Gary Drescher wrote:


Hm, so you're saying that the MSA doesn't necessarily provide the obstacle
clearance that it's advertised to provide. I hadn't considered that
possibility. Are you familiar with any example of an obstacle that's less
than 1000' below a current MSA?

Thanks,
Gary

Well, it's an emperical conclusion based on the certain knowledge that some
TRACON MVA charts have been found to have less than required obstacle
clearance, because sectional charts were used in their construction.

The difference there is that ATC assigns you the MVA, so that is the FAA's
"fault," not your's. But, if you elect to use an MSA as an IFR altitude, that
is strictly your deal. Are you going to be at risk because of this? No, I
don't think so. The point I am trying to make is that MSAs are almost an
afterthought to the procedures designer. A lot of folks in the charting
business would like to do away with them entirely. That has pretty much
happened with RNAV MSAs that do not have sectors.