Jump to content

ATC Procedure for Overtaking IFR Traffic


201er

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, cbarry said:

Hank, yes sir I realize that.  What I'm saying is:  Because it's up to the PIC in VMC to see and avoid, even if course deviation has been allowed  and or clearance has been given and a  collision occurs, then Advisory/ATC will lean on 91.113.  Thus, 91.113 exists as simply  one regulation to provide guidance on how to address the original question pondered.  As many of us have experienced, avoidance of overtaking traffic is handled by change of altitude, speed and /or course.  In addition, I'd be careful about relying on Advisory/ATC solely while in IMC (I say solely only because we as pilots sometimes relax in IMC believing we are somehow being protected better by Advisory). How can they confirm you're in IMC?  As good as they are, they can only rely on an estimate  of the weather conditions or with the pilot reporting they're in IMC.  You could be in an out of IMC and even in an area the weather is calling VMC.

What does IMC or VMC have to do with it? Either you are flying instrument flight rules or visual flight rules. The meteorological condition has little to do with the process except that you are restricted solely to VMC when operating under VFR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does IMC or VMC have to do with it? Either you are flying instrument flight rules or visual flight rules. The meteorological condition has little to do with the process except that you are restricted solely to VMC when operating under VFR.


I always thought if you ran into somebody while in VMC it's your ass, and if you run into somebody while in IMC it's somebody else's ass.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, 201er said:

What does IMC or VMC have to do with it? Either you are flying instrument flight rules or visual flight rules. The meteorological condition has little to do with the process except that you are restricted solely to VMC when operating under VFR.

VMC has much to do with it- even if you are IFR.  Think about this scenario:

youre on an IFR clearance.  A controller turns you to the right 30 degrees for your approach. You see an ultralight to your right.  As you turn, the line of sight rate stagnates and his range reduces rapidly.  You fear collision.  Do you continue to fly the vector, "because ATC said so" or do you maneuver out of the way?

if you are VMC, and you see another aircraft, you own safe separation.  ATC has a delayed display of what's going on. The best sensor out there for real time data and information is your eyes, attached to your brain (or as I refer to it, your "advanced mission computer").  The key is seeing the guy though.  In IMC, you NEED ATC to operate.... there for, they should be able to provide safe separation.

ever wonder why VFR cloud clearances exist outside of just "stay out of clouds"?  It's so that a pilot has time, as a VFR pilot, to react/ deconflict from IFR traffic busting through those clouds.... 

IFR and VFR are rulesets- true- but IMC and VMC apply different criteria within those rulesets.....

 

merit: here's another IFR misnomer... that you should be flying your instruments 100% of the time, even if VMC.  Pilots get lulled into this mentality due to flying under the hood so much during training.  When you're flying IFR- but in VMC, you MUST incorporate an "outside scan" if VMC.  If you were supposed to only look at the instruments, you'd never land..., because you'd never find the "runway environment" in sight (ok... maybe if you have synthetic vision or a cat III approach you would).  But, you get my drift...

Edited by M016576
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, M016576 said:

 

if you are VMC, and you see another aircraft, you own safe separation.  ATC has a delayed display of what's going on. The best sensor out there for real time data and information is your eyes, attached to your brain (or as I refer to it, your "advanced mission computer").  The key is seeing the guy though.  In IMC, you NEED ATC to operate.... there for, they should be able to provide safe separation.

Right. There may be conflicts between VFR traffic and IFR traffic or between controlled traffic and uncontrolled traffic. However, I think it is a stretch to imply that there is a burden on the pilot to maintain separation while in IMC. The pilot can verify things (check TCAS, ADSB traffic, or listen to conflicting vectors on the radio), however, it really is not up to the IFR pilot in controlled IMC to maintain separation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, 201er said:

What does IMC or VMC have to do with it? Either you are flying instrument flight rules or visual flight rules. The meteorological condition has little to do with the process except that you are restricted solely to VMC when operating under VFR.

Because flying  in VMC or IMC can actually only be confirmed by PIC not ATC.  The next time you're IMC or VMC,  ask ATC what the weather conditions are at your LAT & LONG.  My point is many of us may rely on IFR separation services when flying IFR in VMC while overtaking (or other times for that matter) like we think we can while in IMC but simply assume ATC knows we're in IMC--bad assumption.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, cbarry said:

Because flying  in VMC or IMC can actually only be confirmed by PIC not ATC.  The next time you're IMC or VMC,  ask ATC what the weather conditions are at your LAT & LONG.  My point is many of us may rely on IFR separation services when flying IFR in VMC while overtaking (or other times for that matter) like we think we can while in IMC but simply assume ATC knows we're in IMC--bad assumption.

