I like my privatized airport :)

"Richard Kaplan" wrote in message
s.com...

You are correct that pilots are not told "Radar Service Terminated" on the
ILS 18 to MGW.


Earlier you said Morgantown Tower has no radar capability. What did you
base that on? If arriving aircraft are not being told "Radar Service
Terminated" it's probably because the tower has a BRITE scope, as would be
expected of a VFR tower that close to an ASR.



As a practical matter, though, only under special
circumstances could/would they coordinate with Clarksburg to vector
airplanes talking to MGW tower. As a practical matter, Morgantown Tower
relies upon pilot position reporting for separation.


Morgantown tower is a VFR tower. They provide runway separation.
Clarksburg approach provides IFR separation.



Then how is it that I routinely execute instrument approaches at MGW and
then proceed IFR at 3000 feet to my very nearby home base of KWAY to see
if I can land visually at KWAY?


An MEA is the lowest published altitude between radio fixes which assures
acceptable navigational signal coverage and meets obstacle clearance
requirements between those fixes. Morgantown Municipal Airport and Greene
County Airport are not radio fixes, and there is no published altitude
between them. Off-airways operations would be subject to the MVA when
Clarksburg approach is open and the MIA when Cleveland ARTCC takes the
airspace.

How is it one can become a CFII without knowing what an MEA is?

If the minimum altitude for IFR operations in the WAY area is 3000 MSL,
what's the point of executing an instrument approach at MGW to get into WAY?
An instrument approach is needed to descend beneath the minimum altitude for
enroute operations, not to descend down to it.



Can you please tell me what IFR clearance taking off from MGW Runway 18
could appropriately contain the words "On Departure turn Left"?


You're illustrating why we need a verbatim transcript of the communications.
Previously you said the instruction was "Cleared for Takeoff -- Turn Left on
Course", now you say it was "On Departure turn Left". To determine if an
error was made we need to know what was said and without a transcript we
don't know what was said.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

Earlier you said Morgantown Tower has no radar capability. What did you
base that on? If arriving aircraft are not being told "Radar Service

MGW Tower routinely seems to not know where I am located when I call in on
the approach. They will sometimes, for example, ask me to "Report DIXIN
Inbound" when I am already inside DIXIN; if they saw me on radar they would
not ask for such a report.

If the minimum altitude for IFR operations in the WAY area is 3000 MSL,
what's the point of executing an instrument approach at MGW to get into
WAY?
An instrument approach is needed to descend beneath the minimum altitude
for
enroute operations, not to descend down to it.

The MVA is indeed 3000 MSL in the WAY area. So as mentioned in an earlier
posting IFR traffic could be at 3000 MSL in the MGW area and thus
conflicting with the departure procedure from MGW runway 18.

One reason why I might execute an approach at MGW to get into WAY would be
in the winter if I anticipate possible icing in the descent and I want the
option to land at MGW if I accumulate ice vs. continue to WAY if I am
ice-free. Full flaps are not permitted on my airplane after I have
encountered icing conditions, and I would much prefer to execute such a
landing straight-in out of an ILS to the 5000 foot runway at MGW rather than
to fly a traffic pattern around WAY and land on its 3500 foot, slightly
sloping runway.

Another reason why I might execute an approach at MGW to get into WAY is to
get a sense of whether I am likely to be able to complete a visual approach
to WAY. Circling WAY at 3000 feet I might be able to see straight down to
the airport yet forward visibility might be reduced when I start a visual
approach to WAY; the only way to get below 3000 feet at WAY is to cancel
IFR, so I could find myself IMC on a VFR flight plan below radar and radio
reception altitudes. I have found that a better plan is to execute the ILS
into MGW and then decide if the weather will allow me to proceed IFR to WAY
or if I should instead land at MGW.


--
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

"Richard Kaplan" wrote in message
s.com...

MGW Tower routinely seems to not know where I am located when I call in on
the approach. They will sometimes, for example, ask me to "Report DIXIN
Inbound" when I am already inside DIXIN; if they saw me on radar they
would
not ask for such a report.


You said pilots are not told "Radar Service Terminated" on the ILS 18 to
MGW. If Morgantown does not have radar then pilots should be told that
radar service is terminated.



The MVA is indeed 3000 MSL in the WAY area.


How do you know?



So as mentioned in an earlier
posting IFR traffic could be at 3000 MSL in the MGW area and thus
conflicting with the departure procedure from MGW runway 18.


Enroute traffic is typically kept higher for that very reason.



