Contact Approach

On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 04:48:05 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:

If an observation is made but not reported then the requirement for reported
ground visibility has not been satisfied.

I guess what you mean is that if the observation is made but not reported
to someone other than me (as the pilot), then the requirement is not
satisfied.

Is there documentation supporting the concept that the report has to be
made to some government facility directly, and not relayed to ATC via the
pilot?

Thanks.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

I guess what you mean is that if the observation is made but not reported
to someone other than me (as the pilot), then the requirement is not
satisfied.

Is there documentation supporting the concept that the report has to be
made to some government facility directly, and not relayed to ATC via the
pilot?

My take on it is that the =reason= the requirement is not satisfied is
that the observation is not "official" unless it meets certain
requirments, among them being made by a suitably qualified
("certificated?") observer.

So to re-pose the question - if the observation is in fact made by an
officialy certified observer, is it sufficient =then= that the pilot
relays it to ATC, or does the report have to go through some official
channels to be usable for a contact approach clearance? I'm not (of
course) asking what pilots and controllers would actually =do= under the
circumstances, but rather, what the FAA would throw at the pilot or
controller should there be an accident (and it could be proven that the
observation was correct, made by a certfied observer, but not delivered
to ATC except via the pilot).

Jose

Jose wrote:



So to re-pose the question - if the observation is in fact made by an
officialy certified observer, is it sufficient =then= that the pilot
relays it to ATC, or does the report have to go through some official
channels to be usable for a contact approach clearance? I'm not (of
course) asking what pilots and controllers would actually =do= under the
circumstances, but rather, what the FAA would throw at the pilot or
controller should there be an accident (and it could be proven that the
observation was correct, made by a certfied observer, but not delivered
to ATC except via the pilot).



Is there any official weather that is not available at all to ATC?

Is there any official weather that is not available at all to ATC?

I don't know, but in the following hypothetical case (that you could I
suppose argue would never happen) I can see it.

Fred is a certified weather observer, but the station is officially
closed. Fred is also Susan's husband, and Susan is flying back from
Kalahachee and getting ready to land at the small airstrip near their
home. So Fred goes down to wherever he can make certifiable weather
observations, looks out the window, and makes a certifiable (but not
certified) observation, which he relays to Susan on the ham radio. (As
it turns out they are both licensed amateur radio operators, so the
transmission is perfectly legal). Susan forwards this observation to
ATC and asks for a contact approach. Donna at ATC says fine and clears
Susan for the contact approach.

Something Goes Wrong.

In the subsequent investigation, the FAA throws the book at Fred, Susan,
and Donna, claiming that the contact approach should not have been
requested or granted, the observation wasn't "official", wasn't
available to ATC, and all that rot.

What sticks?

Does it matter that the weather at the time was in fact CAVU?

Jose

In article ,
Jose wrote:


Is there any official weather that is not available at all to ATC?

I don't know, but in the following hypothetical case (that you could I
suppose argue would never happen) I can see it.

Fred is a certified weather observer, but the station is officially
closed. Fred is also Susan's husband, and Susan is flying back from
Kalahachee and getting ready to land at the small airstrip near their
home. So Fred goes down to wherever he can make certifiable weather
observations, looks out the window, and makes a certifiable (but not
certified) observation, which he relays to Susan on the ham radio. (As
it turns out they are both licensed amateur radio operators, so the
transmission is perfectly legal). Susan forwards this observation to
ATC and asks for a contact approach. Donna at ATC says fine and clears
Susan for the contact approach.

Something Goes Wrong.

In the subsequent investigation, the FAA throws the book at Fred, Susan,
and Donna, claiming that the contact approach should not have been
requested or granted, the observation wasn't "official", wasn't
available to ATC, and all that rot.

What sticks?

I think that would depend a lot on what the "something" is that went
wrong. If Susan ran out of fuel I doubt that the weather would even
come into play.


Does it matter that the weather at the time was in fact CAVU?


Probably. The devil is always in the details.

But it certainly is an interesting scenario.

rg

Jose wrote:


Is there any official weather that is not available at all to ATC?


I don't know, but in the following hypothetical case (that you could I
suppose argue would never happen) I can see it.

Fred is a certified weather observer, but the station is officially
closed.

Then right there it's not official weather.


Fred is also Susan's husband, and Susan is flying back from
Kalahachee and getting ready to land at the small airstrip near their
home. So Fred goes down to wherever he can make certifiable weather
observations, looks out the window, and makes a certifiable (but not
certified) observation, which he relays to Susan on the ham radio. (As
it turns out they are both licensed amateur radio operators, so the
transmission is perfectly legal). Susan forwards this observation to
ATC and asks for a contact approach. Donna at ATC says fine and clears
Susan for the contact approach.

Wouldn't ever happen.


Does it matter that the weather at the time was in fact CAVU?

If it was CAVU we wouldn't be having this discussion on a contact
approach as the pilot would have gotten a visual approach.

On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 11:36:07 -0700, Newps wrote:

If it was CAVU we wouldn't be having this discussion on a contact
approach as the pilot would have gotten a visual approach.


Not necessarily.

"Newps" wrote in message
...

If it was CAVU we wouldn't be having this discussion on a contact approach
as the pilot would have gotten a visual approach.


Being CAVU does not preclude a contact approach. A contact approach is not
a possibility in this scenario because there's no report of ground
visibility.

A contact approach is not
a possibility in this scenario because there's no report of ground
visibility.

Sure there is. Fred reported it to Susan when he "observed" the
weather, unofficially but equally competently.

Jose

"Jose" wrote in message
m...

Fred is a certified weather observer, but the station is officially
closed.

Then Fred is not certified to take weather observations at that station.