Why is a safety pilot required if on an ifr flight plan?

lancie00

lancie00

Line Up and Wait
Joined
May 12, 2016
Messages
864
Display Name
Display name:
lancie00
Assuming you have your instrument rating. If you are in airspace with radar coverage and you file an ifr flight plan, since ATC is providing aircraft separation, why do you still need a safety pilot to fly with a restricted viewing device in vmc? Wouldn't it be exactly the same as flying in the soup?
 
lancie00 said:
Assuming you have your instrument rating. If you are in airspace with radar coverage and you file an ifr flight plan, since ATC is providing aircraft separation, why do you still need a safety pilot to fly with a restricted viewing device in vmc? Wouldn't it be exactly the same as flying in the soup?
Click to expand...

It's still your job to see and avoid when VMC. ATC isn't necessarily aware of everyone out there.


EDIT: George beat me to it! :)
 
What if you're in a class B or C?
 
I can't think of a valid "reason" for the B/C scenario, but I suspect it's just an edge case that the FAA didn't feel like excluding from the general See and Avoid rule.
 
Class C has some exceptions to separation services between VFR and IFR.
Still 91.109 is pretty dang clear. Even on an IFR plan, even in class A or B, even if you are in solid IMC, if the pilot is wearing a view limiting device, there has to be a safety pilot.
 
flyingron said:
Class C has some exceptions to separation services between VFR and IFR.
Still 91.109 is pretty dang clear. Even on an IFR plan, even in class A or B, even if you are in solid IMC, if the pilot is wearing a view limiting device, there has to be a safety pilot.
Click to expand...
But it's perfectly fine to be looking out the window at this:









without a safety pilot. Go figure.
 
So you can’t do the approachs,to stay current ,in vmc.
 
kgruber said:
Why would you wear a hood IMC?
Click to expand...
Because you have an incompetent safety pilot who sat there silently while you unwittingly flew into a cloud.
 
lancie00 said:
Wouldn't it be exactly the same as flying in the soup?
Click to expand...

No. You won't/shouldn't have VFR traffic when you're in IMC. So, in actual conditions, you're pretty sure the sky is clear. When it's pretty out, you can be pretty sure the sky is only mostly clear.
 
There seems to be a presumption that the safety pilot is present only to look for other traffic. FAR 91.109(c) only requires that a safety pilot "has adequate vision forward and to each side of the aircraft". Would a solo pilot flying with a view limiting device see the oily film building on the windscreen due to some issue in the engine compartment? You'd see that IMC, of course, but your view limiting device may hinder your ability to see it. If you were flying solo in IMC while wearing a hood, how would you know if you were picking up ice?

The point is that a view limiting device in theory limits your view to just the instrument panel but there's potentially other stuff to see that and that a safety pilot would notice these things in addition to calling out traffic.
 
Also, most pilots don't understand that "safety pilot" and "IFR" are totally separate topics.
Just like pilots confuse "IFR" and "IMC".

The regs (91.113) are pretty dang clear on that:
"When weather conditions permit, regardless of whether an operation is conducted under instrument flight rules or visual flight rules, vigilance shall be maintained by each person operating an aircraft so as to see and avoid other aircraft."
 
If you're VFR there can be all sorts of aircraft flying around who aren't receiving separation from anything. Presumably you fly your IFR flights with your eyes out the window when in VFR conditions. Presumably.
 
I understand that the FAR's require it, I'm just wondering why they require it in Class A,B or C airspace where the controller is maintaining separation. I would think it would make it easier for people to stay current if they didn't have to find a safety pilot or pay an instructor.
 
lancie00 said:
I understand that the FAR's require it, I'm just wondering why they require it in Class A,B or C airspace where the controller is maintaining separation. I would think it would make it easier for people to stay current if they didn't have to find a safety pilot or pay an instructor.
Click to expand...

Because it's not just about separation. If you have a view limiting device, there are potential safety-of-flight things you will not see that have nothing to do with other traffic.
 
ChiefPilot said:
Because it's not just about separation. If you have a view limiting device, there are potential safety-of-flight things you will not see that have nothing to do with other traffic.
Click to expand...

Now THAT makes more sense than anything else I've heard. Thanks!
 
lancie00 said:
I understand that the FAR's require it, I'm just wondering why they require it in Class A,B or C airspace where the controller is maintaining separation. I would think it would make it easier for people to stay current if they didn't have to find a safety pilot or pay an instructor.
Click to expand...
Here are a few reasons:

One of the tools available to ATC is visual separation (explicitly listed in AIM 3-2-3 and 3-2-4 for Class B and Class C airspace). If you were allowed to fly in busy airspace without anyone looking out the window, it would necessarily rob ATC of this tool and they would have to separate all traffic by lateral separation and/or vertical separation.

In Class C airspace the services provided to VFR traffic are not the same as those provided in Class B airspace. That matters to IFR traffic because it means that VFR traffic may not be separated from you by ATC and, if you don't have a safety pilot looking out the window and the VFR pilot does not see you, there could be a mid-air collision.