IFR is IFR regardless of the weather around you. The system inherently implies separation between IFR traffic. The only gotcha is IFR in VMC does not provide separation from VFR traffic. When you are IFR, you don't have to concern yourself with separation from other IFR traffic because that is what ATC and the clearance system is already handling. Makes no difference if you're IMC or VMC unless you tell them and accept visual separation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 201er said:

IFR is IFR regardless of the weather around you. The system inherently implies separation between IFR traffic. The only gotcha is IFR in VMC does not provide separation from VFR traffic. When you are IFR, you don't have to concern yourself with separation from other IFR traffic because that is what ATC and the clearance system is already handling. Makes no difference if you're IMC or VMC unless you tell them and accept visual separation.

Almost but not quite. I've had ATC give me traffic call outs (11:00, 4 miles) while I was IMC. Does me no good, and I always respond that I'm IMC. Let's them know the onus for separation is on them, otherwise it's on me.

When I'm IFR in VMC, sure they give separation from other IFR traffic, but it's still up to me to ensure I don't hit them, and it's pretty much up to me to avoid VFR traffic, too. I've had traffic calls in IMC for nearby traffic squawking 1200, several thousand feet above the bases, too, so there are no guarantees.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, 201er said:

IFR is IFR regardless of the weather around you. The system inherently implies separation between IFR traffic. The only gotcha is IFR in VMC does not provide separation from VFR traffic. When you are IFR, you don't have to concern yourself with separation from other IFR traffic because that is what ATC and the clearance system is already handling. Makes no difference if you're IMC or VMC unless you tell them and accept visual separation.

Not exactly... if you're IFR, and a traffic conflict exists that you recognize in VMC, with other IFR traffic, the ownus is still on you, the pilot with situational awareness, to remedy the situation.  ATC has an increased role in providing safe separation, but you are still responsible for the safe operation of your craft, if you recognize a potential conflict.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Hank said:

Almost but not quite. I've had ATC give me traffic call outs (11:00, 4 miles) while I was IMC. Does me no good, and I always respond that I'm IMC. Let's them know the onus for separation is on them, otherwise it's on me.

When I'm IFR in VMC, sure they give separation from other IFR traffic, but it's still up to me to ensure I don't hit them, and it's pretty much up to me to avoid VFR traffic, too. I've had traffic calls in IMC for nearby traffic squawking 1200, several thousand feet above the bases, too, so there are no guarantees.

The prevalence of GPS units seems to have made VFR traffic think it's ok to fly above a solid cloud deck VFR, without a "VFR on top" (which is basically IFR) clearance.  I've noticed this too... and by letter of the law, its illegal.

edit: VFR over the top by itself is not illegal.

Edited by M016576
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, M016576 said:

Not exactly... if you're IFR, and a traffic conflict exists that you recognize in VMC, with other IFR traffic, the ownus is still on you, the pilot with situational awareness, to remedy the situation.  ATC has an increased role in providing safe separation, but you are still responsible for the safe operation of your craft, if you recognize a potential conflict.

Ok, once in a rare while ATC can make mistakes or another pilot screws up just like everyone's human. But how often is it that you are more aware of another IFR airplane than ATC is? On a typical IFR flight you never see IFR traffic except head on/passing at a different altitude. How many times have you received a traffic advisory IFR to IFR at same altitude? Like never because of 5 mile or vertical separation rules.

ATC is not an increased role in providing separation for IFR traffic. They are the primary and nearly sole role of providing IFR to IFR separation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, M016576 said:

The prevalence of GPS units seems to have made VFR traffic think it's ok to fly above a solid cloud deck VFR, without a "VFR on top" (which is basically IFR) clearance.  I've noticed this too... and by letter of the law, its illegal.

What law is this? VFR only dictates cloud clearance requirements. As long as they are 1000 above the tops (or whatever the airspace dictates), they're legal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, 201er said:

What law is this? VFR only dictates cloud clearance requirements. As long as they are 1000 above the tops (or whatever the airspace dictates), they're legal.

VFR over the top vs VFR-on-top.

VFR over the top, while not strictly illegal- is typically not strictly wise, either, unless you're IFR rated... in which case you should probably be on a clearance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, 201er said:

Ok, once in a rare while ATC can make mistakes or another pilot screws up just like everyone's human. But how often is it that you are more aware of another IFR airplane than ATC is? On a typical IFR flight you never see IFR traffic except head on/passing at a different altitude. How many times have you received a traffic advisory IFR to IFR at same altitude? Like never because of 5 mile or vertical separation rules.

ATC is not an increased role in providing separation for IFR traffic. They are the primary and nearly sole role of providing IFR to IFR separation.

