm curious about your thoughts on how. Most folks I've come across see VFR On Top as something for very few situations.Cool. Thanks. They have a lot about the rules for flying vfr on too, but couldn’t find anything in the far/aim about the phrasing for the transition, and this seems like something I could use a bunch, especially in New England.
I understand your point. Yes, VFR on top would allow you the flexibility to change altitudes to maintain VFR cloud clearances, but there are at least two limitations which I think limit its usefulness.Lot’s of low layers near the coast, so I could go vfr on top and request changes in altitudes to stay above clouds as long as I am above minimum alts, no? I guess I see your point that I could also request a hard altitude assignment as IFR, but I think vfr on top allows a little more flexibility?
Newly minted license here so trying to learn the practical side of IFR since I have a decent handle on the regs.
Mostly true. But at the same time, you already see there are things you did not learn. Even beyond "practical," if you pay attention to the types of questions asked here, you'll see there are a bunch of regulatory and procedural questions which don't get covered in training.Ahh good points. Thanks for the input. Will be interestig putting everything I learned into actual practice. Long time IFR’ers tell me I’ll never need about 75% of what I had to learn. I’m excited to keep with it.
Ahh good points. Thanks for the input. Will be interestig putting everything I learned into actual practice. Long time IFR’ers tell me I’ll never need about 75% of what I had to learn. I’m excited to keep with it.
The main thing to keep in mind about VFR-on-top is that IFR separation is not applied, you only get VFR advisories. Another thing on the practical side, is you're sure to forget you asked for it and go right back to busting through clouds. BTDT. It's not a tool you plan to use all the time, but a nice one to have in your tool box.Lot’s of low layers near the coast, so I could go vfr on top and request changes in altitudes to stay above clouds as long as I am above minimum alts, no? I guess I see your point that I could also request a hard altitude assignment as IFR, but I think vfr on top allows a little more flexibility?
Yea..... Center, bugsmasher 1234R, IFR request? N1234R go ahead.... N1234R would like a pop up IFR to KLIT for the Rnav approach to rwy 22. I have Kilo at Little Rock..... N1234r squawk 4323, you are cleared to Little Rock national, fly heading 320, vectors for the Rnav 22. Descend and maintain six thousand.
Works pretty well in uncongested airspace. Cant comment on busy Class Bravo though. Never done it there.
"Pop up" is not = to "On top". They sound kinda the same though.N1234R would like a pop up IFR to KLIT for the Rnav approach to rwy 22.
That is correct. If you are VFR On Top, you are still on an IFR flight plan so, no, it is not a "pop-up," a term used to describe a VFR flight requesting a clearance directly from ATC.OK, maybe I'm confused. If you're "VFR on top" (as opposed to "VFR over the top") you're still on an IFR flight plan right? So, it wouldn't be a pop-up IFR request, would it?
Center vs Terminal depends on where you are. Since you are on a IFR flight plan, the only position reports you would need to make are those you need to make on any other IFR flight; otherwise, you are on radar, just like any other IFR flight, and you will probably be sequenced for descent, approach, and landing like anyone else.I'd expect center to hand me off to a terminal controller who'd give me a descent to an altitude and vector, or an approach clearance at some point. If I didn't get it where I'd expected, I'd just contact center with a position report. Is this not correct?
I'm curious about your thoughts on how. Most folks I've come across see VFR On Top as something for very few situations.
Although it potentially frees you to change altitudes so long as you maintain VFR cloud clearances, you are still subject to all the other rules of IFR flight. Your course is your clearance, the altitudes need to be above the minimum IFR altitudes, maintenance of communications, etc. If the goal is to stay above the clouds, it seem easy enough in most areas to request a hard IFR altitude which will do that.
Not all communications are specified in the AIM. "Cancel VFR on Top" would work well too. Since everything other than your altitude applies, they'd likely respond with an altitude to maintain.
No, IFR separation goes out the window—it's on you. Block altitudes take up so much airspace they only give it way out in the boondocks.So you want the protection of IFR but the altitude flexibility of VFR on top. Why not as for a block altitude?
Yep. I see your point. "Cancel" sounds too close to "Cancel IFR," and that's not a misunderstanding you want to happen.I wouldn't use the word 'cancel' in this situation. @flyingron in post #2 was a good example of how to let them know you are ready to quit being OTP and need a new altitude assignment that allows you to go into the clouds. Also known as a 'hard altitude' which is a very common way of saying it as @bobmrg says in post #16. That's the phrase controllers use amongst themselves all the time about this.
So you want the protection of IFR but the altitude flexibility of VFR on top. Why not as for a block altitude?
Got that inside the Memphis class Bravo once. They gave me from 4000 to 8000 one day where the clouds were filled with ice.
Just means your assigned altitude (8,000) versus a block altitude (8-12,000) where you have leeway to move freely up and down the block. See EdFred's example for why it would be handy.Could someone please explain "hard altitude" and when it would be useful?
Just means your assigned altitude (8,000) versus a block altitude (8-12,000) where you have leeway to move freely up and down the block. See EdFred's example for why it would be handy.
I got block altitudes all the time out west flying between Reno and Salt Lake City when I couldn't maintain altitude through the mountain waves. Easier to just ride the up and down drafts. ATC was usually pretty accommodating in that regard.
Cheers,
Brian
"Pop up" is not = to "On top". They sound kinda the same though.
I get block altitude, but had not heard "hard" altitude before.......
Obviously you are flying a Cirrus.
Lol, was that an insult??? Ha, ha!
Don't they clear the airspace for Ciri-pilots? Pretty sure they do. They also push the clouds away on your route making this whole thread null and void. ....
Could someone please explain "hard altitude" and when it would be useful?
Just means your assigned altitude (8,000) versus a block altitude (8-12,000) where you have leeway to move freely up and down the block. See EdFred's example for why it would be handy.
I got block altitudes all the time out west flying between Reno and Salt Lake City when I couldn't maintain altitude through the mountain waves. Easier to just ride the up and down drafts. ATC was usually pretty accommodating in that regard.
Cheers,
Brian
Could someone please explain "hard altitude" and when it would be useful?
A trip I used to make three times a week toting boxes was from Spokane to Boeing Field in Seattle. Spokane was almost always VFR, but i filed for VFR on Top; Center asked me to report my final altitude, which was almost always 6500 feet. As I approached the eastern foothills of the Cascades I could see that the Puget Sound Basin was full of clouds that were spilling over the crest. At that point I would request a hard altitude and be assigned an altitude between 8000 and 10000; I would climb to the assigned altitude and from that point on it was plain-vanilla IFR procedures.
Bob
Back in the days of limited radar, and less traffic, it worked out to not be part of the non-radar separation scheme, but enable you to get into a place such a KBUR.I'm curious about your thoughts on how. Most folks I've come across see VFR On Top as something for very few situations.
And there was the rather famous VFR-on-top collision in 1956 over the Grand Canyon.In later years, it was my only close call on TWA with a commuter IFR/VFR ontop, over LA, that nearly meshed my 767 with with a 121 commuter turboprop.
And there was the rather famous VFR-on-top collision in 1956 over the Grand Canyon.