Special VFR Questions

[SierraPilot123]

I request Special VFR with tower before takeoff because there is scattered cloud layer at 900 ft AGL and clearly in the way of the traffic pattern which I plan to fly for touch and go's.

Tower responds, "Field is VFR, cleared for takeoff." I know it is VFR but there are clouds in the way of the pattern.

So I take off from a field elev of 400 ft and start climbing to a target TPA of 1,400 ft. It is obvious that the scattered clouds are going to a problem since they are at 900 ft and all over the place.

I again request Special VFR so that I don't have to break my 500 ft. below cloud clearence. Tower responds, "Unable, I have other planes in the pattern."

So I end up departing the pattern and climbing through a large hole to get on top of the disappating low clouds and head to another airport for pattern work.

QUESTIONS:

1. How are other A/C legally flying the pattern while maintaining 500 ft below the clouds, putting them at 400 ft AGL? Don't you need to be at TPA and a safe altitude?

2. What was the logic behind this controller not allowing me special VFR?

3. What should I do differently next time?

Thanks for your help

[dc3flyer]

Since there is a tower, I know it is controlled, but what class airspace is it? And the clouds were scattered??? (which isn't a "ceiling", which would make the field technically VFR)

[meritflyer]

Originally Posted by SierraPilot123

I request Special VFR with tower before takeoff because there is scattered cloud layer at 900 ft AGL and clearly in the way of the traffic pattern which I plan to fly for touch and go's.

Tower responds, "Field is VFR, cleared for takeoff." I know it is VFR but there are clouds in the way of the pattern.

So I take off from a field elev of 400 ft and start climbing to a target TPA of 1,400 ft. It is obvious that the scattered clouds are going to a problem since they are at 900 ft and all over the place.

I again request Special VFR so that I don't have to break my 500 ft. below cloud clearence. Tower responds, "Unable, I have other planes in the pattern."

So I end up departing the pattern and climbing through a large hole to get on top of the disappating low clouds and head to another airport for pattern work.

QUESTIONS:

1. How are other A/C legally flying the pattern while maintaining 500 ft below the clouds, putting them at 400 ft AGL? Don't you need to be at TPA and a safe altitude?

2. What was the logic behind this controller not allowing me special VFR?

3. What should I do differently next time?

Thanks for your help

Need more info. What type of airspace was it?

[deadstick]

If it wasn't too busy, I think the tower guys kinda dropped the ball on this. It sounds like his opinion was "other people are ignoring the clouds, why don't you do the same?" This pilot needed to maintain the cloud clearance requirements. Yes, the field was VFR, but the scattered clouds at 900 do cause a problem. Get the special and the new TPA could be 850 AGL or 950 AGL. Without, he'd have to scoot around at 400AGL (no good!) or at 1900 AGL.

I did this a few times and had conflicts an IFR inbound (121). You can't have a SVFR in the pattern and clear another for an approach. I worked with the controller to land/taxi back and wait for the plane to land. Piece o' cake!!

Never let somebody sway you into a FAR violation. If you don't feel 100% sure of yourself, park it. Tomorrow is another day.

[SierraPilot123]

Originally Posted by dc3flyer

Since there is a tower, I know it is controlled, but what class airspace is it? And the clouds were scattered??? (which isn't a "ceiling", which would make the field technically VFR)

Yes technically it was VFR, but there was no safe and legal way in my mind to maintain 500' cloud clearence with out SVFR.

This was in Delta Airspace with parallel runways. Right runway has an ILS, the left has no IFR approaches. So IFR traffic wouldn't be a factor if he cleared me for pattern work on the left. I remember there to be one other aircraft within the pattern. It certainly was not a busy day.

It was inbetween broken and scattered in my field of view. Certainly not enough room to fly around each cloud mass.

You are right....there is always another day...but it would be nice to understand more of the logic behind this.

[exleardriver]

Originally Posted by deadstick

If it wasn't too busy, I think the tower guys kinda dropped the ball on this. It sounds like his opinion was "other people are ignoring the clouds, why don't you do the same?" This pilot needed to maintain the cloud clearance requirements. Yes, the field was VFR, but the scattered clouds at 900 do cause a problem. Get the special and the new TPA could be 850 AGL or 950 AGL. Without, he'd have to scoot around at 400AGL (no good!) or at 1900 AGL.

I did this a few times and had conflicts an IFR inbound (121). You can't have a SVFR in the pattern and clear another for an approach. I worked with the controller to land/taxi back and wait for the plane to land. Piece o' cake!!

Never let somebody sway you into a FAR violation. If you don't feel 100% sure of yourself, park it. Tomorrow is another day.

+1. good answer and solution.

[exleardriver]

Originally Posted by SierraPilot123

Yes technically it was VFR, but there was no safe and legal way in my mind to maintain 500' cloud clearence with out SVFR.

This was in Delta Airspace with parallel runways. Right runway has an ILS, the left has no IFR approaches. So IFR traffic wouldn't be a factor if he cleared me for pattern work on the left. I remember there to be one other aircraft within the pattern. It certainly was not a busy day.

