isn’t a clearance for SVFR necessary explicitly before entering a CTR, so cancel IFR within a CTR is not legally possible under SVMC
Somehow true, by design SVFR allow one to transit Golf VMC to/from CTR VMC, so clearly the intention of SVFR clearance is to enter, exit or transit of CTR as one can maintain “Golf VMC” before or after
The SERA paragraph about SVFR (SERA.5010) mentions no such restriction.
Yes the rules don’t have such restriction that you should be “VFR in Golf” to get SVFR?
I have cancelled IFR and flew SVFR from ILS at 300ft with ceilings at 700ft
There is no guarantee you get automatic SVFR on cancel IFR
Hm, I know this is completely irrelevant in practice and only splitting hairs
It is a very relevant question, when you shoot nearby ILS or RNP before deciding to go an airfield without procedure, you either follow SVFR or IFR departure to leave CTR and fly uncontrolled in Golf under VFR or IFR…I have done this few times: Stapleford via Southend and Etampes via Melun, it’s hard to say exactly what you want as departure as “it depends”
In most places in UK and France, ATC give more options as you are also allowed to fly IFR OCAS and leave CTR laterally, I always assumed that only works with 1 IFR traffic in CTR as one sits bellow radar separation and he is not following separation from procedural missed or instrument departure
My impression, if IFR is restricted to instrument departure or missed or remaining in radar airspace then 1/ only one SVFR is allowed in CTR and 2/ one has to physically land on runway to depart SVFR from IFR approach
One need “20nm circle-to-land” to land in grass strips after ILS
Just to remind myself, UK no longer have these VFR, SVFR paradoxes now, firstly by exemption from SERA and now by law: no requirement for separation with reduced VMC minima 
https://consultations.caa.co.uk/future-safety/proposed-changes-to-vmc-minima-in-class-d-airspace/
Hmm. I have never thought of it that way. There is VFR and there is VMC (Visual Meteorological Conditions). The VMC at a CTR is much stricter than the general rules for VMC “in the open”, but it is still VMC (in a meteorological sense). The last time I flew, a couple of weeks ago, I got SVFR when entering ENVA CTR due to snow. That’s the typical need for SVFR. OK conditions “in the open”, but not OK for the ATC at a CTR due to separation, which requires better visibility than ordinary VMC allows. Out in the open there is no restrictions, it’s fully VMC, and we can hold perfect separation to each other, even if we are 10 or more at a field. This SVFR is of no help to me, it’s purely a thing for the ATC.
In my head VMC is VMC, period. Any restrictions in CTRs etc are due to separation requirements by ATC. SVFR means a clearance to fly in V*M*C, but where the VMC is not OK for the ATC. In no point in time am I flying in I*M*C, not in my head (not saying my head is semantically correct all the time )
That wasn’t quite the point of my examples.
Rather I was trying to show that in the first two case, it was entirely up to the pilot to make sure that if they cancel their IFR clearance, that they remain legal afterwards.
I so no reason that in the case of a CTR, it wouldn’t remain the pilots responsibility to remain legal if they are going to cancel their IFR clearance.
In other words, remaining legal remains the pilot’s problem. They haven’t transferred the problem to ATC and in doing so somehow managed to force ATC to give them a SVFR clearance.
AFAIK ATSU are concerned, it’s mostly due to ATC separation less so about the ability of PIC “see & avoid”,
If the answer is YES, then why even cancel IFR
If NO,
The answer is not clear
If NO,
Sometimes the only way to leave CTR, TMA or Airway…on your own is to pretend that you have ground in sight, even at 2000ft agl with 600ft ceiling
@dublinpilot, in your examples the pilot knows whether he will be in compliance with VFR and thus he expects any clearance required will be granted (cancelling IFR in class C or D TMA still needs a further clearance after cancelling, but traffic rules are no worse off VFR vs IFR you just went out of, so no reason for immediate refusal)
For SVFR, however, the traffic rules are very different and there is no guarantee that they will be complied with after cancelling, so even if reported wx is ok for SVFR you as a pilot do not know nor are required to know whether traffic rules will be complied with upon cancelling which, I remind you is the pilot’s prerogative, just like requesting SVFR.
@LeSving it seems that ATC suggested in the Trondheim case that you relate that you should request SVFR, which they are never supposed to do: they need to await pilot’s request, which causes part of the problem discussed in this thread.
LeSving wrote:
The VMC at a CTR is much stricter than the general rules for VMC “in the open”
Not sure what you mean by this. I thought VMC was defined based primarily on the class of airspace with some special relaxations if you are low and slow enough. How would being in a CTR affect that? Or by “in the open” do you mean in class G below 3’000 ft (or below 1’000 ft AGL if that is higher) and below 140kts?
As to SVFR, I thought it allows you to fly VFR in less than VMC conditions if all of the conditions for SVFR are met (including granting of SVFR by ATC). So less strict in CTR (if granted SVFR) than outside.
Have I misunderstood something on either point?
p.s. As a side note, curious that the UK will now have stricter criteria for VFR in class E than in class D airspace. Not much class E in the UK, and given the UK motivation for changing the rules for class D, makes sense, but still odd.
Antonio wrote:
For SVFR, however, the traffic rules are very different and there is no guarantee that they will be complied with after cancelling, so even if reported wx is ok for SVFR you as a pilot do not know nor are required to know whether traffic rules will be complied with upon cancelling which, I remind you is the pilot’s prerogative, just like requesting SVFR.
But the issue is that one you cancel IFR, you are now operating under VFR. At that point you are illegal (VFR in sub VFR conditions). You are now requesting a SVFR clearance, which might or might not be granted. But until it’s granted, you’re illegal.
So do it right, you’d have to request a SVFR clearance before cancelling your IFR, so that you’re never VFR in between.
I don’t think the problem here is with IFR/VFR or VFR/IFR and PIC constraints like being near clouds or inside them in a short period, we all do it:
Nothing fancy here guys, this is business as usual, it’s done on technical basis in every Zulu/Yankee flight I am aware of, 1/ you don’t land back as ceiling is not high enough for radar pick up to work but you are damn sure to get IFR above 2/ you don’t go missed at your en-route MVA or MEA with 3000ft agl ceiling on nearby ATIS
The problem is with IFR/SVFR, I agree with Antonio it’s more complicated and subtle: SVFR is way more constrained to ATC than IFR or VFR, especially, if one is intending to make a low pass rather than landing or takeoff
Funnily enough, if the CTR zone has some hardcore foggy weather: say clouds ceiling is at 100ft and cloud tops are at 400ft with 550m RVR, leaving CTR under SVFR bellow ceiling from ILS is not possible, however, leaving ILS under VFR above that shallow layer is doable
