Completing the Non-precision approach as a Visual Approach

I'm inbound on the final approach segment of the VOR-A approach at T82
(Fredericksburg Texas):

http://www.myairplane.com/databases/.../T82_vd_gA.pdf

At about 3 miles east of the airport I'm at the MDA of 2460 MSL ("766 AGL"),
mostly in a 700 foot overcast. Through a break in the clouds I clearly see
the airport-- the visibility is about 7 miles.

I descend 166 feet and am able to remain just under the cloud deck for the
final three miles, fly the right hand pattern for runway 14 at 600 AGL, and
land.

Was my descent to about 600 AGL (a) illegal because of 91.175c and/or some
other FAR, or (b) legal because I have now in effect "converted" to a visual
approach and/or am now in uncontrolled airspace (1 mile vis and clear of
clouds).

Mind you I'm not saying I did this last Tuesday, but I might have thought
about it if the conditions had been just so.

Cheers,
John Clonts
Temple, Texas
N7NZ

When you are cleared for the VOR-A you are expected to fly the
profile....fly at the MDA and not a foot lower to the missed approach point
or until you see the runway environment as defined in 91.175. When you see
the airport, you should real quick ask for a contact approach...then you can
follow ground reference and altitude is not a factor.

Bob Gardner

"John Clonts" wrote in message
.. .
I'm inbound on the final approach segment of the VOR-A approach at T82
(Fredericksburg Texas):

http://www.myairplane.com/databases/.../T82_vd_gA.pdf

At about 3 miles east of the airport I'm at the MDA of 2460 MSL ("766
AGL"),
mostly in a 700 foot overcast. Through a break in the clouds I clearly
see
the airport-- the visibility is about 7 miles.

I descend 166 feet and am able to remain just under the cloud deck for the
final three miles, fly the right hand pattern for runway 14 at 600 AGL,
and
land.

Was my descent to about 600 AGL (a) illegal because of 91.175c and/or some
other FAR, or (b) legal because I have now in effect "converted" to a
visual
approach and/or am now in uncontrolled airspace (1 mile vis and clear of
clouds).

Mind you I'm not saying I did this last Tuesday, but I might have thought
about it if the conditions had been just so.

Cheers,
John Clonts
Temple, Texas
N7NZ

"Bob Gardner" wrote in message news:bphub.176041$9E1.917544@attbi_s52...
When you are cleared for the VOR-A you are expected to fly the
profile....fly at the MDA and not a foot lower to the missed approach point
or until you see the runway environment as defined in 91.175. When you see
the airport, you should real quick ask for a contact approach...then you can
follow ground reference and altitude is not a factor.

Bob Gardner

"John Clonts" wrote in message
.. .
I'm inbound on the final approach segment of the VOR-A approach at T82
(Fredericksburg Texas):

http://www.myairplane.com/databases/.../T82_vd_gA.pdf

At about 3 miles east of the airport I'm at the MDA of 2460 MSL ("766
AGL"),
mostly in a 700 foot overcast. Through a break in the clouds I clearly
see
the airport-- the visibility is about 7 miles.
...

Cheers,
John Clonts
Temple, Texas
N7NZ


The caviat here is you need to see the runway environment to be
allowed to descend, not just the airport.

"JimBob" wrote in message
om...
"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
news:bphub.176041$9E1.917544@attbi_s52...
When you are cleared for the VOR-A you are expected to fly the
profile....fly at the MDA and not a foot lower to the missed approach
point
or until you see the runway environment as defined in 91.175. When you
see
the airport, you should real quick ask for a contact approach...then you
can
follow ground reference and altitude is not a factor.

Bob Gardner

"John Clonts" wrote in message
.. .
I'm inbound on the final approach segment of the VOR-A approach at T82
(Fredericksburg Texas):


http://www.myairplane.com/databases/.../T82_vd_gA.pdf

At about 3 miles east of the airport I'm at the MDA of 2460 MSL ("766
AGL"),
mostly in a 700 foot overcast. Through a break in the clouds I
clearly
see
the airport-- the visibility is about 7 miles.
...

Cheers,
John Clonts
Temple, Texas
N7NZ


The caviat here is you need to see the runway environment to be
allowed to descend, not just the airport.

Yes, I did. (Not much to this airport other than the runway!)

Thanks!
John

"JimBob" wrote in message
om...

The caviat here is you need to see the runway environment to be
allowed to descend, not just the airport.


True, but in this case there isn't much to the airport that is not runway
environment.

Bob Gardner wrote:

When you are cleared for the VOR-A you are expected to fly the
profile....fly at the MDA and not a foot lower to the missed approach point
or until you see the runway environment as defined in 91.175. When you see
the airport, you should real quick ask for a contact approach...then you can
follow ground reference and altitude is not a factor.

Ah, bull****. He had the runway in sight, descended and landed. What's
the problem?

Newps wrote:

Bob Gardner wrote:

When you are cleared for the VOR-A you are expected to fly the
profile....fly at the MDA and not a foot lower to the missed approach point
or until you see the runway environment as defined in 91.175. When you see
the airport, you should real quick ask for a contact approach...then you can
follow ground reference and altitude is not a factor.

Ah, bull****. He had the runway in sight, descended and landed. What's
the problem?

Well, for starters, he entered the pattern for a Runway, which sounds like
circle-to-land to me. There are some pretty specific referenes as to what you
can, and cannot do, in flying a circle-to-land.

Alas, you may consider those regulations to be "bull****."

wrote in message
...

Well, for starters, he entered the pattern for a Runway, which sounds like
circle-to-land to me.


Imagine that. Circle-to-land on a VOR-A approach.



There are some pretty specific referenes as to what you
can, and cannot do, in flying a circle-to-land.


What are they?

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

wrote in message
...

Well, for starters, he entered the pattern for a Runway, which sounds like
circle-to-land to me.


Imagine that. Circle-to-land on a VOR-A approach.


There are some pretty specific referenes as to what you
can, and cannot do, in flying a circle-to-land.


What are they?

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

wrote in message
...

Well, for starters, he entered the pattern for a Runway, which sounds like
circle-to-land to me.


Imagine that. Circle-to-land on a VOR-A approach.

Your usual fine observations aside, as you well know some IAPs with
circling-only minimums are aligned exactly with a runway but don't have
straight-in minimums because of descent gradient requirements. Usually, that
type of "alpha" approach triggers the landing requirements of 91.175 rather than
the circle-to-land requirements of 91.175.

In this case, he stated he "entered the pattern."




There are some pretty specific referenes as to what you
can, and cannot do, in flying a circle-to-land.


What are they?

They are set forth in 91.175 as you well know.