Minimums?

On Jan 10, 2:04*pm, Peter Clark
wrote:

For part 91 ops, you only need to have the required inflight
visibility.

Don't you have to have ceiling and visibility, or at least the laundry
list from 91.175(c)(3)(i) to proceed to 100' ATDZE? *I'm thinking
airport in a valley with fog yet you're at the DH and still above the
layer.

Pete, In the USA ceiling is not a requirement. I dont do part 91 IFR
stuff very often, but as I recall you can still go down and have a
look no mater what the WX is reporting.
Frank

On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 13:31:08 -0800 (PST), "F. Baum"
wrote:

On Jan 10, 2:04*pm, Peter Clark
wrote:

For part 91 ops, you only need to have the required inflight
visibility.

Don't you have to have ceiling and visibility, or at least the laundry
list from 91.175(c)(3)(i) to proceed to 100' ATDZE? *I'm thinking
airport in a valley with fog yet you're at the DH and still above the
layer.

Pete, In the USA ceiling is not a requirement. I dont do part 91 IFR
stuff very often, but as I recall you can still go down and have a
look no mater what the WX is reporting.

Unlike part 121 and 131, under part 91 you can go ahead and initiate
an approach with the airport reporting under minimums, but isn't, say,
200/1 a ceiling and visibility requirement?

On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 16:33:32 -0500, Peter Clark
wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 13:31:08 -0800 (PST), "F. Baum"
wrote:

On Jan 10, 2:04*pm, Peter Clark
wrote:

For part 91 ops, you only need to have the required inflight
visibility.

Don't you have to have ceiling and visibility, or at least the laundry
list from 91.175(c)(3)(i) to proceed to 100' ATDZE? *I'm thinking
airport in a valley with fog yet you're at the DH and still above the
layer.

Pete, In the USA ceiling is not a requirement. I dont do part 91 IFR
stuff very often, but as I recall you can still go down and have a
look no mater what the WX is reporting.

Unlike part 121 and 131, under part 91 you can go ahead and initiate
an approach with the airport reporting under minimums, but isn't, say,
200/1 a ceiling and visibility requirement?

Oops, correction, part 135.

On Jan 10, 2:33*pm, Peter Clark
wrote:

Unlike part 121 and 131, under part 91 you can go ahead and initiate
an approach with the airport reporting under minimums, but isn't, say,
200/1 a ceiling and visibility requirement?

I think the 200 is just denoting the HAT or HAA for a non precision
approach.

On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 13:53:20 -0800 (PST), "F. Baum"
wrote:

On Jan 10, 2:33*pm, Peter Clark
wrote:

Unlike part 121 and 131, under part 91 you can go ahead and initiate
an approach with the airport reporting under minimums, but isn't, say,
200/1 a ceiling and visibility requirement?

I think the 200 is just denoting the HAT or HAA for a non precision
approach.

At which point you either need to be under the ceiling and have 1SM
visibility, or are you saying that at 200' AGL I can be looking at the
top of a 100' layer with 10SM visibility, descend through it, and land
even though I don't have the required items from 91.175?

OK. Hmm. Open FAR..

(c) Operation below DH or MDA. Where a DH or MDA is applicable, no
pilot may operate an aircraft, except a military aircraft of the
United States, at any airport below the authorized MDA or continue an
approach below the authorized DH unless --

(1) The aircraft is continuously in a position from which a descent to
a landing on the intended runway can be made at a normal rate of
descent using normal maneuvers, and for operations conducted under
part 121 or part 135 unless that descent rate will allow touchdown to
occur within the touchdown zone of the runway of intended landing;

(2) The flight visibility is not less than the visibility prescribed
in the standard instrument approach being used; and

(3) Except for a Category II or Category III approach where any
necessary visual reference requirements are specified by the
Administrator, at least one of the following visual references for the
intended runway is distinctly visible and identifiable to the pilot:

(i) The approach light system, except that the pilot may not descend
below 100 feet above the touchdown zone elevation using the approach
lights as a reference unless the red terminating bars or the red side
row bars are also distinctly visible and identifiable.

