Narrative:

On the date of the occurrence, I filed a VFR flight plan for a flight to bremerton, wa. The palo alto ATIS reported a ceiling of 1000 ft and 7 mi visibility. However, livermore was reporting clear, and there was sunshine across the bay against the hills. I decided to get a SVFR clearance and try to get into the valley, out of the fog. I asked ground control for SVFR. The controller responded that the field was VFR. I assumed, without really knowing, that meant he couldn't give me the clearance. I took off intending to ask bay departure for SVFR before exiting the class D airspace. At 800 ft, I began entering clouds. I informed the tower I was returning to land, and I was cleared to land. As I turned crosswind from the extended runway centerline, I was in IMC. I am not instrument rated, but I have had approximately 50 hours of instrument training in simulated IFR and in simulators, and I did remember the first rule: believe the attitude indicator, which was showing a steep right bank. I leveled the wings and descended out of the clouds. The right bank had taken the plane from the right downwind position across the runway extended centerline while I was in IMC. The tower asked me to state my intentions and whether I wished to declare an emergency. I replied that I did not need to declare an emergency and proceeded to make a normal landing from the left downwind pattern. I informed the tower that the ceiling off the end of the runway was below VFR. I learned several things from this experience: I don't really understand procedures for SVFR. When I did not completely understand the controller's response to my request for VFR, I should have followed up and found out why I was puzzled, instead of proceeding. Just because the ATIS says 1000 ft, it is not necessarily so. If the ceiling is ragged or there are intermittent clouds, it would be helpful to be informed. Without instrument training, I would have been in a much worse situation than I was. But a little learning is a dangerous thing: if I had no instrument training, I probably would have been more cautious about trying to find a way out of the fog.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PA28 PLT DEPARTS WITH 1000 FT AND 7 MI BUT WHEN AIRBORNE DISCOVERS CEILING IS 800 FT. ON RETURNING TO LAND ENTERS IMC.

Narrative: ON THE DATE OF THE OCCURRENCE, I FILED A VFR FLT PLAN FOR A FLT TO BREMERTON, WA. THE PALO ALTO ATIS RPTED A CEILING OF 1000 FT AND 7 MI VISIBILITY. HOWEVER, LIVERMORE WAS RPTING CLR, AND THERE WAS SUNSHINE ACROSS THE BAY AGAINST THE HILLS. I DECIDED TO GET A SVFR CLRNC AND TRY TO GET INTO THE VALLEY, OUT OF THE FOG. I ASKED GND CTL FOR SVFR. THE CTLR RESPONDED THAT THE FIELD WAS VFR. I ASSUMED, WITHOUT REALLY KNOWING, THAT MEANT HE COULDN'T GIVE ME THE CLRNC. I TOOK OFF INTENDING TO ASK BAY DEP FOR SVFR BEFORE EXITING THE CLASS D AIRSPACE. AT 800 FT, I BEGAN ENTERING CLOUDS. I INFORMED THE TWR I WAS RETURNING TO LAND, AND I WAS CLRED TO LAND. AS I TURNED XWIND FROM THE EXTENDED RWY CTRLINE, I WAS IN IMC. I AM NOT INST RATED, BUT I HAVE HAD APPROX 50 HRS OF INST TRAINING IN SIMULATED IFR AND IN SIMULATORS, AND I DID REMEMBER THE FIRST RULE: BELIEVE THE ATTITUDE INDICATOR, WHICH WAS SHOWING A STEEP R BANK. I LEVELED THE WINGS AND DSNDED OUT OF THE CLOUDS. THE R BANK HAD TAKEN THE PLANE FROM THE R DOWNWIND POS ACROSS THE RWY EXTENDED CTRLINE WHILE I WAS IN IMC. THE TWR ASKED ME TO STATE MY INTENTIONS AND WHETHER I WISHED TO DECLARE AN EMER. I REPLIED THAT I DID NOT NEED TO DECLARE AN EMER AND PROCEEDED TO MAKE A NORMAL LNDG FROM THE L DOWNWIND PATTERN. I INFORMED THE TWR THAT THE CEILING OFF THE END OF THE RWY WAS BELOW VFR. I LEARNED SEVERAL THINGS FROM THIS EXPERIENCE: I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND PROCS FOR SVFR. WHEN I DID NOT COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THE CTLR'S RESPONSE TO MY REQUEST FOR VFR, I SHOULD HAVE FOLLOWED UP AND FOUND OUT WHY I WAS PUZZLED, INSTEAD OF PROCEEDING. JUST BECAUSE THE ATIS SAYS 1000 FT, IT IS NOT NECESSARILY SO. IF THE CEILING IS RAGGED OR THERE ARE INTERMITTENT CLOUDS, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO BE INFORMED. WITHOUT INST TRAINING, I WOULD HAVE BEEN IN A MUCH WORSE SIT THAN I WAS. BUT A LITTLE LEARNING IS A DANGEROUS THING: IF I HAD NO INST TRAINING, I PROBABLY WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE CAUTIOUS ABOUT TRYING TO FIND A WAY OUT OF THE FOG.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.