VFR-On-Top

[gismo]

That's what I had wrong. I mis-remembered a question on the written:

I remembered the altitudes wrong and was thinking that you were VFR on Top the whole time and ATC denied a request to ascend to 9,500. Now that I re-read the question it makes more sense.

In the case presented in the question ATC would likely assign you a restriction with your clearance, something like "Maintain VFR on top at or below 8,000", right? Since 9,000 wouldn't work for them.

In real life that question is a non-sequitur. If you're in icing conditions at 7000 it's rather unlikely you'll be able to remain 1000 ft above the clouds at 7500 ft.

 

[Henning]

If I wanted to operate VFR Over the top, ie cancel IFR on top, I'd just ask for a pop up clearance. If I wanted VFR On top and stay on a clearance, I'd ask for that.

 

[ghogue]

Here is what several posters have referred to. I can say from personal experience that it has been in common use on the West Coast for decades. I first recall using it in the mid 70's in the Monterey, CA. area.

AIM
4-4-8. IFR Clearance VFR-on-top

a. A pilot on an IFR flight plan operating in VFR weather conditions, may request VFR-on-top in lieu of an assigned altitude. This permits a pilot to select an altitude or flight level of their choice (subject to any ATC restrictions.)

b.  Pilots desiring to climb through a cloud, haze, smoke, or other meteorological formation and then either cancel their IFR flight plan or operate VFR-on-top may request a climb to VFR-on-top. The ATC authorization must contain either a top report or a statement that no top report is available, and a request to report reaching VFR-on-top. Additionally, the ATC authorization may contain a clearance limit, routing and an alternative clearance if VFR-on-top is not reached by a specified altitude.

I agree with Steven that once a pilot cancels his IFR clearance, he is not on a VFR On-Top clearance. However, that is phraseology that is used in those conditions as described by some posters here. The 7110.65 V has similar phraseology.

 

[warthog1984]

Assuming the conflicting traffic is at 9,000, the phraseology would be, "Climb to and report reaching VFR-on-Top, if not on top by 8,000 maintain 8,000 and advise, no tops reported."

But if you're in clouds at 7000 you won't be able to report VFR-on-Top at 7,500 because you need 1000 feet above clouds.

Actually, according to the test I took today, the solution to icing at 7000, tops "hundreds of feet above", and climb to 9000 rejected is to request VFR-on-top at 7500ft.

 

[roncachamp]

Actually, according to the test I took today, the solution to icing at 7000, tops "hundreds of feet above", and climb to 9000 rejected is to request VFR-on-top at 7500ft.

Interesting. What test was that?

 

[warthog1984]

Interesting. What test was that?

Instrument Rating Airplane.

 

[roncachamp]

Instrument Rating Airplane.

I hope you got that one "wrong".

 

[eetrojan]

When you request a VFR-on-Top clearance as you describe, when your intent is to cancel IFR upon reaching VFR conditions, you're requesting something you don't intend to do; operate VFR-on-Top. You can simply request what you really want, a short range IFR clearance that permits you to climb through that layer, cancel IFR, and proceed on your merry way VFR.

What are you taught to say out there when you actually want to operate VFR-on-Top?

Steven, trying to understand as I'm preparing for the instrument rating knowledge exam. Below is an instrument rating test question (Sporty's Study Buddy), and the entire Section 4-4-8 from the AIM re "IFR Clearance VFR-on-top."

As far as I can tell, both overtly say that a pilot that wants to climb through a cloud layer and operate in the clear should request a climb to VFR-on-Top and then do one of two things after the climb: (1) continue operating VFR-on-top (staying IFR with ATC); or (2) cancel the IFR flight plan (in essence, operate VFR-on-top within the IFR system, if only for a moment, and then cancel).

I'm confused. Why shouldn't an IFR pilot request VFR-on-top, and then cancel, when that's exactly what the AIM says to do? Are you simply saying that it's your opinion that the AIM's recommendation is poor procedure? Or, are you saying something else?

Thanks. Joe

Knowledge Test Question (right/wrong answers and explanations):

AIM 4-4-8:

 

[midlifeflyer]

Steven, trying to understand as I'm preparing for the instrument rating knowledge exam. Below is an instrument rating test question (Sporty's Study Buddy), and the entire Section 4-4-8 from the AIM re "IFR Clearance VFR-on-top."

You are correct. You understand it just fine.

Bear in mind that roncachamp does not necessarily agree with what official FAA documentation says and, while he sometimes brings a valuable perspective to a discussion, it is often his personal view and not the FAA's.

