VFR over a broken layer

jspilot

jspilot

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Oct 22, 2011
Messages
1,346
Display Name
Display name:
jspilot
I'm curious about something. Let's say you take off in marginal VFR and this marginal VFR contains a broken layer around 2,000 feet. You find a hole and get above and are in crystal clear skies. Your destination is also clear below 12,000. You are able to maintain contact with the ground but technically you are above the ceiling while traveling above the broken layer. Are you still legal?
 
Sure. You could do that even if you couldn't see the ground as long as you were not a student pilot I believe.
 
jspilot said:
I'm curious about something. Let's say you take off in marginal VFR and this marginal VFR contains a broken layer around 2,000 feet. You find a hole and get above and are in crystal clear skies. Your destination is also clear below 12,000. You are able to maintain contact with the ground but technically you are above the ceiling while traveling above the broken layer. Are you still legal?
Click to expand...

Sure. VFR over the top.
 
jspilot said:
I'm curious about something. Let's say you take off in marginal VFR and this marginal VFR contains a broken layer around 2,000 feet. You find a hole and get above and are in crystal clear skies. Your destination is also clear below 12,000. You are able to maintain contact with the ground but technically you are above the ceiling while traveling above the broken layer. Are you still legal?
Click to expand...

A private pilot can fly on top of an overcast layer. Only student pilots and sport pilots have to maintain contact with the ground. As long as you are maintaining legal cloud separation while climbing through the hole you are good.

Now your options if the fan quits will be a bit tougher to find, but if you are high enough you might be able to make it to an airport.
 
JasonM said:
Sure. You could do that even if you couldn't see the ground as long as you were not a student pilot I believe.
Click to expand...

Not in Canada, and not in the US if you are flying some VFR helicopters at night.
 
Last edited:
JasonM said:
Sure. You could do that even if you couldn't see the ground as long as you were not a student pilot I believe.
Click to expand...

Thanks that's what I thought. So let's take this one step further than. In the scenario I described, the tops were merely 3,000 feet at most. In marginal VFR conditions like that, it's much safer to get on top than scud run. So, here's my thought, wouldn't it be smart for metars to contain tops reports in that situation. Because, the VFR pilot, needs to know if he can get on top, thus availing himself to a safer flight. Is this a minor, perhaps major flaw in the VFR flight requirements?
 
jspilot said:
Thanks that's what I thought. So let's take this one step further than. In the scenario I described, the rope were merely 3,000 feet at most. In marginal VFR conditions like that, it's much safer to get on top than scud run. So, here's my thought, wouldn't it be smart for metars to contain tops reports in that situation. Because, the VFR pilot, needs to know if he can get on top, thus availing himself to a safer flight. Is this a minor, perhaps major flaw in the VFR flight requirements?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately it's pretty difficult if not impossible for a ground station to determine the tops. Pireps are best for determining tops and I've recently learned about skewT charts that also help you predict tops, but I don't know enough about them to give you much direction there.
 
jspilot said:
Thanks that's what I thought. So let's take this one step further than. In the scenario I described, the tops were merely 3,000 feet at most. In marginal VFR conditions like that, it's much safer to get on top than scud run. So, here's my thought, wouldn't it be smart for metars to contain tops reports in that situation. Because, the VFR pilot, needs to know if he can get on top, thus availing himself to a safer flight. Is this a minor, perhaps major flaw in the VFR flight requirements?
Click to expand...

Metars (and ASOS/AWOS) are generated using ceilometers which measure cloud bases from the ground, tops are not easy to measure from the ground.
However, Skew-T's would be a much better tool for that purpose.
 
If yer lookin' at a hole to climb through and you can't figure out whether or not you can maintain VFR while climbing until you're on top then you prolly shouldn't try to climb through that hole.
 
Clark1961 said:
If yer lookin' at a hole to climb through and you can't figure out whether or not you can maintain VFR while climbing until you're on top then you prolly shouldn't try to climb through that hole.
Click to expand...

True, great point. But at times widely spread broken layers don't have high cloud tops, and I'd love to know that info similarly to knowing the base before taking off! Imagine how much safer VFR flight would be if, all pilots knew before taking off in mVFR if they could get on top and fly in clear skies vs having to scud run. We all know that controlled flight into terrain and running into IFR conditions are very high up there causes for incidents.

