This whole deal about restricting VFR flights has nothing to do with
what the tower/approach control can handle. This is a parking problem.
As a controller I can get many times more VFR aircraft into an airport
than IFR.

Peter Duniho wrote:

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...

Non-IMC practice approaches are flown VFR,

I wish you had an authoritative citation for that opinion.


You posted the citation yourself. While the 7110 provides some insight into
ATC activities, all you really need to know is that the airport is
(according to this thread) requiring all arrivals to occur under IFR, on an
IFR flight plan, and that that can only occur with an instrument rated and
current pilot acting as PIC.

If you bring a safety pilot along who is instrument rated, and who files an
IFR flight plan, and who acts as PIC during your "practice" approach, that's
fine. But if you had that guy along, you could just get him to fly you
there. Or even to just file and act as PIC while you fly there. No need to
fly a "practice approach" at all.

If the reasoning is really to provide for more efficient arrivals, then they
will not be allowing navaid approaches in VMC. That would negate the whole
point of providing for efficient arrivals (you can land a heck of a lot more
planes in a given time period if they are doing visual approaches with
visual separation than you can for instrument approaches).

All that said, someone else pointed out that the reality may well be that
VFR traffic will be allowed under a reservation system, and that arrivals
won't be restricted to IFR flights at all. I think that's certainly likely,
and would allow for efficient use of the airport without blocking access by
pilots who are not instrument rated.

Pete