Only official instrument approaches authorised under FAR?

"Julian Scarfe" wrote in message
...
"Sec. 91.703 Operations of civil aircraft of U.S. registry outside of the
United States.

(a) Each person operating a civil aircraft of U.S. registry outside
of the United States shall--
...
(2) When within a foreign country, comply with the regulations
relating to the flight and maneuver of aircraft there in force;
(3) Except for Secs. 91.307(b), 91.309, 91.323, and 91.711, comply
with this part so far as it is not inconsistent with applicable
regulations of the foreign country where the aircraft is operated or
annex 2 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation; ..."

So what's the test for something being "inconsistent with applicable
regulations"? Many regulations work as prohibitions: if Part 91
prohibits something and the regulations of the foreign country remain
silent on the issue (for example, the choice of instrument letdown), would
the N-reg aircraft still have to comply with Part 91?

Actually, *any* regulatory requirement on a pilot works as a prohibition
(that is, the pilot is prohibited from violating the requirement). So if
foreign regs were construed as "inconsistent" with a requirement simply by
virtue of their being silent (and thus not imposing the requirement
themselves), then 91.703a3 would be entirely superfluous--it would only
require compliance with US requirements that the foreign regs *also* impose,
and thus would merely reiterate 91.703a2. Since 91.703a3 presumably was not
intended to be superfluous, the only plausible interpretation is that when
the foreign regs are silent on a US requirement, the requirement is in force
for US aircraft.

--Gary

"Matt Barrow" wrote:
What would you use for terrain clearance, and what for separation from other
IFR aircraft?

SIAPs offer terrain clearance, which is why they are mandated.

Clearances are what offer separation from other aircraft, and are not
available in CGAS. In CGAS, IFR flights are afforded no separation
services from ATC.

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
"Matt Barrow" wrote:
What would you use for terrain clearance, and what for separation from
other
IFR aircraft?

SIAPs offer terrain clearance, which is why they are mandated.

He's talking about doing an approach without an official SIAP.

Clearances are what offer separation from other aircraft, and are not
available in CGAS. In CGAS, IFR flights are afforded no separation
services from ATC.

Re-read his question.

"Peter" wrote in message
...

FAR 91.175 (a) suggests that it is not permitted to carry out a
descent in IMC except on an official published IAP.

Any views on this?


FAR 91.175 (a) suggests nothing, it states, "Unless otherwise authorized by
the Administrator, when an instrument letdown to a civil airport is
necessary, each person operating an aircraft, except a military aircraft of
the United States, shall use a standard instrument approach procedure
prescribed for the airport in part 97 of this chapter."



How would it differ if the entire procedure was done in Class G?


It wouldn't differ in any way, the regulation is not limited by class of
airspace.