(ii) The threshold.

(iii) The threshold markings.

(iv) The threshold lights.

(v) The runway end identifier lights.

(vi) The visual approach slope indicator.

(vii) The touchdown zone or touchdown zone markings.

(viii) The touchdown zone lights.

(ix) The runway or runway markings.

(x) The runway lights.

OK, 'ceiling' isn't listed. But effectively the 200 becomes a
ceiling, if you're over an undercast or fog layer you can't see the
visual references regardless of visibility, and if you're at the DH
and are still in the clouds you don't have the flight visibility.

Your logic is impeccable, but the FAA took "ceiling" out of the equation
back in the 60's.

Bob Gardner

"Peter Clark" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 13:53:20 -0800 (PST), "F. Baum"
wrote:

On Jan 10, 2:33 pm, Peter Clark
wrote:

Unlike part 121 and 131, under part 91 you can go ahead and initiate
an approach with the airport reporting under minimums, but isn't, say,
200/1 a ceiling and visibility requirement?

I think the 200 is just denoting the HAT or HAA for a non precision
approach.

At which point you either need to be under the ceiling and have 1SM
visibility, or are you saying that at 200' AGL I can be looking at the
top of a 100' layer with 10SM visibility, descend through it, and land
even though I don't have the required items from 91.175?

OK. Hmm. Open FAR..

(c) Operation below DH or MDA. Where a DH or MDA is applicable, no
pilot may operate an aircraft, except a military aircraft of the
United States, at any airport below the authorized MDA or continue an
approach below the authorized DH unless --

(1) The aircraft is continuously in a position from which a descent to
a landing on the intended runway can be made at a normal rate of
descent using normal maneuvers, and for operations conducted under
part 121 or part 135 unless that descent rate will allow touchdown to
occur within the touchdown zone of the runway of intended landing;

(2) The flight visibility is not less than the visibility prescribed
in the standard instrument approach being used; and

(3) Except for a Category II or Category III approach where any
necessary visual reference requirements are specified by the
Administrator, at least one of the following visual references for the
intended runway is distinctly visible and identifiable to the pilot:

(i) The approach light system, except that the pilot may not descend
below 100 feet above the touchdown zone elevation using the approach
lights as a reference unless the red terminating bars or the red side
row bars are also distinctly visible and identifiable.

(ii) The threshold.

(iii) The threshold markings.

(iv) The threshold lights.

(v) The runway end identifier lights.

(vi) The visual approach slope indicator.

(vii) The touchdown zone or touchdown zone markings.

(viii) The touchdown zone lights.

(ix) The runway or runway markings.

(x) The runway lights.

OK, 'ceiling' isn't listed. But effectively the 200 becomes a
ceiling, if you're over an undercast or fog layer you can't see the
visual references regardless of visibility, and if you're at the DH
and are still in the clouds you don't have the flight visibility.

"F. Baum" wrote in news:7a1f4dfd-626e-4cb5-a7fb-
:

On Jan 10, 2:04*pm, Peter Clark
wrote:

For part 91 ops, you only need to have the required inflight
visibility.

Don't you have to have ceiling and visibility, or at least the laundry
list from 91.175(c)(3)(i) to proceed to 100' ATDZE? *I'm thinking
airport in a valley with fog yet you're at the DH and still above the
layer.

Pete, In the USA ceiling is not a requirement. I dont do part 91 IFR
stuff very often, but as I recall you can still go down and have a
look no mater what the WX is reporting.

Been ages since I did a 91 approach, but unless they've changed it you are
allowed to initiarte an approach in any wx you like and if you see what's
required at the MDA or DH you can land from it.
As opposed to our restriction of having to hve in excess of vis minima
prior to reaching the FAF or OM as the case may be. Once past that, you can
continue to DH if the reported vis is below minimums.
Ceiling is only factored for diversion unless I'm mistaken..

