End of VFR?

[bd32322]

Did you guys read in today's AOPA e-Pilot about the government wanting to stop VFR flight in order to have more control over air traffic?

 

Made me quite mad reading it.

 

http://blog.aopa.org/opinionleaders/2013/08/26/the-next-and-biggest-threat-to-ga-part-2/?WT.mc_sect=blog&WT.mc_id=130830epilot

 

[mikesalman]

So sad.

[Rwsavory]

Tin foil hat stuff.

[1964-M20E]

My next flight I just might go VFR just because and only talk to those I absolutely have to even though I have my IR.  

[201er]

Jim, I agree. But the fact that liberty is being threatened by unconstitutional govt intervention is indeed getting out of hand. It cant be allowed to get any worse.

[Jamie]

Do not -ever- underestimate a civilian government employee's instinct for self preservation. So much of the "security" I see at work is motivated by the (occasionally explicitly stated) desire to be blameless in the event of an "incident". 

 

Also, note that if everyone were IFR, drone flights in civilian airspace (you know... all that area we -aren't- in because we're under positive control) become a lot easier. It's clear They aren't as interested in integrating UAVs with manned traffic as much as integrating manned traffic with UAVs.

 

I'm not saying OMG we're about to lose teh VFR!!! but it's certainly something to be concerned about. Back in '92 (during the great airspace renaming) it was pointed out to me, by an FAA guest presenter, that the only reason for the different airspace categories to exist at all was VFR traffic. Eliminate that, and airspace becomes very simple.

[FAST FLIGHT OPTIONS LLC]

Interesting supposition made on behalf of the author; however, premature conclusions based on little if any facts with correlations drawn between issues which really don’t have anything to do with each other.

[flyboy0681]

Somebody please look up the number of VFR flight operations per year and then compare that to the number of stops by the feds.

 

This article is more about paranoia than anything else, in my opinion.

[aviatoreb]

It is a plausible argument - but I don't buy that this will come to pass.

[Skybrd]

Jim, I agree. But the fact that liberty is being threatened by unconstitutional govt intervention is indeed getting out of hand. It cant be allowed to get any worse.

I also agree, when they closed beaches to protect a little bird (Snowy Plover) and go over peoples heads concerning gay marriage they are on the move to do what ever they want. I've watched the NPS (National Park Service) give the shaft to people especially what they did to Sequoia Park Giant Forest Village. I'm glad we got to use many of the freedoms that are slowly going away.

[flyboy0681]

I also agree, when they closed beaches to protect a little bird (Snowy Plover) and go over peoples heads concerning gay marriage they are on the move to do what ever they want. I've watched the NPS (National Park Service) give the shaft to people especially what they did to Sequoia Park Giant Forest Village. I'm glad we got to use many of the freedoms that are slowly going away.

 

I learned my lesson and will stay away from what is sure to become more political rants.

[M016576]

If VFR flight was eliminated, it would crush the ATC system.

I know there is a large contingent of pilots on this board that file and fly IFR no matter what (and I thank you guys for that- you're all helping me get to my destination faster by accepting vectors / approaches when you could bee-line to the field), but VFR traffic actually frees up ATC to control those that need IFR control.

Of note, I only fly IFR if I need to (ie, it's IMC). VFR is waaaaay faster... It Saves me money... Isn't that what a mooney is all about? Efficiency?

I'd be very VERY upset if VFR flight was taken away. Although , I don't see how it could be possible, unless they scrapped part 91 aviation completely (regardless of whether you are IFR or VFR).

Rant complete

[1964-M20E]

Filling IFR makes evaluating the weather easier.  I look for convective TS, icing, and low vis and ceiling at my destination.  En-route I tend to worry less about sky conditions scattered, broken or overcast.  At a non-towered airport I take off and get my clearance in the air if possible to save time and I’ll cancel early if I can.  Yes I could pick up an IFR clearance en-route if necessary but this saves me the trouble of doing that.

 

Will they really try to eliminate VFR?  Most likely not.  Will they try to rattle our cages? Yes.

[John Pleisse]

If VFR flight was eliminated, it would crush the ATC system.

 

 

 

Not if the FAA were charging substantial user fees. AOPA should be engaging in a little more "doing" and a little less "fear mongering". Absolute conjecture. Although, user fees could be the birth control pill to rally AOPA's meger base. This doesn't excuse the notion that this has been the most openly hostile, anti GA federal government, ever. They are awful.

 

I am at the Primehook Wildlife Refuge right now. A Twin Beech and two helicopters are spraying for mostquitos in one of America's most sensitive environmental areas. VFR will always have it's place. What's a crop duster gonna do? File?

[M016576]

Not if the FAA were charging substantial user fees. AOPA should be engaging in a little more "doing" and a little less "fear mongering". Absolute conjecture. Although, user fees could be the birth control pill to rally AOPA's meger base. This doesn't excuse the notion that this has been the most openly hostile, anti GA federal government, ever. They are awful.

