The Why of VFR Minimums (PA.I.E.K1) 

Finally. Thank you so much. This should be in every aviation book BEFORE VFR weather minimums are mentioned.

Great background info. Thanks!

This was very insightful, especially the 500 below and 1000 above part. Thanks for the clear explanation, relating it back to the reaction time!

Nice summary. I believe, however, that the 500’ below limitation for “standard” VFR is probably to allow more wiggle room on low overcast days. Specifically, if it was 1,000’ below and you needed to maintain 1,000’ AGL over congested areas you couldn’t fly unless the ceiling was 2,000’ or more.

Keep up the good work Patrick. Love the app so far!!

The 500 below vs 1000 above is probably wrong. The more likely reason is because commercial airliners tend to descend slowly and climb faster. So 500 below and 1000 above makes sense. Overall though - this visibility calculation and collision avoidance reaction time just shows why see and avoid doesn't work and why these minima are complete BS. That calculation assumes one of the pilots sees the other one. Why would they? They could both be in each other's blind spot. Completely ridiculous. Let's just come up with some BS theoretical number and keep doubling it... come on. The real problem with VFR weather minima is of course that they can't be enforced or even followed, not even by the most well-intended pilot. You can't measure distance to a cloud (outside of certain very specific circumstances where exact measurements are present), so the whole thing is a complete joke. Of course, this is probably the most amount of rote memorization anywhere in the private ACS, a complete waste of time and brainpower.

The real answer is because there are never enough self-invented tasks for pencil pushers. Show me a device that measures your distance from a small cloud, then I'll agree there is reason. Plus, with DPEs and Instructors alike, on a daily basis the rules are broken. This is one of the biggest jokes of the US rule system.