Bertie

Peter Clark wrote in
:

On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 13:53:20 -0800 (PST), "F. Baum"
wrote:

On Jan 10, 2:33*pm, Peter Clark
wrote:

Unlike part 121 and 131, under part 91 you can go ahead and initiate
an approach with the airport reporting under minimums, but isn't,
say,
200/1 a ceiling and visibility requirement?

I think the 200 is just denoting the HAT or HAA for a non precision
approach.

At which point you either need to be under the ceiling and have 1SM
visibility, or are you saying that at 200' AGL I can be looking at the
top of a 100' layer with 10SM visibility, descend through it, and land
even though I don't have the required items from 91.175?

OK. Hmm. Open FAR..

(c) Operation below DH or MDA. Where a DH or MDA is applicable, no
pilot may operate an aircraft, except a military aircraft of the
United States, at any airport below the authorized MDA or continue an
approach below the authorized DH unless --

(1) The aircraft is continuously in a position from which a descent to
a landing on the intended runway can be made at a normal rate of
descent using normal maneuvers, and for operations conducted under
part 121 or part 135 unless that descent rate will allow touchdown to
occur within the touchdown zone of the runway of intended landing;

(2) The flight visibility is not less than the visibility prescribed
in the standard instrument approach being used; and

(3) Except for a Category II or Category III approach where any
necessary visual reference requirements are specified by the
Administrator, at least one of the following visual references for the
intended runway is distinctly visible and identifiable to the pilot:

(i) The approach light system, except that the pilot may not descend
below 100 feet above the touchdown zone elevation using the approach
lights as a reference unless the red terminating bars or the red side
row bars are also distinctly visible and identifiable.

(ii) The threshold.

(iii) The threshold markings.

(iv) The threshold lights.

(v) The runway end identifier lights.

(vi) The visual approach slope indicator.

(vii) The touchdown zone or touchdown zone markings.

(viii) The touchdown zone lights.

(ix) The runway or runway markings.

(x) The runway lights.

OK, 'ceiling' isn't listed. But effectively the 200 becomes a
ceiling, if you're over an undercast or fog layer you can't see the
visual references regardless of visibility, and if you're at the DH
and are still in the clouds you don't have the flight visibility.


You can have the "ceiling" donw on the deck and still be able to see the
runway clearly in 1/4 mile. All you need is the runway environment in
sight to continue at that stage. It's both legal and do-able.


Bertie

On Jan 10, 3:01*pm, Peter Clark
wrote:

I think the 200 is just denoting the HAT or HAA for a non precision
approach.

At which point you either need to be under the ceiling and have 1SM
visibility, or are you saying that at 200' AGL I can be looking at the
top of a 100' layer with 10SM visibility, descend through it, and land
even though I don't have the required items from 91.175?

Pete, You dont have to be "Under the ceiling". If you are asking me ,
all you need is the inflight visibility (For part 91 and cat1 part 121
you can determine this) and the approach lights at the DA to continue.
My point from the previous post was that the part 91 guys can depart
the FAF and have a look see if the reported vis is below mins.

OK. Hmm. *Open FAR..


OK, 'ceiling' isn't listed. *But effectively the 200 becomes a
ceiling,

Thanks for posting the FAR. If you take a look at how ceiling is
measured, it becomes pretty much meaningless as far as minimums are
considered. This is why it is not a requirement or everyone would be
busting mins all the time.

FB

On Jan 9, 5:01*pm, Brian wrote:
While watching a lot of landing videos and whatnot, I hear "minimums"
called out as an aircraft approaches its landing field.

From what I've been told, "minimums" indicates the decision as to
whether or not the field is in sight, correct?

so if minimums are not met, go around? Am I right in assuming this?