Even with ATC providing separation services to all traffic as in Class B airspace, Murphy's Law dictates that you are safer when you have someone looking out the window for the plane that ATC didn't successfully separate from you. We are all important players on Team "Don't Have a Mid-Air Collision."
 
paflyer said:
But it's perfectly fine to be looking out the window at this:









without a safety pilot. Go figure.
Click to expand...
Correct. I don't know why that's confusing. The safety pilot is there to provide the visual lookout that would be required of the pilot if he were not hooded. Being in class C airspace on an IFR plan doesn't obviate your responsibility to look out the window.
 
ChiefPilot said:
Because it's not just about separation. If you have a view limiting device, there are potential safety-of-flight things you will not see that have nothing to do with other traffic.
Click to expand...
But that's not why safety pilots are required by rule. If you can't avoid terrain, etc... while flying under the hood (or in IMC) you better get something more than a safety pilot (like a good instructor) in the right seat.
 
iamtheari said:
Here are a few reasons:

One of the tools available to ATC is visual separation (explicitly listed in AIM 3-2-3 and 3-2-4 for Class B and Class C airspace). If you were allowed to fly in busy airspace without anyone looking out the window, it would necessarily rob ATC of this tool and they would have to separate all traffic by lateral separation and/or vertical separation.

In Class C airspace the services provided to VFR traffic are not the same as those provided in Class B airspace. That matters to IFR traffic because it means that VFR traffic may not be separated from you by ATC and, if you don't have a safety pilot looking out the window and the VFR pilot does not see you, there could be a mid-air collision.

Even with ATC providing separation services to all traffic as in Class B airspace, Murphy's Law dictates that you are safer when you have someone looking out the window for the plane that ATC didn't successfully separate from you. We are all important players on Team "Don't Have a Mid-Air Collision."
Click to expand...

Another well explained post of things I did not know. I assumed that if you were in A,B or C on an ifr flight plan (even in vmc) that ATC was responsible for separation. Does that mean separation distances are less in VMC?
 
lancie00 said:
Another well explained post of things I did not know. I assumed that if you were in A,B or C on an ifr flight plan (even in vmc) that ATC was responsible for separation. Does that mean separation distances are less in VMC?
Click to expand...
I don't know the actual requirements. The AIM says that the three options (assuming small planes, under 19,000 lb) are visual separation, 500 feet vertical separation, or "target resolution." (They have to give you more horizontal clearance if it's a big plane or a jet.) I suppose each radar system has different target resolution. I also suppose that ADS-B will improve target resolution. But listen to a Class B approach frequency on a CAVU day and you'll hear nothing but "cleared for the visual approach, follow the 737" all day long, which tells me that visual separation is an important tool to keep the planes moving in busy airspace.

But for me it mostly amounts to not putting my life 100% in someone else's hands. I'm not the best at spotting other planes in the air, but I'd still rather have someone in my plane looking out the window than just trust that ATC will protect me without ever making a mistake.
 
flyingron said:
But that's not why safety pilots are required by rule. If you can't avoid terrain, etc... while flying under the hood (or in IMC) you better get something more than a safety pilot (like a good instructor) in the right seat.
Click to expand...

Terrain shouldn't be a factor unless competency is an issue but other things might be. An example I mentioned in an earlier post is oily film on the windscreen - a view limiting device would prevent you from seeing that, VMC or IMC, but a safety pilot would see it (in addition to other traffic).
 
flyingron said:
Correct. I don't know why that's confusing. The safety pilot is there to provide the visual lookout that would be required of the pilot if he were not hooded. Being in class C airspace on an IFR plan doesn't obviate your responsibility to look out the window.
Click to expand...

Yet, if you're busting out of an overcast into MVMC on an approach you don't need a safety pilot.

Requiring an observer when you're under positive control seems illogical to me. If you're in actual, you ain't seeing anything.

But the president hasn't put my name forward to run the FAA so I have to live with silly rules.
 
lancie00 said:
I understand that the FAR's require it, I'm just wondering why they require it in Class A,B or C airspace where the controller is maintaining separation. I would think it would make it easier for people to stay current if they didn't have to find a safety pilot or pay an instructor.
Click to expand...
Yeah that.
 
lancie00 said:
I understand that the FAR's require it, I'm just wondering why they require it in Class A,B or C airspace where the controller is maintaining separation. I would think it would make it easier for people to stay current if they didn't have to find a safety pilot or pay an instructor.
Click to expand...
Plus, who does an entire flight within class C airspace? Are you just making circles? I would bet class B ATC will be ushering you out of there ASAP. That’s even if the let you in in the first place.
 
Not to hijack the thread, but this might be a good place to discuss what a safety pilot should and should not do. Obviously look for traffic and advise, but how far out of wack (not that the hooded pilot was ever in wack) should a safety pilot let a situation go before mentioning it. I've had some say, "I don't care if we're upside down, just look for traffic." Personally, if we're getting to the point where heading/attitude/altitude are not even close, I'm going to say something. (Politely of course.)