 

[bluesky74656]

There seems to be a difference between "VFR-on-top" and a "climb to VFR-on-top". VFR on top is an IFR clearance that requires VFR cloud clearance and visibility, and relieves the controller from having to abide by IFR separation requirements. A "climb to VFR on top" implies that you will cancel when you reach the top.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Velocity173]

There seems to be a difference between "VFR-on-top" and a "climb to VFR-on-top". VFR on top is an IFR clearance that requires VFR cloud clearance and visibility, and relieves the controller from having to abide by IFR separation requirements. A "climb to VFR on top" implies that you will cancel when you reach the top.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They're the same thing. There is no distinction in the AIM definition. The pilot is given the phraseology in both cases of "climb to and report reaching VFR-on-top." It's an IFR clearance to operate on top of an obscuration. Whether the pilot cancels or continues OTP doesn't change the fact an OTP clearance was issued.

No we could get into semantics and say simply because the pilot didn't retain their IFR and told by ATC to maintain VFR-on-top they didn't operate OTP but that still won't change the original clearance.

 

[peerlesscowboy]

There seems to be a difference between "VFR-on-top" and a "climb to VFR-on-top". VFR on top is an IFR clearance that requires VFR cloud clearance and visibility, and relieves the controller from having to abide by IFR separation requirements. A "climb to VFR on top" implies that you will cancel when you reach the top.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In practical terms of the way the clearance is normally used, yes you seem to have a good understanding.

 

[peerlesscowboy]

They're the same thing. There is no distinction in the AIM definition. The pilot is given the phraseology in both cases of "climb to and report reaching VFR-on-top." It's an IFR clearance to operate on top of an obscuration. .......

If you request and are issued a VFR on Top clearance while you're for example cruising at altitude you won't hear "climb to ...........", it'll just be "maintain VFR on Top". And you don't need to be "on top of an obscuration", you just need to be in VFR conditions.

 

[peerlesscowboy]

Here's a bone for the dogs to chew on;
Let's say we're equipped /A cleared LWT --D-> HIA over the little belt mountain range. 12,000' complies with 91.177(a)(2)(i) but the route exceeds navaid service volumes so radar monitoring is required in controlled airspace and Center needs you up to 14,000' to keep you on radar. Does a VFR on Top clearance allow you to do this at 12,500' without radar monitoring direct exceeding service volumes?

 

[Velocity173]

If you request and are issued a VFR on Top clearance while you're for example cruising at altitude you won't hear "climb to ...........", it'll just be "maintain VFR on Top". And you don't need to be "on top of an obscuration", you just need to be in VFR conditions.

I was giving the example from the AIM definition of getting a clearance on the ground. Obviously if you're already above it ATC isn't going to tell you to climb above something that isn't there.

Either way, it's still a VFR-top-clearance, it's just given while airborne vs on the ground.

 

[petrolero]

Just this morning I managed to pass my IFR written. 92%.

In studying, I came across a number of questions dedicated to VFR-On-Top. So, I know that the rules are that you must be able to maintain VFR, you must stay on your filed or assigned route (you can't just flit about like you could under straight VFR), and you may request any VFR altitude from ATC.

My question is: what's the point? Under normal IFR I must stay on my filed or assigned route, I can file any IFR altitude I like and request changes as needed, but I don't have to maintain VFR. I can't think of a good reason I would ever need VFR-On-Top.

I don't see a point to VFR-on-top in the age of /G area navigation or even in the bad old days.

With VFR-on-Top you're serving two masters - instrument and visual flight rules. bah.

 

[roncachamp]

Steven, trying to understand as I'm preparing for the instrument rating knowledge exam. Below is an instrument rating test question (Sporty's Study Buddy), and the entire Section 4-4-8 from the AIM re "IFR Clearance VFR-on-top."

If your sole purpose is passing the test you don't have to understand it, just memorize the answers.

As far as I can tell, both overtly say that a pilot that wants to climb through a cloud layer and operate in the clear should request a climb to VFR-on-Top and then do one of two things after the climb: (1) continue operating VFR-on-top (staying IFR with ATC); or (2) cancel the IFR flight plan (in essence, operate VFR-on-top within the IFR system, if only for a moment, and then cancel).

I'm confused. Why shouldn't an IFR pilot request VFR-on-top, and then cancel, when that's exactly what the AIM says to do? Are you simply saying that it's your opinion that the AIM's recommendation is poor procedure? Or, are you saying something else?

But let's move on with the idea that you really do want to understand.