I understand the people saying it's difficult to get tops reports from ground based equipment but still there has to be a way. In my ideal world, we would get metars that's have , ceiling reports and cloud top reports.
 
Last edited:
jspilot said:
True, great point. But at times widely spread broken layers don't have high cloud tops, and I'd love to know that info similarly to knowing the base before taking off! Imagine how much safer VFR flight would be if, all pilots knew before taking off in mVFR if they could get on top and fly in clear skies vs having to scud run. We all know that controlled flight into terrain and running into IFR conditions are very high up there causes for incidents.



I understand the people saying it's difficult to get tops reports from ground based equipment but still there has to be a way. In my ideal world, we would get metars that's have , ceiling reports and cloud top reports.
Click to expand...


PIREPS are the only way I know of to get actual tops info. But, as others have said, Skew-T charts can help to predict them:

http://williams.best.vwh.net/weather/skewtlogp.pdf
 
RotorDude said:
Not in Canada, and not in the US if you are flying some VFR helicopters at night.
Click to expand...

And then there's the whole Part 135 restrictions on VFR over the top with passengers as well. Hampers us SE guys on some nights.
 
If your not sure you will be on top,when attempting to get through the hole,don't try it. They don't call them sucker holes for nothing.
 
OP, I assume you use FF, GP or similar. Download a Skew-T app (I use the Android one from walls.net.nz), and you'll have an easy to use amazing tool which will tell you in advance of each flight, for each point enroute, where and when you'll find your cloud layers, tops, bottoms and inbetweens.
Or use this site: http://rucsoundings.noaa.gov/gifs/
 
I appreciate the skew-t advice as I totally learned from this thread. I'm just curious why we don't have an accurate system for knowing cloud tops aside from pilot reports. It seems crazy to me that in today's day and age we can't know for certain how high a cloud goes. As far as I can tell these skew t's are still, at best predictions. Call me crazy but when I call 1800wxbrief they give me predictions for tops too and on the day that was the catalyst for my original question the predictions were for tops to 15,000 and they were not above 3,000. I'm asking for technology that may not exist and I get that but can we agree that it should?
 
A private pilot is legal to do this without ground contact. A sport pilot or student pilot is not. I didn't much ever do this before I had my instrument rating, but I do it all the time now because I know if the fertilizer comes in contact with the ventilator, I can file an IFR flight plan and get down.
 
jspilot said:
Thanks that's what I thought. So let's take this one step further than. In the scenario I described, the tops were merely 3,000 feet at most. In marginal VFR conditions like that, it's much safer to get on top than scud run.
Click to expand...
Right. Much safer. What could possibly go wrong?

If you have the skills to get down through an overcast if (when) things close up, that's one thing. But if you don't, you are betting your life on a weather forecast.

I'll stick to scud running.
 
jspilot said:
True, great point. But at times widely spread broken layers don't have high cloud tops, and I'd love to know that info similarly to knowing the base before taking off! Imagine how much safer VFR flight would be if, all pilots knew before taking off in mVFR if they could get on top and fly in clear skies vs having to scud run. We all know that controlled flight into terrain and running into IFR conditions are very high up there causes for incidents.

I understand the people saying it's difficult to get tops reports from ground based equipment but still there has to be a way. In my ideal world, we would get metars that's have , ceiling reports and cloud top reports.
Click to expand...

We can't even accurately report cloud bases (ceilings). Bases can vary a lot both in height and distribution around an airport. And those are "easy" to measure.

The best way to handle running into IFR conditions is to be instrument rated. :) I'm working on mine now. It's fun, it's not especially difficult, and it's going to make situations like this a non-issue.
 
I'm not IR, and did it not too long ago.

Departing Hereford Tx, between layers, T-storms developing left and right. ADS-B Nexrad is a wonderful thing.

I just needed to get 50 miles South to blue skies. Hey look! there's a blue hole up there! ;):lol:

11807756_869941949726124_3356766200646452936_o.jpg
 
Eegads, sorry about the massive picture guys....

