"Chip Jones" wrote in message link.net...

Hi, guys, sorry to be bringing this up again late. Haven't been
able to keep up with the ng for a while.

What happens when this pilot never reports his cancellation to FSS?
What if he never spots the airport and he's non radar, lost comm, below the
MIA?

IMO, this is the pilot's error. Whether or not it's legal, the pilot
needs to understand that he must never, never, ever accept a visual
approach clearance if he isn't positive he can make it in, or climb
under VFR back to some altitude where he can contact ATC. Never, no
matter how hard his ears are being twisted by ATC. Been there heard
that, sorry I don't care how many commuters you have to hold I am
in a cloud, if I go visual you'll be the second to know (if I can still
talk to you), I"m flying the IAP.

Also, so what if you have to "slam dunk" the airport? If that's what you
have to do to get into a place under IFR, that's what you have to do. You
get down to the MIA, you see the airport, you get the clearance. You
descend and land. We're not talking a split-S wingover. If you spiral
down, so be it. I don't break the regs to keep pilots from the "slam
dunk". IFR aircraft don't get below the MIA until it's legal to get below
it. By legal, I'm talking "controller" legal here, not pilot legal. No
question in my opinion that the pilot is legal when the controller issues
the approach clearance. I don't see the "being an ass" part about it
either. I'd rather see the controller doing his job properly because that's
the safest thing for him to do, and he's in the safety business.

Chip, speaking as a pilot, I guess I don't agree that being kept above
MIA until I have the airport in sight is the safest thing for me.

We fly into little rural airports a lot. You never know what you're
gonna find there. Last weekend at an airport which shall remain nameless,
it was a chap in a beautiful XXXXX practicing an aerobatic routine about
2 miles off the runway below a 2500 ft ceiling. No NOTAM about an aerobatic
box or anything of the sort natch. I got a low wing plane, vis below me
is limited. Think I want to spiral down on top of that kind of thing? No
Way Ho Say. I even give up my desire to be able to glide to the runway
to descend down to TPA in good time. (and another argument for the "dive
and drive" method of flying NP approaches too, IMO).

Of course I agree the best thing is to be legal, by issuing a cruise
clearance when it seems warranted. In fact next time I'll ask for one.

With this controller losing radar contact with an IFR, and then illegally
clearing that aircraft for a visual approach to a distant airport the pilot
hasn't yet seen, followed by loss of comm between pilot and controller, what
chance does the weekend pilot have, indeed?

Realistically speaking, Chip, in terms of safety for the pilot, what
advantage do you perceive the (legal) cruise clearance to have over
the (not legal) visual w/out the field in sight?

Cheers,
Sydney