I don't believe I said a pilot should not request a VFR-on-Top clearance then cancel IFR upon reaching VFR conditions. I said; "When you request a VFR-on-Top clearance as you describe, when your intent is to cancel IFR upon reaching VFR conditions, you're requesting something you don't intend to do; operate VFR-on-Top."

Let's look at an example. You want to climb through an overcast to VFR conditions where you will cancel and proceed VFR. You request a climb to VFR-on-Top. The clearance; "...cleared to PHYXE via radar vectors, climb to and report reaching VFR-on-Top, tops reported 2800, if not on top by 4000 maintain 4000 and advise..." You climb through 3800 and cancel IFR, without ever operating VFR-on-Top.

Now, you might be thinking, what do you mean I never operated VFR-on-Top? VFR-on-Top was part of the clearance! True, but you did not report reaching VFR-on-Top and you were never instructed to maintain VFR-on-Top, so no part of your operation met the definition of VFR-on-Top:

VFR-ON-TOP− ATC authorization for an IFR aircraft to operate in VFR conditions at any appropriate VFR altitude (as specified in 14 CFR and as restricted by ATC). A pilot receiving this authorization must comply with the VFR visibility, distance from cloud criteria, and the minimum IFR altitudes specified in 14 CFR Part 91.

 

[roncachamp]

Bear in mind that roncachamp does not necessarily agree with what official FAA documentation says and, while he sometimes brings a valuable perspective to a discussion, it is often his personal view and not the FAA's.

With what official FAA documentation do you believe I expressed disagreement?

 

[roncachamp]

No we could get into semantics and say simply because the pilot didn't retain their IFR and told by ATC to maintain VFR-on-top they didn't operate OTP but that still won't change the original clearance.

A pilot that cancels IFR upon reaching VFR conditions, without having been instructed to maintain VFR-on-Top, has not operated VFR-on-Top. That's not semantics, that's a fact.

 

[roncachamp]

Here's a bone for the dogs to chew on;
Let's say we're equipped /A cleared LWT --D-> HIA over the little belt mountain range. 12,000' complies with 91.177(a)(2)(i) but the route exceeds navaid service volumes so radar monitoring is required in controlled airspace and Center needs you up to 14,000' to keep you on radar. Does a VFR on Top clearance allow you to do this at 12,500' without radar monitoring direct exceeding service volumes?

Affirmative.

 

[Velocity173]

A pilot that cancels IFR upon reaching VFR conditions, without having been instructed to maintain VFR-on-Top, has not operated VFR-on-Top. That's not semantics, that's a fact.

Guess you didn't read what I said about the original clearance part. Just because he didn't operate VFR-on-top, doesn't mean it wasn't a VFR-on-top clearance. The controller doesn't go back and scratch out OTP on the strip after the aircraft was cleared just because he wasn't told to "maintain VFR-on-top."

 

[azure]

Here we go...

 

[peerlesscowboy]

I'd have to agree with Steven here, if your clearance was to "climb to VFR on top ..............." and upon reaching VFR conditions you canceled, you never operated "VFR on top".

 

[peerlesscowboy]

Guess you didn't read what I said about the original clearance part. Just because he didn't operate VFR-on-top, doesn't mean it wasn't a VFR-on-top clearance. The controller doesn't go back and scratch out OTP on the strip after the aircraft was cleared just because he wasn't told to "maintain VFR-on-top."

I'd guess the controller threw the strip in the trash basket after the pilot canceled.

 

[Velocity173]

I'd guess the controller threw the strip in the trash basket after the pilot canceled.

No, if CD issues the clearance for VFR-on-top, they file it with other IFR departures. If the pilot cancels on top without ever being told by departure to "maintain VFR-on-top" they don't call CD back and say "hey mark thru the OTP on the strip, he cancelled on top." The clearance was already given. No point in going back and trying to undo it.

 

[AdamZ]

Todd, great to hear from you! Keep at it with the IR We'll look forward to having you join Angel Flight East when you get the rating!

 

[eetrojan]

I don't believe I said a pilot should not request a VFR-on-Top clearance then cancel IFR upon reaching VFR conditions. I said; "When you request a VFR-on-Top clearance as you describe, when your intent is to cancel IFR upon reaching VFR conditions, you're requesting something you don't intend to do; operate VFR-on-Top."

Yup. I certainly took your statement to mean that I should not request a VFR-on-top clearance and then cancel IFR upon reaching VFR conditions. I was especially of this opinion because you seemed to be suggesting another way that you believe is correct (meaning the AIM is wrong), or at least better, i.e. you said, "You can simply request what you really want, a short range IFR clearance that permits you to climb through that layer, cancel IFR, and proceed on your merry way VFR."