It was inbetween broken and scattered in my field of view. Certainly not enough room to fly around each cloud mass.

You are right....there is always another day...but it would be nice to understand more of the logic behind this.

yeah, good thinking on your part. bottom line is that it's controlled airspace, but not class bravo, so cloud clearance requirement of 500' below, 1000'above and 2000' horizontal. you couldn't operate at a safe altitude per far 91.119, couldn't meet far 91.155(a)..and you could have possibly been violated for a far 91.13 violation had an faa safety inspector been watching over. however, i doubt highly that the controller would have taken your concern lightly with one hanging out in the tower. again, wise choice to simply depart to another airport. i definitely would have followed up though with a phone call to the tower later to explain my concerns and to get their rationale.

[BajtheJino]

My interpretation of a Special VFR is for exiting and entering airspace, not to do T&g's.

[exleardriver]

Originally Posted by BajtheJino

My interpretation of a Special VFR is for exiting and entering airspace, not to do T&g's.

91.157 specifies svfr 'operations' within the lateral boundaries of controlled airspace. most indeed probably use it for departure or arrivals, but the wording does not preclude operating within controlled airspace for the purpose of practicing take-offs and landings when the weather prevents basic vfr cloud clearance requirements, as was in this case. appendix d, section 3 of part 91 lists those airports at which svfr operations are prohibited for fixed-wing aircraft.

[mojo6911]

Originally Posted by SierraPilot123

1. How are other A/C legally flying the pattern while maintaining 500 ft below the clouds, putting them at 400 ft AGL? Don't you need to be at TPA and a safe altitude?

2. What was the logic behind this controller not allowing me special VFR?

3. What should I do differently next time?

Thanks for your help

I think it was a poor decision to decide to do touch and goes with clouds at 900 feet AGL at a busy Class D airport. Next time, remain VFR and leave the area or don't go at all (like you did). They don't have to give you a SVFR.

[exleardriver]

from the controller perspective, the field meets basic vfr for class d: the visibility is good and the ceiling is above 1,000' agl. what they don't always take into account is your requirement in their controlled airspace to be able to meet the cloud clearance requirement set forth in 91.155(a). if you as the pilot cannot knowingly meet this requirement and wish to fly, your alternatives were the svfr clearance, which was denied or to request a clearance to vfr-on-top, climb through the cloud layer, cancel once on top and proceed vfr to an airport clear of clouds. you may have to explain this requirement to the class d ground controller. ask me how i know..

[moxiepilot]

exlear - how do you know?

[jrh]

Just curious, was this Class D tower in a radar environment or not? What I mean is, do the tower controllers have a radar display in the tower cab, or do they only have a pair of binoculars?

I used to operate out of a Class D airport with no radar coverage. In order to go SVFR in their airspace, you had to be the only traffic--no IFR aircraft coming or going, and no other SVFR aircraft. I *think* that's because there was no way to provide traffic seperation, therefore the entire Class D airspace needs to be "protected" until the SVFR aircraft reports they are clear of the airspace.

The reason I say this is to clarify the SVFR clearance has nothing to do with approaches to a parallel runway, etc. It doesn't matter what runways are being used or what approaches are being shot...the entire airspace has to be protected.

And as has already been said, you did the right thing by asking for an SVFR clearance and going elsewhere when you couldn't get one.

[exleardriver]

Originally Posted by moxiepilot

exlear - how do you know?

'jew a funny guy..

[exleardriver]

Originally Posted by jrh

Just curious, was this Class D tower in a radar environment or not? What I mean is, do the tower controllers have a radar display in the tower cab, or do they only have a pair of binoculars?

I used to operate out of a Class D airport with no radar coverage. In order to go SVFR in their airspace, you had to be the only traffic--no IFR aircraft coming or going, and no other SVFR aircraft. I *think* that's because there was no way to provide traffic seperation, therefore the entire Class D airspace needs to be "protected" until the SVFR aircraft reports they are clear of the airspace.

The reason I say this is to clarify the SVFR clearance has nothing to do with approaches to a parallel runway, etc. It doesn't matter what runways are being used or what approaches are being shot...the entire airspace has to be protected.

And as has already been said, you did the right thing by asking for an SVFR clearance and going elsewhere when you couldn't get one.

good point and i think that you're right in that the immediate determinant for refusal was based upon separation requirements, not necessarily any ifr arrivals.

[SIUav8er]

Ive had issues with "special VFR" myself. Kind of.

I was on the ILS one time, under IFR. The airspace was D. The wx was reported 1000 broken and 2 miles visibilty. I was cleard for the cirlce to land on the opposite runway. As I began to circle, the tower controler said there was VFR traffic on the upwind remaining in the pattern. I couldnt believe it! I thought Special VFR was only allowed if there was no IFR traffic in the airspace. It was clearly below class D VFR... what gives?

