Contact Approach -- WX reporting

Dan wrote:

Since a contact approach requires the airport to have an IFR approach,
I fail to see the advantage of a contact approach.

You're being vectored for the ILS and are on a long downwind. You see
the airport due to the fact that only the ASOS is in the clouds, or only
a portion of the airport is in the clouds, the portion with the ASOS.

Jim Macklin wrote:



On a contact approach you do not follow anybody, you are the
only airplane and you navigate to the airport directly.

You got one out of three correct here and the navigation part depends on
the clouds.




A visual approach may be instigated by the controller if the
weather is good VFR.


Just VFR is all the controller needs.




At airports without official weather reporting,
the pilot can report to ATC that visibility is such and such
and he can maintain VMC and request a contact approach, the
pilot become the weather observer.

No, must have weather reporting on the ground. From the .65: 7-4-6


b. The reported ground visibility is at least 1 statute mile.

They make no exception for flight viz.

karl gruber wrote:

One advantage (without looking at the regs so beat me up) is if you are VFR
and want to make a low weather scud run into an airport where "special VFR"
is NOT available.

Just ask the tower for a "Contact approach" instead.

Well that could get involved. You'll have to request and get an IFR
clearance. You'll then have to climb to the MVA to make that clearance
effective. That may or may not allow you to finish your scud run. I
doubt if it will.

Jim Macklin wrote:

Commercial flights are
required to be "on a flight plan" and canceling IFR even for
the last few minutes of a charter flight puts you in
violation.

Rubbish. Many commercial flights go VFR. What matters is how their ops
specs are written. Some allow VFR, some don't.




Flight visibility is solely judged by the pilot on an IFR
approach, once the first step is passed.

And the first step on a contact approach is reported ground viz of a mile.


ATC will clear any
airplane to make any approach the pilot requests.

Uh, maybe. What's the traffic picture? Go into ORD and request a VOR
approach with a procedure turn and see where that gets you.



The pilot
is not supposed to request or begin an approach if the
weather is below visibility minimums. But any pilot, Part
91,121, 125, or 135 is the only person who can judge flight
visibility and that is the controlling visibility on an IFR
approach.

Wrong. 121 and 135 pilots are not allowed to even start the approach
when the reported ground viz is below the airlines minimums. Flight viz
isn't even a question that's asked.

wrote:

Jim Macklin wrote:

A visual approach may be instigated by the controller if the
weather is good VFR.


What is good VFR?

Just VFR?

I thought MVFR or better was required for PIC request?

Is that the requirement for ATC to assign? That is to say they won't
assign in MVFR?

The weather must be VFR. Most of the time that means 1000/3 for the
approach controller. In order for the ATIS to state the visual
approaches are being conducted the ceiling must be 500 feet above the
MVA at the airport. Here at BIL that means the ceiling must be 2300 or
greater. If it is less than that and you are coming from the downwind
side of the airport we will vector you in close and drop you to the MVA
of 5300. If you report the airport we'll give you the visual, if not
you'll stay at 5300 if the approach will be to the west or you'll climb
to 5700 if the approach will be to the east.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
oups.com...

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

.. I
see no advantage then in picking up an IFR clearance in order to
request a contact approach as the minimums for a contact approach are
the same as VFR in Class G airspace.


I don't think I'd try to get a clearance from Approach Control. I'd deal
diectly with tower. I "think" I've done this...at Portland. It was handled
just like a special VFR, only it was a contact approach. It was on a scud
run down I-5 from Seattle. I know, this is an IFR clearance, but you make it
sound dificult when all it is is a tower call. PDX tower, Piper 7777Z, 5NW,
request contact approach.

Bam!...........in there.

Karl
"Curator"

Karl
"Curator"

karl gruber wrote:

I don't think I'd try to get a clearance from Approach Control. I'd deal
diectly with tower. I "think" I've done this...at Portland. It was handled
just like a special VFR, only it was a contact approach. It was on a scud
run down I-5 from Seattle. I know, this is an IFR clearance, but you make it
sound dificult when all it is is a tower call. PDX tower, Piper 7777Z, 5NW,
request contact approach.

Bam!...........in there.


It's not a tower call, it's up to whatever facility is responsible for
approach control functions.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ps.com...

Surface areas and contact approaches both
require weather observations.


Does that include automated weather observations?

"Newps" wrote in message
. ..


Well that could get involved. You'll have to request and get an IFR
clearance. You'll then have to climb to the MVA to make that clearance
effective. That may or may not allow you to finish your scud run. I
doubt if it will.


No. You can just get one from tower, JUST lke special VFR.

Karl

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
oups.com...

karl gruber wrote:

I don't think I'd try to get a clearance from Approach Control. I'd deal
diectly with tower. I "think" I've done this...at Portland. It was
handled
just like a special VFR, only it was a contact approach. It was on a scud
run down I-5 from Seattle. I know, this is an IFR clearance, but you make
it
sound dificult when all it is is a tower call. PDX tower, Piper 7777Z,
5NW,
request contact approach.

Bam!...........in there.


It's not a tower call, it's up to whatever facility is responsible for
approach control functions.


Nope, it can be a tower call. I've done it.

Karl
"Curator"