Ron Garret wrote:

Again, I misunderstood then. I only quoted you and responded based on
what you wrote.


You must not be reading very carefully. I say right there in the part
you quoted that I was talking about a different trip (AVX-FUL).

I was trying to just use your examples.




How does going to FUL require what you state? Cannot you pick which
approach and IAF?


It's a tangent, so if you really want to get into that you should start
a new thread. Or look up the old one. Or look at the charts.

How is that a tangent?


Because it's a different route. The circumstances are different. What
one does when flying to FUL may or may not apply when flying to VNY. I
only brought up FUL because it's a data point where I've had occasion to
ask controllers for their input, and they unequivocally told me NOT to
follow the regs. (Yes, I know that what controllers say doesn't matter.
Nonetheless, it's a data point.)

So you are saying that one has to change operating rules based on the
route of the flight. That is exactly why we are having difficulty
understanding each other. The rules are in place to define what to do
under all circumstances. Saying that something applies in one instance
and not another is bad. What are the criteria then for defining which
set of our own rules that deviate from the FARs is necessary? The ONLY
one i am aware of the the one regarding emergencies.



You can choose any IAF and any approach that
you are able to do when the clearance ends in "direct" - and the airport
is the clearance limit.


Yes, but by the book you have to fly to the clearance limit first.
91.181(b) is quite clear about this.


It is your clearance limit because that is where you filed to and where
you want to land. You cannot commence your approach until your
clearance limit time/time on your flight plan.


Why do you choose the VOR procedure at FUL rather than the LOC/DME? In
that case it is easy to pick the approach with nopt.


Not as easy as you might think. The preferred routing (which is the one
you will invariably be assigned) from AVX to FUL is V21 SLI Direct.

Again, "direct" does not mean direct to the airport.


That's news to me. Where in the regs does it say that?


When you don't lose comms and you file and fly to an airport and do not
get vectors, where do you go to? You go to an IAF, right? Or do you
always go to the airport, then to a navaid that defines an IAF?


Direct means you
go to an IAF then get to the airport. How are you supposed to land?


My reading of 91.185(c)(3)(ii) seems to imply that you have to fly to
the airport first, then to an IAF.


You can;t just go to the airport and circle down to land - that is the
whole reason for having defined instrument approaches.


If you're saying that it's stupid to fly to the airport first, I agree
with you. Hence my question.


Right. See above regarding what that last "direct" means. It does not
mean go froom the penultimate fix to the airport. It means go to an
IAF then fly the approach.


I'm pretty sure you're wrong about that.


My initial (and I guess overzealous) reaction to your post was that it
seemed like you just didn;t care what "the book" said or what you are
supposed to do based on part 91 regs for ifr flight. That is scary to me.


Of course I care. But that doesn't mean that I blindly follow the rules
without thinking.

I misunderstood your initial question and I apologize for any demeaning
statements. It appeared to me that you were not aware of what the FARs
stated. Again, my apologies.


rg