I have seen this more often then you might think.  But then again 4 out of 5 flights I'm flying, I have an air to air radar and helmet mounted cueing system helping me.

ATC provides an increased role- if you are IMC, then they are the sole role.  If you are VMC, you still own a part of flight path deconfliction and safety of flight.  So to go back to your original post: VMC and IMC do play a role in the process of VFR/IFR flight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a lot of misuse of the specific term "VFR on Top" which is a specific type of IFR clearance which may be one of the most pointless things. Most people (incorrectly) mean VFR above clouds. I have yet to hear of anyone using it the way it is intended. Now with that said, there is a substantial difference between a non-instrument rated pilot forcing his way above a cloud deck through a hole, flying xcountry, and praying on there being an opening on the other end and an instrument rated pilot who opts not to go IFR. I've done the second. I usually have an IFR flight plan on file just in case. But weather at departure/destination might be full on VMC and enroute I may be over a solid layer. No issue for me as I am IFR capable so don't be surprised to meet me VFR above clouds. However, being an instrument capable pilot, I am well aware of the expectation that everyone above a solid cloud deck is following certain procedures so I am definitely operating a transponder and almost certainly talking to ATC.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, 201er said:

There is a lot of misuse of the specific term "VFR on Top" which is a specific type of IFR clearance which may be one of the most pointless things. Most people (incorrectly) mean VFR above clouds. I have yet to hear of anyone using it the way it is intended. Now with that said, there is a substantial difference between a non-instrument rated pilot forcing his way above a cloud deck through a hole, flying xcountry, and praying on there being an opening on the other end and an instrument rated pilot who opts not to go IFR. I've done the second. I usually have an IFR flight plan on file just in case. But weather at departure/destination might be full on VMC and enroute I may be over a solid layer. No issue for me as I am IFR capable so don't be surprised to meet me VFR above clouds. However, being an instrument capable pilot, I am well aware of the expectation that everyone above a solid cloud deck is following certain procedures so I am definitely operating a transponder and almost certainly talking to ATC.

I think we are in violent agreement!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, 201er said:

When you are IFR, you don't have to concern yourself with separation from other IFR traffic because that is what ATC and the clearance system is already handling. Makes no difference if you're IMC or VMC unless you tell them and accept visual separation.

 

9 hours ago, M016576 said:

Not exactly... if you're IFR, and a traffic conflict exists that you recognize in VMC, with other IFR traffic, the ownus is still on you, the pilot with situational awareness, to remedy the situation.  ATC has an increased role in providing safe separation, but you are still responsible for the safe operation of your craft, if you recognize a potential conflict.

§91.113   Right-of-way rules: Except water operations.

(b) General. When weather conditions permit, regardless of whether an operation is conducted under instrument flight rules or visual flight rules, vigilance shall be maintained by each person operating an aircraft so as to see and avoid other aircraft.

It seems pretty clear from 91.113 that in fact you do need to "concern yourself with separation from other IFR traffic..." It's not clear to us why you would think otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Deb said:

 

§91.113   Right-of-way rules: Except water operations.

(b) General. When weather conditions permit, regardless of whether an operation is conducted under instrument flight rules or visual flight rules, vigilance shall be maintained by each person operating an aircraft so as to see and avoid other aircraft.

It seems pretty clear from 91.113 that in fact you do need to "concern yourself with separation from other IFR traffic..." It's not clear to us why you would think otherwise.

As pointed out earlier, ATC cannot be certain of the weather conditions surrounding you and as such must provide separation from other IFR traffic presuming you can't see them.

The vigilance to see and avoid bit is not from other controlled IFR traffic but from VFR traffic, emergency, or someone screwed something up traffic. I'm not saying not to see and avoid. I'm just saying that controlled IFR traffic has separation built in from other controlled IFR traffic as part of the system and regardless of meteorological conditions.

Edited by 201er
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 201er said:

As pointed out earlier, ATC cannot be certain of the weather conditions surrounding you and as such must provide separation from other IFR traffic presuming you can't see them.

The vigilance to see and avoid bit is not from other controlled IFR traffic but from VFR traffic, emergency, or someone screwed something up traffic. I'm not saying not to see and avoid. I'm just saying that controlled IFR traffic has separation built in from other controlled IFR traffic as part of the system and regardless of meteorological conditions.

No. In VMC, it is up to the PIC to provide separation with all aircraft and obstructions, whether or not operating on a VFR or IFR flight plan, or receiving Flight Following services. Show the distinction in 91.113 . . . Besides, I watch where I'm going because I know too many other pilots are not watching where they are going . . .

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.