X-plane 12: FlyShirley Artificial Intelligence (AI) ride along in the Diamond DA42 from RDU to FAY

[@PilotLH]

Very nice video Frank! Remember when flying VFR to fly at the correct altitude depending on your direction. Anything 0-179 degrees is odd (1500ft, 3500ft, 5500ft or 7500ft etc) and 180-359 is even (2500ft, 4500ft, 6500ft or 8500ft etc). As you may notice from the above, all VFR traffic flies 500ft over the thousands and this is to maintain separation from IFR aircraft. The same odd/even rule applies for IFR except you fly at thousands instead of the aforementioned VFR altitudes. In this video you should have reduced your altitude to 2500ft to adhere to the VFR altitude instead of levelling out at 3000ft as your cruise heading was 202 (odd). Enjoy!

[@VirtualAviationAviator]

You are absolutely correct. Any altitudes over 3000ft requires that you fly easterly at an odd altitude or westerly at an even altitude. However, the rule does not apply under 3000 feet. At 3000 feet, the rule you mentioned should have been applied and I should have climbed to 3500'.

[@airplane-alex-list]

Agreed! Nice video! The cfr's, specifically 91.159 you refer to, can be confusing, but in this case it only applies if you're cruising _above_ 3000 ft. So even at 3000 you can cruise in any direction, turns out!

[@PilotLH]

@@airplane-alex-list Thanks for the additional information there- the VFR directional charts published online always show altitudes under 3000ft so was unaware of that rule. As the cloud layer was above at 3500ft, Frank made the correct decision to descend to 2500ft where the directional rules do not apply and to avoid a violation flying in IFR conditions on a VFR flight by climbing into cloud. That is assuming Frank was simulating not having a an instrument rating for IFR flight of course! He was also descended more than 1000ft below the cloud base, which was correct to do so, so great decision making there also Frank! Lee

[@VirtualAviationAviator]

@@airplane-alex-list Yup. The FAA often use language like, up to but not including...

[@airplane-alex-list]

@@PilotLH Totally agree. Awesome stuff!

[@Pe11ePD]

Is this Aerobask DA-42?

[@VirtualAviationAviator]

Yes. It is.