A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Instrument Flight Rules
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Minimum Safe Altitude (MSA) Standards



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old March 7th 04, 04:24 AM
Teacherjh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


MSA is defined in the AIM as "altitudes depicted on approach charts
which provide at least 1,000 feet of obstacle clearance." So, if an MSA
is 3000 ft, does that necesarily mean that there is at least one
obstacle in the area that is 2000 ft tall or could there be some other
reason for the 3000 ft setting?


"at least" means "no less than, but maybe more than, though maybe not". So, it
does not necessarily mean that there is at least one obstacle 2000 ft tall. I
don't know the actual criteria for designing these things, but wherever there
is wiggle room, expect something to wiggle and you'll be safe.


While I am at it, is there any easy way to find the obstacle in a quad
of VFR sectional that makes the quad's Maximum Elevation Feature (MEF)
at the level that is at. It is a bit of a pain to search the quad's
entire area to find that one tower


Nope. And even if you found that one tower, you are still left with that other
tower that is two feet lower, but in a different area. And the hill that
doesn't have a tower, but it tall enough by itself to qualify as the third
highest elevation (by only fourteen feet), so only has a dot.

Besides, not all towers are indicated on the chart. They say so explicitly.

You'll need to study the sectional anyway to check for parachute areas, MOAs,
ATAs, landmarks, wires, frequencies, and all sorts of other things relevant to
VFR flight and even IFR flight for that matter, especially if you are going to
graze the trees, as I like to (for the view).

Jose



--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) Rich Stowell Aerobatics 28 January 2nd 09 02:26 PM
Reasoning behind course reversal Michael 182 Instrument Flight Rules 26 February 27th 04 03:27 PM
Requirement to fly departure procedures [email protected] Instrument Flight Rules 77 October 15th 03 06:39 PM
GPS Altitude with WAAS Phil Verghese Instrument Flight Rules 42 October 5th 03 12:39 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.