[PilotChip]

§ 91.119 Minimum safe altitudes: General

Except when necessary for takeoff or landing,

no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes:



I discussed this around the cab and the consensus is that half of the traffic pattern is climb-out and the remainder is, essentially, the arrival portion. In this case of low ceilings the altitude requirements would not apply AND the published TPA would not be adhered to due to weather conditions and overall PIC judgment. A turn away or departure from the closed traffic pattern would then constitute application of required height above ground restrictions, unless cleared via SVFR.

Now, please try to stay at TPA when possible. Most TPAs are 1000' agl or higher. This may be a gray area, but in some opinions that simple sentence fragment gives the pilot an advantage.
____________________________

b. SVFR operations may be authorized for aircraft operating in or transiting a Class B, Class C, Class D, or Class E surface area when the primary airport is reporting VFR but the pilot advises that basic VFR cannot be maintained.

NOTE-
The basic requirements for issuance of a SVFR clearance in subpara a apply with the obvious exception that weather conditions at the controlling airport are not required to be less than basic VFR minima.

Mainly focusing on a/c arriving to, departing from, or transiting the airport... as a pilot you CAN advise "vfr cannot be maintained, request SVFR" but if the field is vfr don't automatically expect svfr just because you find yourself in a tight spot.

If you need it though, DO ask for it!
Don't expect to be given the extra clearance (SVFR) for pattern work if there are vfr aircraft within the airspace and the field is reporting vfr.

[PilotChip]

Originally Posted by SIUav8er

Ive had issues with "special VFR" myself. Kind of.

I was on the ILS one time, under IFR. The airspace was D. The wx was reported 1000 broken and 2 miles visibilty. I was cleard for the cirlce to land on the opposite runway. As I began to circle, the tower controler said there was VFR traffic on the upwind remaining in the pattern. I couldnt believe it! I thought Special VFR was only allowed if there was no IFR traffic in the airspace. It was clearly below class D VFR... what gives?

Very good question here!

In most cases a letter of agreement with the approach control facility will authorize the class D tower to permit SVFR. This simple letter allows it to happen (per the 7110.65 ATC Manual). All letters include different information pertaining to airspace capacity, traffic flow, amount, workload, etc....

Why was there a vfr(?) aircraft in the pattern?
As your ILS approach came closer to the airport the local controller established visual contact with your aircraft. At that point, I'm assuming, the controller meant "SVFR a/c upwind in the pattern," and was applying visual separation between you (arriving) and the aircraft in the pattern (granted he could assure keeping both of you in sight the entire time until you landed).

Or they could have just taken a special weather report and went vfr all of the sudden.

If their letter of agreement had stated "no svfr in the airspace when there was an IFR in the airspace, unless visual separation is applied." (which many do) then it might be best judgment to land you (IFR) first prior to launching any svfr into the airspace......

In the case you needed to go missed, the controller would have had to get that svfr pattern guy on the ground before you left his sight on your ma.

[PilotChip]

Just curious, was this Class D tower in a radar environment or not? What I mean is, do the tower controllers have a radar display in the tower cab, or do they only have a pair of binoculars?

tower cab displays are not intended for any type of separation services within class d, unless specified in a facility directive and approved by mngmt.

check this out too
explains in detail about what we are really supposed to be using it for.... go down to "3-1-9"
http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff...3/atc0301.html


and there are usually 3 to 6 pairs of binos being thrown around at any given moment

[SIUav8er]

great info! thank you!

[Omdahl]

Here is some added info about SVFR and IFR:

7−5−2. PRIORITY
a. SVFR flights may be approved only if arriving
and departing IFR aircraft are not delayed.

NOTE−
The priority afforded IFR aircraft over SVFR aircraft is not
intended to be so rigidly applied that inefficient use of
airspace results. The controller has the prerogative of
permitting completion of a SVFR operation already in
progress when an IFR aircraft becomes a factor if better
overall efficiency will result.

As for SVFR in the pattern:

7−5−5. LOCAL OPERATIONS
a. Authorize local SVFR operations for a specified
period (series of landings and takeoffs, etc.) upon
request if the aircraft can be recalled when traffic or
weather conditions require. Where warranted, LOAs
may be consummated.

PHRASEOLOGY−
LOCAL SPECIAL V−F−R OPERATIONS IN THE
IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF (name) AIRPORT ARE
AUTHORIZED UNTIL (time). MAINTAIN SPECIAL
V−F−R CONDITIONS.

[nosehair]

How did you know the scattered clouds were at 900 feet?

How big was the hole you climbed through? How did you know you had 2000' horizontal clearance?

By now, youre question about why he could not give you SVFR to stay in the pattern should be answered. There was other traffic. A SVFR is kinda like an instrument approach clearance - one at a time.

But my questions to you about 'cloud clearance' also revolve around TPA.

You could have flown a 400' pattern; the 500' minimum you're thinking of is excepted for take-offs and landings, although it might push the 91.13 careless and reckless - that would depend on the terrain, but that is a general minimum for an instrument circling approach, and is not dangerous in and of itself.

Back to the question - how did you know the clouds were at 900'?