Instrument departure, non-IFR airport

Newps wrote:


Sam Spade wrote:


If controlled airspace was not involved you could do what you want.
But, the rub comes in them providing you a clearance into (presumably
1200-foot floor Class E airspace without some procedure that assures
obstacle clearance until reaching the minimum IFR altitude.


Not ATC's problem. That's 100% on the pilot.


I know what you're saying, but I really do wonder. I guess it varies
with the facility. SCT has been known to get spooked about such things.

In any case, the OP went back to SCT and found out they don't want their
airspace clobbered with an airport in a really tight airspace situation.

Sam Spade wrote:


I know what you're saying, but I really do wonder. I guess it varies
with the facility. SCT has been known to get spooked about such things.

In any case, the OP went back to SCT and found out they don't want their
airspace clobbered with an airport in a really tight airspace situation.

That's perfectly understandable because you might end up shutting down a
busy airport for one lousy IFR departure. But that's the reason and why
they wouldn't just tell somebody that is difficult to understand.

On Mar 2, 4:13 pm, Newps wrote:
Sam Spade wrote:

I know what you're saying, but I really do wonder. I guess it varies
with the facility. SCT has been known to get spooked about such things.

In any case, the OP went back to SCT and found out they don't want their
airspace clobbered with an airport in a really tight airspace situation.

That's perfectly understandable because you might end up shutting down a
busy airport for one lousy IFR departure. But that's the reason and why
they wouldn't just tell somebody that is difficult to understand.

But does SCT have the authority to refuse service to an airport
because of inconvenience? They can certainly delay a departure, but
outright refuse? What if its the middle of the night and there is
very little traffic?

And what if someone crashed trying to scud run to Riverside because an
IFR departure were refused? Wouldn't that get the TRACON manager in
trouble?

wrote:



And what if someone crashed trying to scud run to Riverside because an
IFR departure were refused? Wouldn't that get the TRACON manager in
trouble?

Why would it? That makes the pilot sound like a victim.

On Mar 3, 4:22 am, Sam Spade wrote:
wrote:

And what if someone crashed trying to scud run to Riverside because an
IFR departure were refused? Wouldn't that get the TRACON manager in
trouble?

Why would it? That makes the pilot sound like a victim.

Victim is taking it a bit far. I was thinking more along the lines of
a denied IFR clearance being identified as contributing to an accident
specifically because the OP was told to get a special VFR clearance to
Riverside. And if you're worried about terrain, usually an IFR
clearance will allow you to climb higher than a special VFR clearance
in Class D airspace.

I was thinking more along the lines of
a denied IFR clearance being identified as contributing to an accident
specifically because the OP was told to get a special VFR clearance to
Riverside.

As far as I know SVFR cannot be suggested by the controller. It has to
be requested by the pilot.

Jose
--
Humans are pack animals. Above all things, they have a deep need to
follow something, be it a leader, a creed, or a mob. Whosoever fully
understands this holds the world in his hands.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

wrote:

On Mar 3, 4:22 am, Sam Spade wrote:

wrote:


And what if someone crashed trying to scud run to Riverside because an
IFR departure were refused? Wouldn't that get the TRACON manager in
trouble?

Why would it? That makes the pilot sound like a victim.


Victim is taking it a bit far. I was thinking more along the lines of
a denied IFR clearance being identified as contributing to an accident
specifically because the OP was told to get a special VFR clearance to
Riverside. And if you're worried about terrain, usually an IFR
clearance will allow you to climb higher than a special VFR clearance
in Class D airspace.


I can't imagine ATC denying an IFR clearance then issuing a special VFR
clearance unless the pilot requested it.

I think the OP was advised of his options during a discussion about the
issues at Flabob.

On Mar 4, 6:15 am, Sam Spade wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 3, 4:22 am, Sam Spade wrote:

wrote:

And what if someone crashed trying to scud run to Riverside because an
IFR departure were refused? Wouldn't that get the TRACON manager in
trouble?

Why would it? That makes the pilot sound like a victim.

Victim is taking it a bit far. I was thinking more along the lines of
a denied IFR clearance being identified as contributing to an accident
specifically because the OP was told to get a special VFR clearance to
Riverside. And if you're worried about terrain, usually an IFR
clearance will allow you to climb higher than a special VFR clearance
in Class D airspace.

I can't imagine ATC denying an IFR clearance then issuing a special VFR
clearance unless the pilot requested it.

I think the OP was advised of his options during a discussion about the
issues at Flabob.


Correct. The context was a telephone call about available options for
departing Flabob and [eventually] getting on an IFR flight plan.

wrote in message
ps.com...

But does SCT have the authority to refuse service to an airport
because of inconvenience? They can certainly delay a departure, but
outright refuse? What if its the middle of the night and there is
very little traffic?

And what if someone crashed trying to scud run to Riverside because an
IFR departure were refused? Wouldn't that get the TRACON manager in
trouble?


FAAO 7110.65 still requires controllers to "provide air traffic control
service to aircraft on a 'first come, first served' basis as circumstances
permit". Denying a departure clearance due to conflicting traffic is
entirely proper, but that's not the situation here. "No instrument
departure, no clearances on the ground.", as expressed by the FSDO, is
simply wrong.

Newps wrote:


Sam Spade wrote:



I know what you're saying, but I really do wonder. I guess it varies
with the facility. SCT has been known to get spooked about such things.

In any case, the OP went back to SCT and found out they don't want
their airspace clobbered with an airport in a really tight airspace
situation.


That's perfectly understandable because you might end up shutting down a
busy airport for one lousy IFR departure. But that's the reason and why
they wouldn't just tell somebody that is difficult to understand.

I also have serious heartburn with some "SOP" obstacle departure
procedure that probably was not "Terpsed" by AVN. Once ATC issues that
puppy they put the FAA on the hook for departure obstacle clearance.