Given that, I couldn't reconcile your apparent admonition that I shouldn't follow the AIM's instructions to request VFR-on-top regardless of whether I intended to operate VFR-on-top while IFR or cancel IFR upon reaching VFR conditions.

I understand that requesting VFR-on-top and then canceling means I may (will?) technically never operate VFR-on-top, and I understand that I might somehow get the same result without using the words "VFR-on-top" and then canceling.

However, what I'm really wondering is if there's some important, easy-to-understand reason that I should do it the "AIM" way, versus the other way you suggested. Or, is it just six of one, half a dozen of another, same difference stuff. That's what I want to understand.

Thanks.

 

[peerlesscowboy]

No, if CD issues the clearance for VFR-on-top, they file it with other IFR departures. If the pilot cancels on top without ever being told by departure to "maintain VFR-on-top" they don't call CD back and say "hey mark thru the OTP on the strip, he cancelled on top." The clearance was already given. No point in going back and trying to undo it.

Why would the departure controller call CD back? CD issued the clearance, the pilot canceled with departure control when he got to VFR conditions on top so the departure controller filed the strip in #13, no "undo" about it....pilot had an IFR clearance and when he canceled.....it's history.

 

[petrolero]

File to a fix that will allow you time/distance enought to get on top, then your IFR cancels itself and you pick up VFR. If you are not in the clear at your clearance limit, get a new clearance to a point further down the road. This is a composite flight plan and it is a PITA and I can't imagine many scenarios in which it would be worth the hassle.

Just operate IFR! The only reason I can think of for canceling IFR once on top is to go off-route. If you are /G you are already likely on the most direct route anyway except perhaps in extremely crowded parts of the country. But in that case I'd absolutely want to remain IFR!

 

[roncachamp]

Guess you didn't read what I said about the original clearance part.

Your guess is incorrect.

Just because he didn't operate VFR-on-top, doesn't mean it wasn't a VFR-on-top clearance.

That's correct.

The controller doesn't go back and scratch out OTP on the strip after the aircraft was cleared just because he wasn't told to "maintain VFR-on-top."

That's also correct.

 

[roncachamp]

No, if CD issues the clearance for VFR-on-top, they file it with other IFR departures. If the pilot cancels on top without ever being told by departure to "maintain VFR-on-top" they don't call CD back and say "hey mark thru the OTP on the strip, he cancelled on top." The clearance was already given. No point in going back and trying to undo it.

True, but not the issue.

 

[Velocity173]

Why would the departure controller call CD back? CD issued the clearance, the pilot canceled with departure control when he got to VFR conditions on top so the departure controller filed the strip in #13, no "undo" about it....pilot had an IFR clearance and when he canceled.....it's history.

Didn't say he would call back. Saying the strip doesn't get tossed into the "trash basket" after the pilot cancels. It's an OTP clearance and as such is filed away with all the other IFR strips. No one cares that the pilot never officially operated OTP.

 

[Velocity173]

True, but not the issue.

No the issue is that you can't understand why someone would file OTP just to cancel once on top. Did anyone even read the Flying article I posted? It's a common clearance in CA. OTP gives the pilot the flexibility to climb until they reach VFR conditions, cancel, and then perform maneuvers that they wouldn't otherwise do on an IFR. Doesn't matter that they didn't officially operate OTP because of one statement missing by the controller. Doesn't change the purpose of the clearance.

 

[roncachamp]

I understand that requesting VFR-on-top and then canceling means I may (will?) technically never operate VFR-on-top, and I understand that I might somehow get the same result without using the words "VFR-on-top" and then canceling.

However, what I'm really wondering is if there's some important, easy-to-understand reason that I should do it the "AIM" way, versus the other way you suggested. Or, is it just six of one, half a dozen of another, same difference stuff. That's what I want to understand.

There's no important reason to change what you're doing, I was just pointing out what I've thought to be an oddity in the AIM. That language, about using VFR-on-Top to climb through the crud with the intent to cancel without ever actually operating VFR-on-Top, has been in the AIM for as long as I can remember, and I've been flying forty years. Why advise pilots to request something they don't want?

Let's go back to the example, you want to climb through an overcast to VFR conditions where you will cancel and proceed VFR. If you request a climb to VFR-on-Top, it goes like this; "...cleared to PHYXE via radar vectors, climb to and report reaching VFR-on-Top, tops reported 2800, if not on top by 4000 maintain 4000 and advise..." You climb through 3800 and cancel IFR.

If you request an IFR clearance to PHYXE it goes like this; "...cleared to PHYXE via radar vectors, climb and maintain 4000..." You climb through 3800 and cancel IFR.

