What is ACTUAL?

[Iceman21]

... .

Not that I care, because I would NEVER log this as actual, but shouldn't you be on a IFR flight plan?

If not, it can't be IMC.

Even if you are on an IFR flight plan, then I believe logging it as actual is still questionable.

But it's your logbook...




eP.

You miss the point eP. It can be CAVU per an ATIS, TAF, etc. and you may still need to fly via the panel. Does that mean, I am not illegal because I am flying on the panel in VFR. The visibility and clouds are what they are. The FARs do not say that in order to fly VFR you need a disernable horizon to reference. In this case you certainly do not need to be on a flight plan and you are not in IMC.

Do you log actual on an IFR flight plan when flying in VMC?

 

[ePilot22]

You miss the point eP. It can be CAVU per an ATIS, TAF, etc. and you may still need to fly via the panel. Does that mean, I am not illegal because I am flying on the panel in VFR. The visibility and clouds are what they are. The FARs do not say that in order to fly VFR you need a disernable horizon to reference. In this case you certainly do not need to be on a flight plan and you are not in IMC.

Do you log actual on an IFR flight plan when flying in VMC?

If I were in VMC I couldn't log actual.

If you have to fly with reference to the instruments and log it as such, you better be on an IFR flight plan. If not and you ARE IMC while VFR, that would mean you are violating the FARs.

VFR=Visual Flight Rule, flight with respect to visual reference.

IFR=Instrument Flight Rule, flight with respect to insturment reference.

The only way you can fly IMC (as described above) without being on an IFR flight plan is Class G airspace.

Again, it's your log book, log what you want - when you want...


eP.

 

[Iceman21]

Sky: Clear below 10,000'
Visibilty: Greater than 10 miles

These conditions are VMC, therefore you do not have to file an IFR flight plan. The fact that there is no horizon does not change the fact that the visibility is over 10 miles.

The definition of VFR does not state any reference to a horizon.

Your arguement puts the rules before the situation. Meaning by the defintion of IMC is where you get the term "actual" when "actual" is the way in which you control the airplane not the rules under which you are flying.

 

[ePilot22]

So you're logging actual, which means you're claiming to be in IMC, but you're flying VFR?

How do you fly VFR in IMC? (legally)

I understand VMC while operating under IFR, but not IMC under VFR.

Please explain.



eP.

 

[Iceman21]

So you're logging actual, which means you're claiming to be in IMC, but you're flying VFR?

I am logging actual because that is how I am flying the plane.

How do you fly VFR in IMC? (legally)

Read the legal opinion posted by midlifeflyer. There you have one of the top lawyers from the FAA Enforcement Division interpreting the FAR for us.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Whoa. ePilot is right. You =can't= legally fly VFR in IMC.

Don't confuse phrases. "Actual" and "IMC" mean two different things. VsuPilot pointed this out.

"Actual instrument conditions" exist when you need the instruments to stay upright because of outside conditions, even if those conditions technically permit flight under VFR (the moonless night over water scenario).

But "instrument meteorological conditions" means something else else. All it means is "weather conditions below the minimums prescribed for flight under Visual Flight Rules (VFR)."

So, it can be "actual" without being IMC and it can be IMC without it being actual. The "moonless night" is an example of the former. Flying 900' below a cloud deck above 10,000 msl with 100 miles visibility is IMC, but obviously without being "actual"

 

[ePilot22]

midlifeflyer,

What happened to the control tower and light gun signals? That was a cool avatar!

Ok, I get what you are saying about IMC, M being Meteorological, and the example of being in actual without having clouds.

How does this work then...

Can a non-instrument rated pilot fly at night in VFR with no visual reference (by reference to the instruments) and log actual?

The conclusion should be yes, since they are VMC and legally VFR.

Just food for thought...



eP.

 

[Iceman21]

"Actual instrument conditions" exist when you need the instruments to stay upright because of outside conditions, even if those conditions technically permit flight under VFR (the moonless night over water scenario).

I suppose I wasn't exactly wording it correctly, but that is what I was attempting to get across.

 

[joe_pilot]

...The only way you can fly IMC (as described above) without being on an IFR flight plan is Class G airspace...

Good. You corrected yourself. Because if you were ever in one of my ground schools at Airman and got that wrong..... ...on the other hand if you were ever stupid enough to actually fly IMC in class G without being on an IFR flight plan...

When were you there, BTW? 75958 was my baby. Engine loss on take-off going into IMC, complete electrical failure in IMC, in-flight fire (all different flights). She always got me home, though.

Everyone else thought she was bad luck. can't imagine why.

-JP

 

[ePilot22]

Afs...

When were you there, BTW?

JP,

I was there last spring. Mid May 05 until the end of June 05. I did the CFI and II course there. Judging by your TT, I'm guessing you were there around 2000 or 2001. Just a guess though.

It's funny what you say about 75958, I never had any problems with her, but...

On my first flight from the right seat for the II, we take-off into IMC (OVC004), break out about 3000msl and begin basic maneuvers. Shoot the LOC Rwy 3 approach back in and land - all without event.

As we shut the engine down the CFI looks at me and says "that went well considering this isn't the best plane for IFR and I haven't flown actual for six or seven months."

I didn't give it a second thought when we departed, but I'm sure glad he didn't say anything until after the flight. Now I have an even better idea of what he was talking about.

All and all, Airman wasn't to bad. The people I met and still talk to today are great.

I don't know what happened to 75958, but hopefully she's treating someone well.:erm: (in the good way, of course!)




eP.