:popcorn:Let the games begin!
 
upstateny said:
Not to hijack the thread, but this might be a good place to discuss what a safety pilot should and should not do. Obviously look for traffic and advise, but how far out of wack (not that the hooded pilot was ever in wack) should a safety pilot let a situation go before mentioning it. I've had some say, "I don't care if we're upside down, just look for traffic." Personally, if we're getting to the point where heading/attitude/altitude are not even close, I'm going to say something. (Politely of course.)

:popcorn:Let the games begin!
Click to expand...
Here are my rules:
1. If the maneuver requires a parachute under 91.307, speak up. Do not let the plane get past a 60-degree bank or 30-degree nose up or down attitude without at least pointing it out to the pilot.
2. Tell the pilot early enough before violating VFR minimums to do something safely about it. In other words, do say "There is a cloud ahead. Turn 20 degrees left to avoid it or just take off the hood for a few minutes." Don't wait and then say "Wow, it's chilly inside these clouds!" (Not applicable if on an IFR clearance, of course.)
3. Tell the pilot about anything that would make you worried if you were the pilot. Oil on the windshield, ice on the wing, mountains moving up the windshield instead of down, etc.
4. Don't talk on the radio unless you have an explicit agreement with the pilot to share those duties.
 
lancie00 said:
I understand that the FAR's require it, I'm just wondering why they require it in Class A,B or C airspace where the controller is maintaining separation. I would think it would make it easier for people to stay current if they didn't have to find a safety pilot or pay an instructor.
Click to expand...

There is no separation requirement between VFR's in Class C airspace. Yeah, they're gonna call traffic and give you a safety alert and advise you maybe to turn or change your altitude if the see you gettin real close IF they aren't busy with a higher priority duty and see it. But there is no separation. The separation between VFR's and IFR's is 'target resolution,' don't let the targets touch. Controllers call it 'green between.' Or 500 feet vertically. Class B separation between VFR's and other VFR or IFR traffic is 1 1/2 miles if the traffic weighs more than 19,000 lbs or is a turbojet. If the traffic is 19,000 lbs or less it is 'target resolution.' That can be kinda close on some Radar's. Or 500 feet vertical. You really don't want to be flyin around with your head in the cockpit in Class B/C airspace any more than you should be anywhere else.
 
Last edited:
paflyer said:
Yeah that.
Click to expand...
The premise is wrong. Class C doesn't guarantee IFR separations, already pointed that out. Class C *USUALLY* provides IFR-VFR separation services but there are at least three exceptions.
 
lancie00 said:
Assuming you have your instrument rating. If you are in airspace with radar coverage and you file an ifr flight plan, since ATC is providing aircraft separation, why do you still need a safety pilot to fly with a restricted viewing device in vmc? Wouldn't it be exactly the same as flying in the soup?
Click to expand...

Unless you're receiving Class B or Class C services, ATC is providing separation only from other IFR traffic.
 
So file IFR into a C with mulitple practice approaches.
 
lancie00 said:
...If you are in airspace with radar coverage and you file an ifr flight plan, since ATC is providing aircraft separation, why do you still need a safety pilot to fly with a restricted viewing device in vmc? ...
Click to expand...

Because controllers are not perfect. (And the pilots they're working with don't always follow instructions, especially in VMC.)

Also, there is a lot more VFR traffic when VMC prevails, and I assume that more traffic means more controller workload.
 
iamtheari said:
In Class C airspace the services provided to VFR traffic are not the same as those provided in Class B airspace. That matters to IFR traffic because it means that VFR traffic may not be separated from you by ATC and, if you don't have a safety pilot looking out the window and the VFR pilot does not see you, there could be a mid-air collision.
Click to expand...

VFR traffic is separated from IFR traffic in Class C airspace.
 
roncachamp said:
VFR traffic is separated from IFR traffic in Class C airspace.
Click to expand...
Unless you're a helicopter, unless the traffic is a hot air balloon, unless the preferred radar sensor is out, for satellite departures for VFRs that haven't yet been contacted/identified, by the faciltiy You know how to read 7110.65, Steve. As I said, there are exceptions.
 
iamtheari said:
I don't know the actual requirements. The AIM says that the three options (assuming small planes, under 19,000 lb) are visual separation, 500 feet vertical separation, or "target resolution." (They have to give you more horizontal clearance if it's a big plane or a jet.) I suppose each radar system has different target resolution. I also suppose that ADS-B will improve target resolution. But listen to a Class B approach frequency on a CAVU day and you'll hear nothing but "cleared for the visual approach, follow the 737" all day long, which tells me that visual separation is an important tool to keep the planes moving in busy airspace.
Click to expand...

VFR/IFR minimum radar separation in Class B airspace is 1.5 miles between aircraft that weigh more than 19,000 pounds and all turbojets. With aircraft of lesser weight the minimum is target resolution; the radar targets must not touch. VFR/IFR minimum radar separation in Class C airspace is target resolution for all aircraft.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top