I am at the Primehook Wildlife Refuge right now. A Twin Beech and two helicopters are spraying for mostquitos in one of America's most sensitive environmental areas. VFR will always have it's place. What's a crop duster gonna do? File?

I didn't mean monetarily: I meant physically. The amount of forced traffic requiring positive control would overwhelm the already undermanned ATC system.

You're right: it's totally unrealistic to think of aviation without a VFR component (crop dusters, aerobatics, banner towing, sky diving, fighter jets, stupidest thing I've heard: forcing pilots to fly IFR when it's VMC... Talk about a waste of resources!

[John Pleisse]

Not second guessing you, just adding to your commentary. The article made a "to-do" about "Nudge". A government that could indirectly force change by controlling choices. It's like me telling my kid, he can do his homework or be grounded....his choice. ATC bogged down? You can pay a $90 user fee to file or......not fly.

[M016576]

Filling IFR makes evaluating the weather easier. I look for convective TS, icing, and low vis and ceiling at my destination. En-route I tend to worry less about sky conditions scattered, broken or overcast. At a non-towered airport I take off and get my clearance in the air if possible to save time and I’ll cancel early if I can. Yes I could pick up an IFR clearance en-route if necessary but this saves me the trouble of doing that.

Will they really try to eliminate VFR? Most likely not. Will they try to rattle our cages? Yes.

Regardless of whether you file IFR or VFR, your preflight planning and evaluation should be the same. VFR just gives you the freedom to fly where and how you want. IFR gives you a safe means to travel through IMC. Some people file IFR when it's VMC to shed some of the responsibility of flying (deconfliction, visual lookout): it's kind of a false perception- just because you're IFR, doesn't mean you can blow off your visual lookout responsibilities....

Really, the appropriate way to file/fly on VMC days where radar coverage is available, is VFR flight following. You get the best of both worlds- traffic call outs and the freedom to navigate how you want to. Obviously, if you need the practice/proficiency, IFR flight during VMC conditions is the way to go, until you're ready for the big show.

My comments are, as always, just my humble opinion, but I feel like IFR is overused, and in most cases, if you fly what you file, to include the approach, it costs you an extra 20 or so minutes.

If you live in a super busy piece of airspace (DC, NYC, LA), then I don't fault IFR there as a routine- it's the best way to get around. Those silly VFR corridors are worse than I-5 during rush hour!

[Becca]

Deleted.

[Piloto]

I don't see how IFR filing will make for safer skys. After all the four flights involved on 911 were on an IFR flight plans. In fact, has there been a terrorist flight on a non-IFR flight? I don't think terrorists go for Mooneys but the big iron. Never heard of a Mooney killing more than 4 people. And I don't think that a Mooney is big enough to take down a building.

 

José 

[Rustler]

Yesterday I received one of the AOPA's mid-sized envelopes that had printed on it in large letters something like HELP STOP UNWARRANTED SEARCHES OF GA AIRCRAFT. It was another of their solicitations for additional monies from members.

 

I find it more than interesting that the OP referenced an AOPA blogger's speculations about the possibility of the end of VFR flight. While the credentials of the blogger appear pristine, the timing of the piece he wrote does not. My sense of it is that his is a attempt to reinforce AOPA's continuing search for additional money.

 

I'm not saying that the conclusion the blogger suggests might not be possible. I'm simply saying that the timing, to me, is highly suspect. Just call me cynical.

[Dave Marten]

Gents,

Keep in mind it's a blog by a "futurist" (After I drink enough beer I'm a futurist too!). I support AOPA's (and others) efforts to defend GA but I hardly think now is the end of the VFR world! I'm far more concerned about the impact of the current economic and fiscal policies on GA.

Heck, we made it through some other "futurist's" prediction of the end of the world when the Mayan calendar ended in Dec 2012!

Help support Aviation........GO FLY!

[kerry]

How can it be possible to get rid of VFR.  If that was the case then how can a student pilot do his or her first cross country.  Does a student pilot get their instrument rating prior to getting their ticket.  Doesn't make sense and seems dangerous.  Although 1/2 the stuff our government does makes no sense.

[WardHolbrook]

I could see them trying to outlaw night SE flying. That's already the case in many countries around the world. I could also see them restricting VFR flying to 50 nm from the airport. I don't think it would serve any purpose, but that's just me. Thankfully, we have plenty of politicians who seem to think that they know what's best for us. I'm sure they'll do the right thing. 

[flyboy0681]

And I don't think that a Mooney is big enough to take down a building.

 

José 

 

 

I agree 100%. If only the Feds knew about this.

 

If memory serves me correct, there were two incidents over the past 10 years where two small planes were deliberately flown into buildings. One was into a Tampa office building and the other where some guy flew his Piper into a IRS office somewhere in Texas (he must have really had a grudge). I think the resulting fire from the Texas incident destroyed the building however.

[yvesg]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanny_state

Yves