Going Over the Tops?

[1964-M20E]

Our Sony digital cameras don't have this problem. Mine's a year old, the wife's is three or four, simple point-and-shoot pocket cameras. My Samsung phone is also immune. It's mostly the iproducts from iApple. Just kick back, drink the Kool Aid and enjoy the funny effects that appear. Or go droid. 

Not so fast amigo.

 

I have an HTC and it does the same thing and my Samsung before that would also give its own interpretation of the propeller moving.

 

 

So I think the cool aid leaked into the water.  

[jlunseth]

That device is an interesting idea, but during a flight earlier this spring I came to realize there is another wrinkle to the decision of when to deviate, and that is the curvature of the earth believe it or not.  I have had a number of flights, that one in particular, where the decision to deviate needs to be made 50 miles or more ahead.  The particular condition was the back side of a very long frontal system that ran from Memphis up to Minnesota.  Down near Memphis, and until I got into Iowa, the top of the blanket on the back side was well below my altitude, which was FL200.  Toward the east everything sloped up into the front where all the weather was going on (Tstorms and a few tornadoes), so no deviations east, but to the west far enough it was clear behind the front.  Going in to Missouri the clouds got a little higher, I went to FL230 and was clear.  Up ahead quite a long way, probably 50 nm, the clouds looked about their current level, say 20,000.  There was a little bit of a "valley" along my course line, that is, the clouds were high to the east and I could see they were a little higher to the west, but straight ahead looked pretty good, they appeared well below.

 

Unfortunately, if they are over horizon distance (about 12 miles), the curvature of the earth makes it looks as though the distant clouds are lower than they actually are AGL.  Quite a bit lower.  So when I got up to the "head" of the valley I realized I was going to be in the wet tops.  I asked for a little deviation, then a little more, then 120 degrees of deviation and about 50 miles later I diverted for fuel.  Never got into trouble, but learned a lesson about the curvature of the earth. 

[Piloto]

The curvature of the Earth does not affect the perspective view on a horizon finder scope. If you were at 50nm on the ground from the weather you will not see it. But as you climb it will start showing up on the horizon because you are at higher altitude. Where the horizon scope is very useful is at distances over 30nm away from the weather were you can make an early decision. Of course it does not tell you what is behind. But I found it useful to asses a growing build up or mountains relative height. Me and others have been using it for over 30 years before the days of GPS and terrain depiction and I am happy with it. How would you know if you are above the Sierra Nevada or the Andes crossing without GPS. There are other scopes that also have magnification (military type) but are more expensive. The only drawback is that it does not work at night.   

 

José   

[ryoder]

I think if you are on top and cannot see the ground, you are technically in IMC.

No this is not imc. This is perfectly legal for private pilots but not for sport pilots. I have done this once in my short amount of time and had another pilot in the airplane keeping me on track as we flew along the coast. We couldn't see the coastline but had vor, dead reckoning, and a gps. It was fun.

[Piloto]

I would rather be on top, even if I was VFR only qualified. Being on top allows you to see clearly was is coming ahead, like weather and mountain peaks.

 

José

[cliffy]

Lets see, how would I know if I'm above the Sierras or Rockies (even at night)?  How about the big numbers on every small square on the Sectional Chart? Been using it for half a century. Haven't hit a rock yet. 

 

Flying straight and level? Take your half empty water bottle and sight along the top of the water level at the cloud tops. Used it in Boeings. 

[midlifeflyer]

I think if you are on top and cannot see the ground, you are technically in IMC. 

Rather than a simple, "No, that's incorrect," I will ask - what in the regulations and/or AIM makes you think that?

 

You can start with the PCG definition and go from there:

 

VISUAL METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS- Meteorological conditions expressed in terms of visibility, distance from cloud, and ceiling equal to or better than specified minima

 

But be specific. Your memory of what you think the rules might be doesn't count.

[DrBill]

For the digital camera experts; is there any way of getting rid of this effect? I never had it with my old 35mm camera or the old 8mm video camera.

 

José

Yes, use a filter to cut down the light and make the aperture larger.   That is caused by the rolling shutter of  image device.. The electronics cannot capture all pixels at once but do it row by row starting at the top.  A larger aperture will make the prop be in motion and not stopped so youll see a "gray" circle.  There is a filter available for GO PRO Cameras that eliminate this.

