![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||
|
There were two errors in the VFR page.
First, class G (uncontrolled) airspace does not have a cloud clearance requirement other than remaining outside of clouds, so it's not correct to say you must always be some particular distance from clouds. Perhaps we should correct it to say that you must avoid clouds (without going into detail about exactly by how much).
Second, even the highest-density congested airspace (class B) can be flown VFR. Only class A airspace (above 14,000 feet MSL) requires IFR flight (assuming VMC prevails). It's not unusual to confuse a requirement to be in contact with ATC and to follow their instructions (or even requirements for explicit clearances) with IFR flight -- they are not the same thing. You can fly VFR in such congested airspace and must refuse ATC instructions that put you into IMC, so you'll hear pilots refuse a clearance "unable to maintain VFR on that heading (at that altitiude)".
At least, this is so in the United States. It's my understanding that most other countries are the same in these two respects.
You're correct about class G airspace, and I think your addition of the word "usually" was a good way to handle it without adding excessive detail.
BTW, Class A starts at 18,000 msl, not 14,000.
You are not completely wrong saying the cloud clearance in G is clear of clouds, but you are missing a huge amount of information. Class G has some of the most strenuous and detailed cloud clearance requirements of all airspaces'.
Below 1200ft AGL, regardless of MSL altitude:
Day: clear of clouds. Night: 500ft below, 1000ft above, 2000ft horizontal.
More than 1200ft AGL and below 10000ft MSL:
Day: 500ft below, 1000ft above, 2000ft horizontal. Night: 500ft below, 1000ft above, 2000ft horizontal.
More than 1200ft AGL and at or above 10000ft MSL :
Day + Night: 1000ft below, 1000ft above, 1SM horizontal.
So this responds to your "inches" question ;)
Fly safe,
a fellow pilot.
Annother suggestion: the first paragraph states that the purpose of the VFR wx minima is for 'see and avoid.' While this is true, it is actually the second of two reasons for VFR wx minima. The first, and most important reason, is to keep non-instrument rated pilots out of conditions in which they are deprived of outside references.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Agree The
Night VFR article is a
stub and merely add requirements to VFR regulations
PhysicsMasta (
talk)
01:17, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Disagree Special VFR is not VFR - it is a set of special rules that can be used to allow flight with visual reference to the surface in airspace and/or meteorological conditions that would normally require flight under IFR. BaseTurnComplete 02:31, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
In general, C-VFR is VFR but
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Cosy-ch ( talk • contribs) 15:42, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
Sometimes I hear ex-pilots and Air Force Officers say "...flying VFR" as a metephore to take intiative and get things done without guidance. Would this be an apporiate article to put this in? BRI70 01:10, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Please! The inserted CVFR Chart is nor a example for a VFR Chart nether respects this chart the valid minimal standards for Aeronautical charts (mostly more agreement then standards). In order to avoid publicity for some great distributors, You can use a sample of a ICAO Chart in Europe! The image with the sectional chart of Tel-Aviv is useless for many reasons: - Israel is not a GA-friendly state - The rhules for VFR (GA) are'nt not representative at all for others - the chart contains no objects and signs used for VFR Charts, instead of it's design is the same as IFR sectional charts - Please refer to accredited oragnisations and proposals for VFR like ICAO, EASA and national organisations like DGAC, BAZL, DFS and others (exemples for central Europe) -- Cosy-ch ( talk) 15:35, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
Not does this chart from Israelian airspace not correspond to EASA standards, it is simply a provocation. I wonder if there is 1 of 1 million of VFR rated pilots they even have been flying in this airspace as PIC.
Please, take a picture that reflects our daily view of airspace in Europe or elswhere (the example from EASA has the advantage, that it is identical for the whole Europe and the design standard is very new) -- 188.61.240.103 ( talk) 07:48, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
Mountain Visual Flight Rules also need to be mentioned. Urhixidur ( talk) 20:59, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
commercial pilot license | Hm Aviation provides world class Commercial Pilot License Training and Dgca CPL Classes in delhi as per DGCA curriculum. We have trained Over 1700 Pilots and most of them are working with Top Airlines. visit us [1] https://www.hmaviation.net/p/commercial-pilot-license Shivanigupta345 ( talk) 05:42, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||
|
There were two errors in the VFR page.
