Getting IFR current, in VFR, with a hood on, flying solo, in class B?
- Thread starter Caelum Deus
- Start date
- Status
inigo88
Composite-lover
This thread is win. That being said, since I used to have an unhealthy fascination with ATC via microsoft flight simulator in my teen years, I will provide my underqualified 2 cents. 
While the FAR and AIM both provide more than adequate guidance on this issue from a pilot standpoint, I am often interested in the training literature that ATC gets. This is disseminated mainly through a document called FAA Order JO 7110.65, the relevant section of which is quoted below:
Chapter 7 - Visual, Section 9 - Class B Service Area - Terminal
That seems pretty cut and dry, but in practice has not been what I've always experienced in my very limited time flying Class B transitions. Flying the "Bay Tour" over the top of SFO via their surface area allows very little hand holding for example. You get a terse "Cleared into Class B, remain west of the 101 freeway, maintain VFR at or below 1500." That's it. I found myself with head on traffic at my altitude in that narrow corridor, with very busy controllers who weren't particularly concerned with our immediate affairs, but thanks to see-and-avoid and radio situational awareness it was a non-issue. And I totally don't fault them for that, because they were doing US a huge favor by letting us through. (@ChasenSFO probably knows what I'm talking about.)
So whether or not there's any reg written about it, it's a totally lame move to stop scanning for other traffic in VMC in Class B airspace "because ATC is supposed to be in control." At the end of the day ATC will get a slap on the wrist for being task saturated, and if you miraculously survive your midair and crash, you will be violated for 91.13.
This is beyond the fact that numerous other FARs have already been quoted showing you need a safety pilot any time you're under the hood. All of these thought exercises are fun to find holes in the regs, but at the end of the day if the decisions you make utterly lack common sense as displayed in this thread, they can and will hit you with "careless and reckless" after the fact.
While the FAR and AIM both provide more than adequate guidance on this issue from a pilot standpoint, I am often interested in the training literature that ATC gets. This is disseminated mainly through a document called FAA Order JO 7110.65, the relevant section of which is quoted below:
Chapter 7 - Visual, Section 9 - Class B Service Area - Terminal
That seems pretty cut and dry, but in practice has not been what I've always experienced in my very limited time flying Class B transitions. Flying the "Bay Tour" over the top of SFO via their surface area allows very little hand holding for example. You get a terse "Cleared into Class B, remain west of the 101 freeway, maintain VFR at or below 1500." That's it. I found myself with head on traffic at my altitude in that narrow corridor, with very busy controllers who weren't particularly concerned with our immediate affairs, but thanks to see-and-avoid and radio situational awareness it was a non-issue. And I totally don't fault them for that, because they were doing US a huge favor by letting us through. (@ChasenSFO probably knows what I'm talking about.)
So whether or not there's any reg written about it, it's a totally lame move to stop scanning for other traffic in VMC in Class B airspace "because ATC is supposed to be in control." At the end of the day ATC will get a slap on the wrist for being task saturated, and if you miraculously survive your midair and crash, you will be violated for 91.13.
This is beyond the fact that numerous other FARs have already been quoted showing you need a safety pilot any time you're under the hood. All of these thought exercises are fun to find holes in the regs, but at the end of the day if the decisions you make utterly lack common sense as displayed in this thread, they can and will hit you with "careless and reckless" after the fact.
MidlifeFlyer
Well-Known Member
I can't speak for any of the other idiots but, personally, I thought you asked a very good question and that the Class B example is a good one since it's a class of airspace where ATC takes on responsibility for VFR separation.
You just don't like the answer (and one where the safe answer and regulatory answer are the same), that the rules on using safety pilots and the rules on "see and avoid" do not depend the airspace you are in and whether ATC has responsibility for separation.
Autothrust Blue
”…trusting ze process…”
Hey now, I think I resemble that remark...
I know a wise old guy who would say, "Ask yourself if the operation being proposed is safe, legal, and comfortable, in that order. If the answer to any of the above is 'no,' then it's probably not a good idea."
The operation proposed above is unsafe, illegal, and would make most of us uncomfortable regardless of the first two points, which is why most of the peanut gallery were all "dude, really?"
Tl;dr: "not idiots."
AFIS LINK ACK
e6bflyer
Well-Known Member
This guy is just trolling at this point asking for proof of various regs that he professes to already know by virtue of his supposed experience. I suggest we just stop feeding him.
Pilots and controllers, we all work as a team to accomplish the same goal no matter who is responsible for what. That will never change. Merry Christmas and may the new year be as promising for professional pilots as it appears to be.