One reason why I might execute an approach at MGW to get into WAY would be
in the winter if I anticipate possible icing in the descent and I want the
option to land at MGW if I accumulate ice vs. continue to WAY if I am
ice-free. Full flaps are not permitted on my airplane after I have
encountered icing conditions, and I would much prefer to execute such a
landing straight-in out of an ILS to the 5000 foot runway at MGW rather
than
to fly a traffic pattern around WAY and land on its 3500 foot, slightly
sloping runway.

Another reason why I might execute an approach at MGW to get into WAY is
to
get a sense of whether I am likely to be able to complete a visual
approach
to WAY. Circling WAY at 3000 feet I might be able to see straight down to
the airport yet forward visibility might be reduced when I start a visual
approach to WAY; the only way to get below 3000 feet at WAY is to cancel
IFR, so I could find myself IMC on a VFR flight plan below radar and radio
reception altitudes. I have found that a better plan is to execute the
ILS
into MGW and then decide if the weather will allow me to proceed IFR to
WAY
or if I should instead land at MGW.


So executing an instrument approach at MGW has nothing to do with proceeding
IFR to WAY then? It's just to get a check on the weather? You fly the
approach, miss, and then climb to the MVA and proceed to WAY?

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
news
You said pilots are not told "Radar Service Terminated" on the ILS 18 to
MGW. If Morgantown does not have radar then pilots should be told that
radar service is terminated.

That is a valid point and something which I agree would be helpful for me to
clarify.... I will ask Morgantown tower directly next time I get a chance.

Either way, it does not get away from the initial topic of discussion which
is that an IFR clearance on takeoff from MGW runway 18 should never contain
the words "On Takeoff Turn Left ...."


The MVA is indeed 3000 MSL in the WAY area.
How do you know?


I have asked ATC (Clarksburgh Approach) this question many times on IFR
flight plans approaching WAY.


Enroute traffic is typically kept higher for that very reason.

Yes, but for all I know enroute traffic was landing at a nearby airport and
thus kept lower or maybe wanted lower to avoid winds or icing or wanted
lower by request to stay IMC or had an emergency or any number of reasons.


So executing an instrument approach at MGW has nothing to do with
proceeding
IFR to WAY then? It's just to get a check on the weather? You fly the
approach, miss, and then climb to the MVA and proceed to WAY?

If the weather is marginal VFR for WAY, say minimum ceiling for a visual
approach into WAY with 3 miles visibility, I might well go missed on the ILS
to MGW and then continue IFR from MGW to WAY by my preference to help with
separation from other aircraft.

--
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

"Richard Kaplan" wrote in message
s.com...

That is a valid point and something which I agree would be helpful for me
to clarify.... I will ask Morgantown tower directly next time I get a
chance.


I phoned Morgantown tower, they have no BRITE.



Either way, it does not get away from the initial topic of discussion
which is that an IFR clearance on takeoff from MGW runway 18
should never contain the words "On Takeoff Turn Left ...."


There are many things an IFR clearance should not contain, but without a
transcript we do not know what it did contain.



I have asked ATC (Clarksburgh Approach) this question many times on IFR
flight plans approaching WAY.


Okay, but remember this is the same facility that apparently cleared you for
an approach when another IFR aircraft would be conflicting with the missed
approach segment.



Yes, but for all I know enroute traffic was landing at a nearby airport
and thus kept lower or maybe wanted lower to avoid winds or icing or
wanted
lower by request to stay IMC or had an emergency or any number of reasons.


Separation is the first priority. You don't grant a request that
compromises separation.



If the weather is marginal VFR for WAY, say minimum ceiling for a visual
approach into WAY with 3 miles visibility, I might well go missed on the
ILS to MGW and then continue IFR from MGW to WAY by my preference
to help with separation from other aircraft.


How do you know what the weather is at WAY? What does an approach at MGW
have to do with proceeding IFR to WAY?

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...

How do you know what the weather is at WAY? What does an approach at MGW
have to do with proceeding IFR to WAY?

WAY is close enough to MGW for me to be able to make a reasonable estimate
of whether I can get into WAY based on weather in MGW... it is not perfect
but it is a pretty effective plan considering I have done this for years and
thus know the local weather patterns very well. Since I am IFR, if I cannot
get into WAY then no harm is done -- I could just ask for a clearance back
to MGW and land.


--
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

"Richard Kaplan" wrote in message
s.com...

WAY is close enough to MGW for me to be able to make a reasonable estimate
of whether I can get into WAY based on weather in MGW... it is not perfect
but it is a pretty effective plan considering I have done this for years
and thus know the local weather patterns very well. Since I am IFR, if I
cannot get into WAY then no harm is done -- I could just ask for a
clearance
back to MGW and land.


I don't follow. If you're assuming the weather at WAY is similar to the
weather at MGW, then just the need to do an approach at MGW should tell you
that an approach is needed at WAY. Since WAY has no approach you won't be
able to get in.