I often see charts like the one above showing VFR cloud clearance minima. Since the regs list a minimum distance above clouds obviously VFR flights are allowed to fly over clouds. However, it's not clear what kind of clouds one can fly over: only individual smaller clouds, a broken layer or a solid layer. In the US does a pilot under VFR have to maintain a visual reference to the surface?
Asked
Active
Viewed 1.8k times
23
-
3They don't usually give reasons for the rules. I didn't realize at first that the cloud-separation rule was not because clouds are scary. It was because IFR planes could pop out of the cloud, and you and they could get a nasty surprise. – Mike Dunlavey Sep 02 '16 at 00:03
-
1Paraglider's in the UK just need to remain clear of cloud and have sight of the surface. It doesn't say that sight has to be directly below you... – Michael Shaw Sep 04 '16 at 23:20
1 Answers
21
Yes, it's legal to operate under VFR without any visual reference to the surface. It's called operating VFR over-the-top, not to be confused with VFR-on-top which is an IFR clearance. Over-the-top is defined in 14 CFR 1.1:
Over-the-top means above the layer of clouds or other obscuring phenomena forming the ceiling.
There are some exceptions and restrictions, though (this list may not be complete):
- Recreational pilots must have visual reference to the surface (14 CFR 61.101)
- So must sport pilots (14 CFR 61.315)
- So must student pilots (14 CFR 61.89)
- If the pilot has a foreign-based private license then all restrictions on the foreign license apply, which could prevent VFR over-the-top (14 CFR 61.75)
- Large, turbine or fractionally owned aircraft must be equipped as for IFR (14 CFR 91.507)
- If flying for an airline or other operator, their OpSpecs must allow it
-
10Ok, let's see if aviation terminology can get more confusing. VFR-on-top is not in fact VFR. And VFR-over-the-top is a completely different thing. Ugh. No wonder I was confused! – TomMcW Sep 01 '16 at 19:09
-
2@TomMcW Yeah, the other problem with VFR-over-the-top is that you, unless you're equipped and rated for IFR, you have to be sure you'll have VMC in which to descend on the other side of those clouds. – reirab Sep 01 '16 at 19:36
-
Is VFR-over-the-top an ATC clearance or more just a description of flying VFR over clouds? When would you use the phrase? – TomMcW Sep 01 '16 at 19:45
-
1@TomMcW It's a description, not a clearance. Many VFR flights aren't in contact with ATC anyway. As it happens, I heard a VFR pilot trying to get down through a cloud layer recently, he asked ATC if any other VFR flights had made it through and if the controller could ask them where they found a hole in the layer. If he didn't find a hole I hope he had plenty of fuel to get him back to somewhere less cloudy! – Pondlife Sep 01 '16 at 20:14
-
1@Pondlife That's why I was wondering if it was legal to do. It doesn't sound very wise unless you're at least IFR equipped and rated. You could get stuck up there – TomMcW Sep 01 '16 at 20:28
-
@TomMcW Yes, it's a nice example of legal vs. safe. [This question}(http://aviation.stackexchange.com/q/1636/62) has some more information but I'd say you need have a plan B for sure. – Pondlife Sep 01 '16 at 20:36
-
its perfectly legal to ask the controller if there are any airports reporting VFR or ceilings above your altitude. Note that under IFR, when your destination is above minimums, after you've flown missed the controller will ask you your intentions. At that point, you would be doing the same thing, asking for airports reporting above minimums or VFR. Alternate airports are for lost comms. – rbp Sep 01 '16 at 22:46
-
1
-
2@Andrius That would be a great question to ask, I have no idea what the EASA regulations are on this. As for landing, you still need to be IFR to go through clouds. If you get to your destination and there's no hole in the clouds then you have to go somewhere else, or switch to IFR if you can. – Pondlife Sep 02 '16 at 15:09