Pilots and controllers, we all work as a team to accomplish the same goal no matter who is responsible for what. That will never change. Merry Christmas and may the new year be as promising for professional pilots as it appears to be.
SpiraMirabilis
Possible Subversive
As an aside to everyone who is reading this thread, and not intending to pick on Caelum that much but as I was a good schoolboy in a Catholic school I couldn't help but raise my eyebrow at his name. Caelum Deus, literally means Chisel God but a more likely connotation probably refers to either 1) the phrase 'caelum et terra' as it appears in the bible, as in 'created the earth' or 2) the Caelum constellation.
With that said I think a fair interpretation of his name is either 'Creator God' or 'SkyGod'. YMMV, but it is an auspicious name either way.
With that said I think a fair interpretation of his name is either 'Creator God' or 'SkyGod'. YMMV, but it is an auspicious name either way.
And he has two usernames which is violation of something, somewhere.
aviatorx43
Well-Known Member
Not sure why he has "caelum Deus" because if he wants to say "sky god" or "god of the sky" it has to be "caeli Deus." Somebody should have studied noun declensions....
Anyway, I keep IFR current at home with Microsoft flight simulator. I heard as long as I log approaches in my local area, the FAA doesn't have a problem with it. So much cheaper, and no need for a safety pilot.
...
Anyway, I keep IFR current at home with Microsoft flight simulator. I heard as long as I log approaches in my local area, the FAA doesn't have a problem with it. So much cheaper, and no need for a safety pilot.
...
Monk
Well-Known Member
I had a doctor come into my office less than a week ago telling me he read that the FAA had approved flight sim to maintain currency, and wanted to know when I thought it would be approved for ipc's and bfr's.Not sure why he has "caelum Deus" because if he wants to say "sky god" or "god of the sky" it has to be "caeli Deus." Somebody should have studied noun declensions....
Anyway, I keep IFR current at home with Microsoft flight simulator. I heard as long as I log approaches in my local area, the FAA doesn't have a problem with it. So much cheaper, and no need for a safety pilot.
...
🦈💜
Well-Known Member
I would ask them if there was anything in the regulations that would cause that to be an issue, and direct them to do their research. If it was a flight instructor asking the question, or even someone with 300 hours and an instrument rating, I'd borderline freak out that they didn't even know the basic regs.
-Fox
🦈💜
Well-Known Member
tlewis95
I drive planes
Reasonable for a new pilot with 5 hours, not so reasonable for an assistant chief with 5000. How many times have you taught see and avoid? That is a day two or three conversation that is pretty easy for them (even the 'idiots') to understand.
Caelum Deus
Sky God
Let me make this all very clear to you *ing idiots because either your childish impulsivity cant resist saying "I cant believe you're a CFI" from one element of what I said, or you have actually read through this entire thread and still cant realize what I'm asking.
In class B ATC is ultimately responsible for VFR/VFR separation, if so why mention it if they are not solely responsible? That was all. And yes I do know about all the regulations that involve the requirements of needing a safety pilot, and yes I do know all about the regulations that involve the see and avoid concept. The question that I originally asked was an example on the extreme side of what ATCs responsibilities/limitations are. The poster who mentioned that the rules overlap and that depending on the situation both the pilot and controller are responsible for traffic separation answered my question. But all this non sense has continued due to the fact that my hypothetical/extreme/of-course-no one-would-actually-do-that example has side tracked many of you from the real point. The question was used as an attention getter and was used to point out a situation which would be used to draw a line between a pilots and a controllers responsibility in class B. Like I've said before, the basis of what I was asking was "if ATC is responsible, then why is the pilot responsible too?" I have no idea why you guys are having a hard time with this.
So for all of you who have helped to answer this question, thanks, and to those who have said "how do you not know the answer, you should give up your certs, ect" you should be less contempt prior to your investigation and put forth something that can be actually helpful instead of running around like a bunch of retards.
In class B ATC is ultimately responsible for VFR/VFR separation, if so why mention it if they are not solely responsible? That was all. And yes I do know about all the regulations that involve the requirements of needing a safety pilot, and yes I do know all about the regulations that involve the see and avoid concept. The question that I originally asked was an example on the extreme side of what ATCs responsibilities/limitations are. The poster who mentioned that the rules overlap and that depending on the situation both the pilot and controller are responsible for traffic separation answered my question. But all this non sense has continued due to the fact that my hypothetical/extreme/of-course-no one-would-actually-do-that example has side tracked many of you from the real point. The question was used as an attention getter and was used to point out a situation which would be used to draw a line between a pilots and a controllers responsibility in class B. Like I've said before, the basis of what I was asking was "if ATC is responsible, then why is the pilot responsible too?" I have no idea why you guys are having a hard time with this.
