ntsb report

Can someone explain to me why wasn't he granted the clearance into
KIND? Was it because of traffic flow or because of the weather at
KIND? According to the decision it was both, but I was unaware that
ATC wouldn't grant you a clearance if the destination field was below
minimums as a part 91 flight.

Obviously you'd still need fuel on board to comply with an alternate
minimums, etc. As a part 91 flight he could still attempt to execute
the approach if the field was below minimums, while air carrier flights
wouldn't have been able to, correct?

I'm not asking about the intelligence of doing such things, obviously,
but rather the mechanisms for ATC to deny you a clearance.

"bdl" wrote in message
oups.com...

Can someone explain to me why wasn't he granted the clearance into
KIND? Was it because of traffic flow or because of the weather at
KIND? According to the decision it was both, but I was unaware that
ATC wouldn't grant you a clearance if the destination field was below
minimums as a part 91 flight.


The report says he was going to Indianapolis, but not necessarily KIND. It
may have been that Indianapolis approach simply wasn't accepting additional
traffic regardless of destination due to aircraft holding for KIND, which
was below minimums.



Obviously you'd still need fuel on board to comply with an alternate
minimums, etc. As a part 91 flight he could still attempt to execute
the approach if the field was below minimums, while air carrier flights
wouldn't have been able to, correct?


That's true, but if they're already swamped with traffic they're not going
to accept additional traffic.



I'm not asking about the intelligence of doing such things, obviously,
but rather the mechanisms for ATC to deny you a clearance.


There may have been a ground stop for traffic destined for airports served
by Indianapolis approach. If so, he can't get a clearance for an airport
within IND approach airspace.

Thanks Steven, as a new Instrument rated pilot, my 'real-world'
experience with the system is pretty limited. And your right, I
assumed KIND, when the decision only mentioned Indianopolis.

I had assumed that a ground stop (or some other traffic "congestion")
was the cause for the lack of clearance into Indianapolis, but the
mention in the decision of the weather being below minimums as another
reason for not granting a clearance confused me. Assuming a ground
stop wasn't in effect (hypothetical situation where noone was going to
Indianapolis, other than our wayward pilot) would they still have
denied him a clearance because the field was below minimums?

There may have been a ground stop for traffic destined for
airports served by Indianapolis approach. If so, he can't get
a clearance for an airport within IND approach airspace.

So ground stop's would affect all aircraft headed for destinations
within a given terminal environment, not just a specific airport.
That makes sense if you figure that the reason for the ground stop is
approach control is overloaded. Adding more airplanes to the system
even if they are just stopping at a sattelite field isn't going to
help the matter.

Sorry for the naive questions. Never had a clearance denied before.

Anybody know what happened to him? Did he make it into the airport he
was going to? Or was he forced to diver someplace else? The report
only makes mention of taking off, not the eventual landing.

"bdl" wrote in message
ups.com...

Thanks Steven, as a new Instrument rated pilot, my 'real-world'
experience with the system is pretty limited. And your right, I
assumed KIND, when the decision only mentioned Indianopolis.

I had assumed that a ground stop (or some other traffic "congestion")
was the cause for the lack of clearance into Indianapolis, but the
mention in the decision of the weather being below minimums as another
reason for not granting a clearance confused me. Assuming a ground
stop wasn't in effect (hypothetical situation where noone was going to
Indianapolis, other than our wayward pilot) would they still have
denied him a clearance because the field was below minimums?


No. Weather at the destination airport is not a basis upon which to deny a
departure clearance and the controller working the departure location may
not even know what the weather is at the destination.




So ground stop's would affect all aircraft headed for destinations
within a given terminal environment, not just a specific airport.


Not necessarily, but it could.

No. Weather at the destination airport is not a basis upon
which to deny a departure clearance and the controller
working the departure location may not even know what the
weather is at the destination.

Thanks for your help.

Brian