BILL

[PMcClure]

This is incorrect.

According to my wife, it may not even be the first time this week I have been wrong. 

 

Question for you - if on the top with no reference to the ground, how do you navigate visually? 

[Marauder]

According to my wife, it may not even be the first time this week I have been wrong. Question for you - if on the top with no reference to the ground, how do you navigate visually?

You don't. Unlike IFR, you know you don't have a requirement to navigate by a specific route when you are VFR over the top. If you are going from point A to point B and you can see the ground you can navigate via ded reckoning, pilotage or by a Nav device (VOR, VFR only GPS, iPad if you want). All legal. If you are VFR over the top without ground reference, you will be forced to navigate by electronic means. As long as you maintain VFR cloud clearances and in flight visibility and navigate by appropriate IFR equipment you are legal. The interesting part is that you don't need to be IFR rated. It doesn't mean it is the smartest thing to do if you go over weather that doesn't allow a VFR descent, but there is nothing illegal about flying over a deck. Here is a description of VFR over the top and how it is different than VFR on top: http://flighttraining.aopa.org/magazine/2001/July/200107_Features_Over_The_Top.html I have flown on an IFR flight plan and done VFR on top. Another article on it here: http://www.flyingmag.com/training/instrument-flight-rules/ifr-vfr-top This gives you the flexibility of flying by VFR but still maintaining your IFR flight plan.

[PMcClure]

Going back to my student days and discussions with my CFI about VFR on/over the top caused my confusion. He explained to me that you can fly VFR on top, but you must be able to descend VFR to be legal. I took that to mean from you current location, not your destination. Regardless, I would avoid VFR on top unless I was a IFR rated pilot (in a IFR certified plane) when above a layer more than 50% coverage. Thanks for the help, proving I still can learn. PS - please don't tell my wife I was wrong. I am trying to convince here, I really am prefect!

[sreid]

Going back to my student days and discussions with my CFI about VFR on/over the top caused my confusion. He explained to me that you can fly VFR on top, but you must be able to descend VFR to be legal. I took that to mean from you current location, not your destination. Regardless, I would avoid VFR on top unless I was a IFR rated pilot (in a IFR certified plane) when above a layer more than 50% coverage. Thanks for the help, proving I still can learn. PS - please don't tell my wife I was wrong. I am trying to convince here, I really am prefect!

 

Your CFI was correct regarding student pilots: student pilots may not act as pilot in command when the flight cannot be made with visual reference to the ground. As a private pilot, that rule doesn't apply, just the VFR cloud clearance rules apply.

 

 

 

Steve

[Marauder]

Going back to my student days and discussions with my CFI about VFR on/over the top caused my confusion. He explained to me that you can fly VFR on top, but you must be able to descend VFR to be legal. I took that to mean from you current location, not your destination. Regardless, I would avoid VFR on top unless I was a IFR rated pilot (in a IFR certified plane) when above a layer more than 50% coverage. Thanks for the help, proving I still can learn. PS - please don't tell my wife I was wrong. I am trying to convince here, I really am prefect!

Trust me, there are still a number of debates going on about the difference between "VFR on top" and "VFR over the top" and whether you can fly above clouds if you are VFR.

I remember the difference by sayin VFR on top means on an IFR flight plan and VFR over the top means "I better get over to the other side"

Even as an instrument rated pilot I worry if I fly "over the top" and find myself asking for an IFR pop up in the congested northeast and being told "wassamatter with you? Come back later, us guys are busy here".

[PMcClure]

Your CFI was correct regarding student pilots: student pilots may not act as pilot in command when the flight cannot be made with visual reference to the ground. As a private pilot, that rule doesn't apply, just the VFR cloud clearance rules apply.

 

 

 

Steve

Not arguing, but what regulation differentiates this for student pilots?

[sreid]

Not arguing, but what regulation differentiates this for student pilots?

 

Sure, it's 61.89(a)(7). There are a few limitations that only apply to students.

 

Steve

[midlifeflyer]

Trust me, there are still a number of debates going on about the difference between "VFR on top" and "VFR over the top" and whether you can fly above clouds if you are VFR.

 

 

There are often debates between folks who know things and folks who think they know things. Trust me, not just in aviation

[Marauder]

There are often debates between folks who know things and folks who think they know things. Trust me, not just in aviation

As long as the Chief Counsel doesn't get involved, I'm okay with that