The only difference is a lengthier clearance for VFR-on-Top.

 

[roncachamp]

No the issue is that you can't understand why someone would file OTP just to cancel once on top. Did anyone even read the Flying article I posted? It's a common clearance in CA. OTP gives the pilot the flexibility to climb until they reach VFR conditions, cancel, and then perform maneuvers that they wouldn't otherwise do on an IFR. Doesn't matter that they didn't officially operate OTP because of one statement missing by the controller. Doesn't change the purpose of the clearance.

Please explain why operating on a VFR-on-Top clearance until reaching the point of cancellation gives the pilot the flexibility to perform those maneuvers but operating on a normal IFR clearance to the point of cancellation does not.

 

[Velocity173]

Please explain why operating on a VFR-on-Top clearance until reaching the point of cancellation gives the pilot the flexibility to perform those maneuvers but operating on a normal IFR clearance to the point of cancellation does not.

Didn't say it didn't??? If you would read the article, the example is nothing more than a short range clearance but with OTP for the requested altitude. Now, I suppose they could just file IFR with a hard IFR altutude and hope to get on top but it seems to me more logical just to request OTP. You don't need to worry about an altitude assignment, just climb til you're 1,000 ft above the obscuration, cancel, then do whatever VFR manuvers that need to be done.

I probably gave a hundred OTP clearances to helos flying from NKX to NFG. You have an H-53 socked in at NKX with a marine layer but needs to get on R2503. The purpose isn't to retain their IFR all the way to NFG but to cancel at some point and go to the range. With no tops report and no reason to maintain an IFR altitude all the way to NFG, an OTP clearance is the way to go.

Not sure why those types of OTP clearances are so confusing to you. Just because it's not common in GRB doesn't mean they don't do it elsewhere.

 

[roncachamp]

Didn't say it didn't???

No, you didn't say it, you implied it.

If you would read the article, the example is nothing more than a short range clearance but with OTP for the requested altitude. Now, I suppose they could just file IFR with a hard IFR altutude and hope to get on top but it seems to me more logical just to request OTP. You don't need to worry about an altitude assignment, just climb til you're 1,000 ft above the obscuration, cancel, then do whatever VFR manuvers that need to be done.

Requesting VFR-on-Top provides no advantage over filing IFR with a hard altitude when the pilot intends to cancel IFR upon reaching VFR conditions. Let's look at some examples.


Pilot requests VFR-on-Top to climb above a layer, ATC has IFR traffic at 5000:

The clearance; "...cleared to PHYXE via radar vectors, climb to and report reaching VFR-on-Top, tops reported 2800, if not on top by 4000 maintain 4000 and advise..." The pilot climbs through 3800 and cancels IFR.


Pilot requests an IFR clearance with a hard IFR altitude to climb above a layer, ATC has IFR traffic at 5000:

The clearance; "...cleared to PHYXE via radar vectors, climb and maintain 4000..." The pilot climbs through 3800 and cancels IFR.



Pilot requests VFR-on-Top to climb above a layer, ATC has no other traffic, the controller's airspace extends from the surface to 10,000 MSL:

The clearance; "...cleared to PHYXE via radar vectors, climb to and report reaching VFR-on-Top, tops reported 2800, if not on top by 10,000 maintain 10,000 and advise..." The pilot climbs through 3800 and cancels IFR.


Pilot requests an IFR clearance with a hard IFR altitude to climb above a layer, ATC has no other traffic, the controller's airspace extends from the surface to 10,000 MSL:

The clearance; "...cleared to PHYXE via radar vectors, climb and maintain 10,000..." The pilot climbs through 3800 and cancels IFR.


The only difference, given that the pilot will cancel upon reaching VFR conditions and thus will not actually operate VFR-on-Top at any time, is requests for VFR-on-Top elicit lengthier clearances.

I probably gave a hundred OTP clearances to helos flying from NKX to NFG. You have an H-53 socked in at NKX with a marine layer but needs to get on R2503. The purpose isn't to retain their IFR all the way to NFG but to cancel at some point and go to the range. With no tops report and no reason to maintain an IFR altitude all the way to NFG, an OTP clearance is the way to go.

So you believe, yet you cannot explain why you believe that is so when the pilot will cancel upon reaching VFR conditions and not actually operate VFR-on-Top at any time.

Not sure why those types of OTP clearances are so confusing to you. Just because it's not common in GRB doesn't mean they don't do it elsewhere.

There is nothing about this subject that is confusing to me. Perhaps it's not common in GRB because pilots in this area have a better understanding of VFR-on-Top than do pilots in California.