So for all of you who have helped to answer this question, thanks, and to those who have said "how do you not know the answer, you should give up your certs, ect" you should be less contempt prior to your investigation and put forth something that can be actually helpful instead of running around like a bunch of retards.
Caelum Deus
Sky God
Let me make this all very clear to you *ing idiots because either your childish impulsivity cant resist saying "I cant believe you're a CFI" from one element of what I said, or you have actually read through this entire thread and still cant realize what I'm asking.
In class B ATC is ultimately responsible for VFR/VFR separation, if so why mention it if they are not solely responsible? That was all. And yes I do know about all the regulations that involve the requirements of needing a safety pilot, and yes I do know all about the regulations that involve the see and avoid concept. The question that I originally asked was an example on the extreme side of what ATCs responsibilities/limitations are. The poster who mentioned that the rules overlap and that depending on the situation both the pilot and controller are responsible for traffic separation answered my question. But all this non sense has continued due to the fact that my hypothetical/extreme/of-course-no one-would-actually-do-that example has side tracked many of you from the real point. The question was used as an attention getter and was used to point out a situation which would be used to draw a line between a pilots and a controllers responsibility in class B. Like I've said before, the basis of what I was asking was "if ATC is responsible, then why is the pilot responsible too?" I have no idea why you guys are having a hard time with this.
So for all of you who have helped to answer this question, thanks, and to those who have said "how do you not know the answer, you should give up your certs, ect" you should be less contempt prior to your investigation and put forth something that can be actually helpful instead of running around like a bunch of retards.
Caelum Deus
Sky God
Let me make this all very clear to you *ing idiots because either your childish impulsivity cant resist saying "I cant believe you're a CFI" from one element of what I said, or you have actually read through this entire thread and still cant realize what I'm asking.
In class B ATC is ultimately responsible for VFR/VFR separation, if so why mention it if they are not solely responsible? That was all. And yes I do know about all the regulations that involve the requirements of needing a safety pilot, and yes I do know all about the regulations that involve the see and avoid concept. The question that I originally asked was an example on the extreme side of what ATCs responsibilities/limitations are. The poster who mentioned that the rules overlap and that depending on the situation both the pilot and controller are responsible for traffic separation answered my question. But all this non sense has continued due to the fact that my hypothetical/extreme/of-course-no one-would-actually-do-that example has side tracked many of you from the real point. The question was used as an attention getter and was used to point out a situation which would be used to draw a line between a pilots and a controllers responsibility in class B. Like I've said before, the basis of what I was asking was "if ATC is responsible, then why is the pilot responsible too?" I have no idea why you guys are having a hard time with this.
So for all of you who have helped to answer this question, thanks, and to those who have said "how do you not know the answer, you should give up your certs, ect" you should be less contempt prior to your investigation and put forth something that can be actually helpful instead of running around like a bunch of retards.
Caelum Deus
Sky God
Let me make this all very clear to you *ing idiots because either your childish impulsivity cant resist saying "I cant believe you're a CFI" from one element of what I said, or you have actually read through this entire thread and still cant realize what I'm asking.
In class B ATC is ultimately responsible for VFR/VFR separation, if so why mention it if they are not solely responsible? That was all. And yes I do know about all the regulations that involve the requirements of needing a safety pilot, and yes I do know all about the regulations that involve the see and avoid concept. The question that I originally asked was an example on the extreme side of what ATCs responsibilities/limitations are. The poster who mentioned that the rules overlap and that depending on the situation both the pilot and controller are responsible for traffic separation answered my question. But all this non sense has continued due to the fact that my hypothetical/extreme/of-course-no one-would-actually-do-that example has side tracked many of you from the real point. The question was used as an attention getter and was used to point out a situation which would be used to draw a line between a pilots and a controllers responsibility in class B. Like I've said before, the basis of what I was asking was "if ATC is responsible, then why is the pilot responsible too?" I have no idea why you guys are having a hard time with this.
So for all of you who have helped to answer this question, thanks, and to those who have said "how do you not know the answer, you should give up your certs, ect" you should be less contempt prior to your investigation and put forth something that can be actually helpful instead of running around like a bunch of retards.
Caelum Deus
Sky God
Let me make this all very clear to you *ing idiots because either your childish impulsivity cant resist saying "I cant believe you're a CFI" from one element of what I said, or you have actually read through this entire thread and still cant realize what I'm asking.
