top of page

What “Flight Visibility” Really Means (and Why It Matters in IFR)

You’ll see visibility everywhere in instrument flying: on METARs, ATIS, approach plates, tower reports, and RVR readouts. But the key phrase in the regs isn’t “reported visibility.” It’s flight visibility—and that distinction matters when you’re trying to decide whether you can continue below minimums and actually land.


Here’s the pilot-focused breakdown.



Study this full length lesson (video, podcast, flashcards, and quiz) here: Full Length Lesson >


Flight visibility: the view from your seat

Flight visibility is the visibility as observed from the cockpit while you’re in flight—essentially the forward horizontal distance at which you can see and identify objects.


That’s different from:

  • Ground (prevailing) visibility: what’s measured/reported at or near the airport surface by sensors or observers.

  • RVR (Runway Visual Range): an instrument-based measurement of how far you can see down the runway (typically reported in feet), tied to runway lights and sensors.


So when you’re flying an instrument approach, the real-world question becomes:

  • “From the cockpit right now, can I actually see enough to meet the approach’s visibility requirement and land safely?”


Where flight visibility matters in instrument flying

1) Continuing below DA/DH or MDA

On an instrument approach, the decision to continue below minimums isn’t just about altitude. It’s also about whether your flight visibility meets the published requirement for that approach.

  • If you’re at DA/DH (precision/vertical guidance) and you don’t have what you need, you go missed.

  • If you’re at MDA (non precision), you hold the altitude (or treat it as a hard floor in a constant-descent technique) and you cannot descend below it unless you have the required visual cues and the flight visibility is at least the required value.


2) Landing

Even if you pick up the runway environment, the question isn’t “Can I see something?” It’s “Can I see enough to make a normal, safe landing with the required visibility?”


How this shows up on approach plates

Approach plates publish visibility minimums in one of two common ways:

  • Statute miles (e.g., “1 SM”)

  • RVR values (e.g., “2400 RVR”)


The plate is telling you the minimum visibility standard for that procedure. Your job is to ensure what you have in real life—your flight visibility—meets or exceeds that value when you continue below minimums and when you land.


Who determines flight visibility?

The pilot does.


You’re the one looking out the windshield, evaluating what you can see, and deciding whether you can safely continue. But you don’t do it in a vacuum—you use a stack of inputs:


Reported visibility (METAR/ATIS/AWOS)

Great for planning. Not always representative of what you’ll see on short final because it can miss:

  • localized fog near the runway

  • precipitation bands

  • smoke/haze layers that vary by location


RVR (when available)

RVR is often the best “runway-specific” clue in low visibility because it’s measuring along the runway environment. In some conditions, it’s also more relevant than a general “2 miles” report.


What you actually see on the approach

This is the reality check. Can you:

  • identify the runway environment clearly enough?

  • maintain alignment?

  • descend normally and land within the touchdown zone?

  • do all that without rushing or guessing?


If the answer is “not really,” that’s a missed approach—no matter what the report said.


Why flight visibility can be better or worse than what’s reported

It’s common for cockpit visibility and reported visibility to disagree. A few reasons:

  • Localized fog sitting over the approach end or touchdown zone

  • Rain/snow intensity changes right over the runway

  • Night glare and bloom from runway lights in mist or drizzle

  • Haze/smoke layers that look fine at the sensor but are worse on final

  • Wind-driven variability (blowing snow/dust) that changes minute to minute


You can also get the opposite: reports say “low,” but the final is surprisingly usable. That’s why you evaluate flight visibility in real time.


Practical IFR habits that make flight visibility easier to manage

Brief it like a decision, not a number


Instead of “mins are 1 mile,” brief:

  • “We need at least 1 mile flight visibility and the required runway references to continue below minimums and land.”


That keeps you anchored to what you must actually have, not just what was reported 10 minutes ago.


Use a stability mindset

If you pick up the runway late and it feels like you’ll need to dive, chase lights, or “salvage” the landing, treat that as a visibility/visual-cue problem even if you technically see something. The safer move is usually:

  • go missed

  • come back around for a more stable attempt (or divert)


Don’t bargain below minimums

The most dangerous habit is “just a little lower to see if it improves.” If you don’t have the visibility/visual references you need at the decision point, execute the missed approach. Clean, repeatable, professional.


The takeaway

Flight visibility is what you can see from the cockpit in flight, and it’s the visibility that truly governs whether you can continue below DA/MDA and whether you can land safely on an instrument approach.


Reports (METAR/ATIS) and RVR help you plan, but the decision at minimums is ultimately based on what’s real out the windshield—right now.



Study Full Aviation Courses:

wifiCFI's full suite of aviation courses has everything you need to go from brand new to flight instructor and airline pilot! Check out any of the courses below for free:


Study Courses:


Checkride Lesson Plans:


Teaching Courses:



 
 
bottom of page