IAP through class G

Why do some airports with an instrument approach (e.g. HIE) lack a surface
Class E to protect the approach? HIE LOC 10 has Class G below 700' AGL, but
the MDA is well below that height. A plane can legally fly VFR just below a
700' ceiling along the final approach course, with no way for it to see and
avoid an approaching IFR plane, or vice versa.

--Gary

In article p_ySc.132920$eM2.100919@attbi_s51,
"Gary Drescher" wrote:

Why do some airports with an instrument approach (e.g. HIE) lack a surface
Class E to protect the approach?

It's a regulatory thing. In order to have controlled airspace to the
surface (what's known as a "surface area"), you need to have approved
weather reporting. Interestingly enough, HIE has an ASOS, which I
thought would have counted as "approved weather reporting", but maybe
not?

HIE LOC 10 has Class G below 700' AGL, but
the MDA is well below that height. A plane can legally fly VFR just below a
700' ceiling along the final approach course, with no way for it to see and
avoid an approaching IFR plane, or vice versa.

Yup. Big sky, small plane. If that sort of stuff scares you, stick to
places with surface areas. Of course, there's nothing to prevent
somebody from flying IMC illegally without a clearance, even when there
is a surface area.

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
news_ySc.132920$eM2.100919@attbi_s51...

Why do some airports with an instrument approach (e.g. HIE) lack a
surface Class E to protect the approach? HIE LOC 10 has Class G
below 700' AGL, but the MDA is well below that height. A plane can
legally fly VFR just below a 700' ceiling along the final approach
course, with no way for it to see and avoid an approaching IFR plane,
or vice versa.


Controlled airspace at the surface requires surface weather observations and
radio communications capability with ATC down to the runway surface. If you
do not have both of those an airport with an SIAP will have Class G airspace
from the surface to 700' AGL.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
hlink.net...
Controlled airspace at the surface requires surface weather observations
and
radio communications capability with ATC down to the runway surface.

HIE has both ASOS and a clearance deliveray frequency. I guess they just
want to be able to do pattern work or scud-running under a 700' ceiling.

--Gary

Gary Drescher wrote:

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
hlink.net...
Controlled airspace at the surface requires surface weather observations
and
radio communications capability with ATC down to the runway surface.

HIE has both ASOS and a clearance deliveray frequency. I guess they just
want to be able to do pattern work or scud-running under a 700' ceiling.

--Gary

As Steve said, not only does the airport have to have approved weather
reporting service and communications, the regional FAA office has to determine
a need for a Class E surface area. AOPA fights these tooth and nail as an
"airspace grab," so the FAA policy is to not establish them except under
certain circumstances. The regional FAA Flight Procedures Office is in the
best position to explain that policy to you.

wrote in message ...
As Steve said, not only does the airport have to have approved weather
reporting service and communications, the regional FAA office has to
determine
a need for a Class E surface area. AOPA fights these tooth and nail as an
"airspace grab," so the FAA policy is to not establish them except under
certain circumstances. The regional FAA Flight Procedures Office is in
the
best position to explain that policy to you.

Thanks, perhaps I'll ask them. So far all of my IMC approaches have been to
Class B, C, or D airports, so I haven't been very concerned about this
issue. But it does seem to me that the safety of being in controlled
airspace during the approach until below the MDA would outweigh the
usefulness of being able to fly VFR under a 700' ceiling (especially at HIE,
surrounded by hills and mountains).

--Gary

"Gary Drescher" wrote:
it does seem to me that the safety of being in controlled
airspace during the approach until below the MDA would outweigh the
usefulness of being able to fly VFR under a 700' ceiling (especially at HIE,
surrounded by hills and mountains).

To the IFR pilot, I'm sure having protection from those annoying VFR
types seems more important. But, the VFR guy who wants to practice
touch-and-goes from a 500 AGL pattern (or maybe even makes a living
crop-dusting, or doing pipeline patrol, or flying a med-evac chopper)
might feel differently.

It all depends upon your point of view, I guess. Nobody's forcing you
to fly into that airport in weather conditions you feel are unsafe.
Nobody's forcing you to use the MDA that's published on the chart.
Break off the approach at 700 AGL if you don't see the ground by then.
Sure, you give up a bit of operational flexibility, but you gain safety.
The choice is yours.

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 13:44:02 GMT, "Gary Drescher"
wrote:

Thanks, perhaps I'll ask them. So far all of my IMC approaches have been to
Class B, C, or D airports, so I haven't been very concerned about this
issue. But it does seem to me that the safety of being in controlled
airspace during the approach until below the MDA would outweigh the
usefulness of being able to fly VFR under a 700' ceiling (especially at HIE,
surrounded by hills and mountains).

The majority of my instrument approaches during the past three or four
years have been to airports with MDA's in uncontrolled airspace.

As a matter of fact, yesterday I setting up for an approach into my home
base, with weather in this area no better than 900/2, and there was VFR
flight going on near an airport about twenty miles from my home base. It
happened to be a SAR mission at 500'.


--ron

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
news:xzISc.134889$eM2.67516@attbi_s51...
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
hlink.net...
Controlled airspace at the surface requires surface weather observations
and
radio communications capability with ATC down to the runway surface.

HIE has both ASOS and a clearance deliveray frequency. I guess they just
want to be able to do pattern work or scud-running under a 700' ceiling.


Apparently establishing a Class E surface area has not been deemed to be in
the public interest.

That's just one of the gotchas in instrument flying...if you shoot an
approach into a field where controlled airspace stops at 700' agl you have
to be extra alert just in case. Odds are against anyone doing pattern work
in such conditions, but Murphy's Law always applies.

Bob Gardner

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
news_ySc.132920$eM2.100919@attbi_s51...
Why do some airports with an instrument approach (e.g. HIE) lack a surface
Class E to protect the approach? HIE LOC 10 has Class G below 700' AGL,
but
the MDA is well below that height. A plane can legally fly VFR just below
a
700' ceiling along the final approach course, with no way for it to see
and
avoid an approaching IFR plane, or vice versa.

--Gary