First, class G (uncontrolled) airspace does not have a cloud clearance requirement other than remaining outside of clouds, so it's not correct to say you must always be some particular distance from clouds. Perhaps we should correct it to say that you must avoid clouds (without going into detail about exactly by how much).
Second, even the highest-density congested airspace (class B) can be flown VFR. Only class A airspace (above 14,000 feet MSL) requires IFR flight (assuming VMC prevails). It's not unusual to confuse a requirement to be in contact with ATC and to follow their instructions (or even requirements for explicit clearances) with IFR flight -- they are not the same thing. You can fly VFR in such congested airspace and must refuse ATC instructions that put you into IMC, so you'll hear pilots refuse a clearance "unable to maintain VFR on that heading (at that altitiude)".
At least, this is so in the United States. It's my understanding that most other countries are the same in these two respects.
You're correct about class G airspace, and I think your addition of the word "usually" was a good way to handle it without adding excessive detail.
BTW, Class A starts at 18,000 msl, not 14,000.
You are not completely wrong saying the cloud clearance in G is clear of clouds, but you are missing a huge amount of information. Class G has some of the most strenuous and detailed cloud clearance requirements of all airspaces'.
Below 1200ft AGL, regardless of MSL altitude:
Day: clear of clouds. Night: 500ft below, 1000ft above, 2000ft horizontal.
More than 1200ft AGL and below 10000ft MSL:
Day: 500ft below, 1000ft above, 2000ft horizontal. Night: 500ft below, 1000ft above, 2000ft horizontal.
More than 1200ft AGL and at or above 10000ft MSL :
Day + Night: 1000ft below, 1000ft above, 1SM horizontal.
So this responds to your "inches" question ;)
Fly safe,
a fellow pilot.
Annother suggestion: the first paragraph states that the purpose of the VFR wx minima is for 'see and avoid.' While this is true, it is actually the second of two reasons for VFR wx minima. The first, and most important reason, is to keep non-instrument rated pilots out of conditions in which they are deprived of outside references.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Agree The
Night VFR article is a
stub and merely add requirements to VFR regulations
PhysicsMasta (
talk)
01:17, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Disagree Special VFR is not VFR - it is a set of special rules that can be used to allow flight with visual reference to the surface in airspace and/or meteorological conditions that would normally require flight under IFR. BaseTurnComplete 02:31, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
In general, C-VFR is VFR but
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Cosy-ch ( talk • contribs) 15:42, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
Sometimes I hear ex-pilots and Air Force Officers say "...flying VFR" as a metephore to take intiative and get things done without guidance. Would this be an apporiate article to put this in? BRI70 01:10, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Please! The inserted CVFR Chart is nor a example for a VFR Chart nether respects this chart the valid minimal standards for Aeronautical charts (mostly more agreement then standards). In order to avoid publicity for some great distributors, You can use a sample of a ICAO Chart in Europe! The image with the sectional chart of Tel-Aviv is useless for many reasons: - Israel is not a GA-friendly state - The rhules for VFR (GA) are'nt not representative at all for others - the chart contains no objects and signs used for VFR Charts, instead of it's design is the same as IFR sectional charts - Please refer to accredited oragnisations and proposals for VFR like ICAO, EASA and national organisations like DGAC, BAZL, DFS and others (exemples for central Europe) -- Cosy-ch ( talk) 15:35, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
Not does this chart from Israelian airspace not correspond to EASA standards, it is simply a provocation. I wonder if there is 1 of 1 million of VFR rated pilots they even have been flying in this airspace as PIC.
Please, take a picture that reflects our daily view of airspace in Europe or elswhere (the example from EASA has the advantage, that it is identical for the whole Europe and the design standard is very new) -- 188.61.240.103 ( talk) 07:48, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
Mountain Visual Flight Rules also need to be mentioned. Urhixidur ( talk) 20:59, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
commercial pilot license | Hm Aviation provides world class Commercial Pilot License Training and Dgca CPL Classes in delhi as per DGCA curriculum. We have trained Over 1700 Pilots and most of them are working with Top Airlines. visit us [1] https://www.hmaviation.net/p/commercial-pilot-license Shivanigupta345 ( talk) 05:42, 15 March 2024 (UTC)