Why doesn't this board re-size photo's...?
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
Right. Much safer. What could possibly go wrong?

If you have the skills to get down through an overcast if (when) things close up, that's one thing. But if you don't, you are betting your life on a weather forecast.

I'll stick to scud running.
Click to expand...

I think you are a bit over reacting. If you go back an read my original post my destination and every airport within 25 miles of that destination was clear below 12,000. Also I'm never going to climb up over an overcast layer, that's not a viable option.
 
Somedudeintn said:
Unfortunately it's pretty difficult if not impossible for a ground station to determine the tops. Pireps are best for determining tops and I've recently learned about skewT charts that also help you predict tops, but I don't know enough about them to give you much direction there.
Click to expand...

Nope.

It's really easy for a mountaintop station above the clouds to determine tops.

I do it all the time for marine layer. Tops are almost always below 2500 and the airport is over a 2600 foot pass.

Now, doing it automatically for an arbitrary station is another issue.
 
Last edited:
jspilot said:
I think you are a bit over reacting. If you go back an read my original post my destination and every airport within 25 miles of that destination was clear below 12,000. Also I'm never going to climb up over an overcast layer, that's not a viable option.
Click to expand...
In the situation you describe I would probably have done the same, in fact I did once or twice, before I was instrument rated. But in general I would be very cautious, as broken layers have a tendency often to close up, and if this happens while you're on top, then what?
 
azure said:
if this happens while you're on top, then what?
Click to expand...

Then it's time to take a -blue in the face- moment of silence and reflect on the situation and how you got into it. :D:sad:

Um, however in that given situation maybe the safest bet would be to possibly get SVFR and call it "Clear of clouds" I see it better as at least you have some certainty that you wont get an aircraft busting out of the cloud cover into you.
 
Last edited:
Tops reports are even more useful for instrument rated pilots, and just as hard to get.
I have done all of the below to get a tops report.
looked at web cam on near by ski hill (6700 feet) airport at 2500 ft.

Called Tower/Approach control on the phone and asked, usually hear something in the back ground like Hey Joe, got any top reports? No, hang on. United 123 could we get a tops reports. Tops are at 5000 ft.

Ask Center for a tops report, similar to calling on the phone.

Brian
 
frfly172 said:
If your not sure you will be on top,when attempting to get through the hole,don't try it. They don't call them sucker holes for nothing.
Click to expand...
Yes, there's a reason those nice inviting holes in the broken layer are called "sucker holes", as the clouds build they tend to close up and leave you stuck on top. A minor inconvenience if you're instrument rated and equipped, if not .... you'll learn what the raccoon feels like when he takes the bait in the havahart trap and hears the door slam shut behind him. :eek:
 
Good talk here guys but I'm a bit confused about the implied danger many are stating. I completely agree that if I was intending to immediately return to the airport I took off from in mVFR than yes the real risk of broken becoming overcast and being stuck is real. Yet, if my destination is clear and the surrounding airports are clear, I still believe it to be safer to get over the top of a broken layer than scud run under it. Now if you factor in a low fuel scenario or one airport is clear but every other airport around is mVFR than getting on top is a mistake.

Of note, I also encountered on the return leg MVFR below me but my destination was reporting few at 1400. I will say, finding the airport through the clouds was a real struggle but I knew I'd have a hole to get through, which it turned out I did. I'm not one to take chances and I don't make a habit out of flying above broken layers but knowing the weather was clear around both of the airports I used on this flight and was only cloudy between the two points brought about lots of thoughts.
 
Last edited:
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
Right. Much safer. What could possibly go wrong?

If you have the skills to get down through an overcast if (when) things close up, that's one thing. But if you don't, you are betting your life on a weather forecast.

I'll stick to scud running.
Click to expand...

Meh.

I had dozens, if not hundreds, of hours "over the top" before getting my instrument rating. Clear in Missouri. Clear in Georgia. Cloudy between. Fly back to work. Almost always over the top.

Not once had an issue. I was working on my IR at the time and could have safely descended through the layer should something have happened but...

Not once had an issue.