In class B ATC is ultimately responsible for VFR/VFR separation, if so why mention it if they are not solely responsible? That was all. And yes I do know about all the regulations that involve the requirements of needing a safety pilot, and yes I do know all about the regulations that involve the see and avoid concept. The question that I originally asked was an example on the extreme side of what ATCs responsibilities/limitations are. The poster who mentioned that the rules overlap and that depending on the situation both the pilot and controller are responsible for traffic separation answered my question. But all this non sense has continued due to the fact that my hypothetical/extreme/of-course-no one-would-actually-do-that example has side tracked many of you from the real point. The question was used as an attention getter and was used to point out a situation which would be used to draw a line between a pilots and a controllers responsibility in class B. Like I've said before, the basis of what I was asking was "if ATC is responsible, then why is the pilot responsible too?" I have no idea why you guys are having a hard time with this.
So for all of you who have helped to answer this question, thanks, and to those who have said "how do you not know the answer, you should give up your certs, ect" you should be less contempt prior to your investigation and put forth something that can be actually helpful instead of running around like a bunch of retards.
Caelum Deus
Sky God
Let me make this all very clear to you *ing idiots because either your childish impulsivity cant resist saying "I cant believe you're a CFI" from one element of what I said, or you have actually read through this entire thread and still cant realize what I'm asking.This thread is win. That being said, since I used to have an unhealthy fascination with ATC via microsoft flight simulator in my teen years, I will provide my underqualified 2 cents.
While the FAR and AIM both provide more than adequate guidance on this issue from a pilot standpoint, I am often interested in the training literature that ATC gets. This is disseminated mainly through a document called FAA Order JO 7110.65, the relevant section of which is quoted below:
Chapter 7 - Visual, Section 9 - Class B Service Area - Terminal
That seems pretty cut and dry, but in practice has not been what I've always experienced in my very limited time flying Class B transitions. Flying the "Bay Tour" over the top of SFO via their surface area allows very little hand holding for example. You get a terse "Cleared into Class B, remain west of the 101 freeway, maintain VFR at or below 1500." That's it. I found myself with head on traffic at my altitude in that narrow corridor, with very busy controllers who weren't particularly concerned with our immediate affairs, but thanks to see-and-avoid and radio situational awareness it was a non-issue. And I totally don't fault them for that, because they were doing US a huge favor by letting us through. (@ChasenSFO probably knows what I'm talking about.)
So whether or not there's any reg written about it, it's a totally lame move to stop scanning for other traffic in VMC in Class B airspace "because ATC is supposed to be in control." At the end of the day ATC will get a slap on the wrist for being task saturated, and if you miraculously survive your midair and crash, you will be violated for 91.13.
This is beyond the fact that numerous other FARs have already been quoted showing you need a safety pilot any time you're under the hood. All of these thought exercises are fun to find holes in the regs, but at the end of the day if the decisions you make utterly lack common sense as displayed in this thread, they can and will hit you with "careless and reckless" after the fact.
In class B ATC is ultimately responsible for VFR/VFR separation, if so why mention it if they are not solely responsible? That was all. And yes I do know about all the regulations that involve the requirements of needing a safety pilot, and yes I do know all about the regulations that involve the see and avoid concept. The question that I originally asked was an example on the extreme side of what ATCs responsibilities/limitations are. The poster who mentioned that the rules overlap and that depending on the situation both the pilot and controller are responsible for traffic separation answered my question. But all this non sense has continued due to the fact that my hypothetical/extreme/of-course-no one-would-actually-do-that example has side tracked many of you from the real point. The question was used as an attention getter and was used to point out a situation which would be used to draw a line between a pilots and a controllers responsibility in class B. Like I've said before, the basis of what I was asking was "if ATC is responsible, then why is the pilot responsible too?" I have no idea why you guys are having a hard time with this.
So for all of you who have helped to answer this question, thanks, and to those who have said "how do you not know the answer, you should give up your certs, ect" you should be less contempt prior to your investigation and put forth something that can be actually helpful instead of running around like a bunch of retards.
z987k
Well-Known Member
Well that seems a bit unnecessary.
But to be honest your question - "if ATC is responsible, then why is the pilot responsible too?"
Is an absolutely ridiculous one for anyone who has achieved even a ppl. So regardless, if it's under the hood solo or why am I responsible, both questions are something you should just know out of common sense. Like no reg even required, if anything out of pure self preservation.
I think the backlash is really that people are floored someone with 5000 hours is asking either question.
But to be honest your question - "if ATC is responsible, then why is the pilot responsible too?"
Is an absolutely ridiculous one for anyone who has achieved even a ppl. So regardless, if it's under the hood solo or why am I responsible, both questions are something you should just know out of common sense. Like no reg even required, if anything out of pure self preservation.
I think the backlash is really that people are floored someone with 5000 hours is asking either question.
- Status