Scud run all day long if you want. I preferred over the top.
 
jspilot said:
Of note, I also encountered on the return leg MVFR below me but my destination was reporting few at 1400. I will say, finding the airport through the clouds was a real struggle but I knew I'd have a hole to get through, which it turned out I did. I'm not one to take chances and I don't make a habit out of flying above broken layers but knowing the weather was clear around both of the airports I used on this flight and was only cloudy between the two points brought about lots of thoughts.
Click to expand...
Few at 1400? I'd be careful in that situation. How far am I from the destination field? 10 minutes? An hour? Two hours? 10 minutes away I wouldn't worry much, but clouds present at 1400 means there's low moisture around that COULD (not will, but might, and regardless of what the forecast says) develop into a more solid layer, given enough time. If I was a significant distance away I might still go over the top, but I'd be monitoring AWOS reports from the destination if possible (ADS-B, XM) and using my Mark Is to make sure I had a way down at all times.

Going over the top as a VFR-only pilot is like many potentially risky things in aviation, it's all about making sure you always have outs.
 
TK211X said:
Um, however in that given situation maybe the safest bet would be to possibly get SVFR and call it "Clear of clouds" I see it better as at least you have some certainty that you wont get an aircraft busting out of the cloud cover into you.
Click to expand...
SVFR is another useful tool but don't forget that it's only available where controlled airspace exists to the surface. I don't think the OP said whether he was departing from a field with a surface area.
 
Can be done but this is a case where strict personal minimums are a must. What is legal isn't necessary smart.

I'll general only do this VFR if:

1) The clouds really clear up ahead and I continue to verify this in flight with ASOS/ATIS/FSS

2) I always visually have an 'out' back to the ground. Doesn't need to be right below me, but I want to see that some holes exist. Flying over fully overcast is only something I want to be doing IFR.

Typical scenario for this would be early morning in the summer where there are some lower clouds and visibility below 2-3k is really hazy. Get up into cleaner air and the murk below 'burns off' en-route.
 
Last edited:
Maybe I missed it if someone stated it earlier, but IIRC, a broken layer is considered a ceiling, so hole or no hole, VFR you can't go through it. Scattered, no problem.
 
I departed LAF once IFR and the tower asked me for a tops report. I was handed off to departure but asked for a frequency change back when I broke out so I could do so.
 
Blatham489 said:
Maybe I missed it if someone stated it earlier, but IIRC, a broken layer is considered a ceiling, so hole or no hole, VFR you can't go through it. Scattered, no problem.
Click to expand...


You can go through it even when reported as 'broken' if you meet the cloud clearance requirements.
 
Blatham489 said:
Maybe I missed it if someone stated it earlier, but IIRC, a broken layer is considered a ceiling, so hole or no hole, VFR you can't go through it. Scattered, no problem.
Click to expand...

Huh? I think I need to see a cite for that one. Beside, METARs report weather at aerodromes...not across the region.
 
Blatham489 said:
Maybe I missed it if someone stated it earlier, but IIRC, a broken layer is considered a ceiling, so hole or no hole, VFR you can't go through it. Scattered, no problem.
Click to expand...

You don't recall correctly.
Broken is a ceiling.
There is no rule on going through ceilings.
There are rules on going through clouds - in a nutshell, don't do it if not on an IFR flight plan.
It is possible to get on top of a ceiling without flying through clouds.

Beware of special cases prohibiting operation without reference to the surface. (e.g., student pilot)
 
jspilot said:
It seems crazy to me that in today's day and age we can't know for certain how high a cloud goes.
Click to expand...

Next time you are flying commercial look out at the cloud tops as you climb through a layer. The tops are usually very irregular with large variation. Particularly typical summertime CU and TCU. How are you going to measure that?

Now think of the legal liability of getting it wrong....
 
jspilot said:
Good talk here guys but I'm a bit confused about the implied danger many are stating.
Click to expand...
In your scenario as you have it presented, realistically, I think the danger is, what do you do if you have an emergency during the portion of the flight while you are over the layer with no hole to get through?

I think the correct answer is 'tell ATC and ask for help'. Don't freak out - Report the emergency and let the system work for you. I would rule out such a flight for fear of an emergency, but it is something that you should think about ahead of time/have a plan for before it happens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top