If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Wizard of Draws wrote: This doesn't seem like a prudent thing to do. If 1/2 of the airport is obscured, how would you know that the rest wouldn't fog up in less time than it took to land? IMHO, it would be best to fly the published approach and be ready to go missed. Local experience. Due to our location on top of some high terrain when we get fog we often have only half the airport 0/0. The other half literally is clear and a million. A VFR pilot can be stuck on the ground seeing his destination 60 miles away but behind you less than a 1/4 mile no approach short of an autoland will get you in. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:44:40 -0700, Newps wrote:
wrote: Never would have thought of this, but it seems plausible enough, now that you mention it. Although there is a regulation that says that the pilot is required to use a prescribed "instrument letdown" when cleared for an approach, or something like that. I wonder, would this be a violation of that? The approach gets you into conditions to land visually. Nowhere does it say you have to fly any part of the actual approach. Obviously you'll need to make sure ATC knows what you're doing. Nowhere? How abou this:? (a) Instrument approaches to civil airports. 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. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:45:57 -0700, Newps wrote:
wrote: Newps wrote: This happens all the time here. East half of the airport, including the ASOS, is 0/0. West half is clear and a million.. No contact approach allowed. Better off to do an instrument approach and just break it off as soon as you receive the clearance. Ask for the full approach if it will take you near or over the airport and then just break off and land if you can get an approach and landing clearance. Nothing says you have to actually go out and do the approach. Once a clearance for an approach is issued, the pilot is bound by the appropriate segments of the approach (Part 97) and the applicable parts of 91.175. Any "short cut" with either a contact, visual, or cancellation is a legal no-no. Baloney. Once I'm in a position to fly visually to the airport/runway I can do just that. that's not what this says, I don't think: (a) Instrument approaches to civil airports. 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. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
In a previous article, said:
(a) Instrument approaches to civil airports. 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. If you can see the runway and can land without violating VFR cloud separation rules, then the instrument letdown is no longer necessary, so this clause shouldn't apply, right? -- Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/ For their next act, they'll no doubt be buying a firewall running under NT, which makes about as much sense as building a prison out of meringue. -- Tanuki |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:49:20 +0000 (UTC),
(Paul Tomblin) wrote: In a previous article, said: (a) Instrument approaches to civil airports. 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. If you can see the runway and can land without violating VFR cloud separation rules, then the instrument letdown is no longer necessary, so this clause shouldn't apply, right? I would say not right. Under the circumstances we are discussing, the airfield is IFR, therefore, presumably, an "instrument letdown" is required, although I suppose that language can be reasonably argued to mean that IMC conditions exist. It's an interesting proposition, I think. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:49:20 +0000 (UTC),
(Paul Tomblin) wrote: In a previous article, said: (a) Instrument approaches to civil airports. 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. If you can see the runway and can land without violating VFR cloud separation rules, then the instrument letdown is no longer necessary, so this clause shouldn't apply, right? The other thing, I think, is that under the circumstances we are discussing, the pilot is cleared for a particular instrument approach. Since he has not been "otherwise authorized", presumably he would be in violation for deviating from an IFR clearance, if he just went off and flew his own home-made procedure. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:49:20 +0000 (UTC),
(Paul Tomblin) wrote: In a previous article, said: (a) Instrument approaches to civil airports. 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. If you can see the runway and can land without violating VFR cloud separation rules, then the instrument letdown is no longer necessary, so this clause shouldn't apply, right? Then, there's this language about maintaining altitude on an approach until established on a segment, and throughout all segments: (i) Operations on unpublished routes and use of radar in instrument approach procedures. When radar is approved at certain locations for ATC purposes, it may be used not only for surveillance and precision radar approaches, as applicable, but also may be used in conjunction with instrument approach procedures predicated on other types of radio navigational aids. Radar vectors may be authorized to provide course guidance through the segments of an approach to the final course or fix. When operating on an unpublished route or while being radar vectored, the pilot, when an approach clearance is received, shall, in addition to complying with §91.177, maintain the last altitude assigned to that pilot until the aircraft is established on a segment of a published route or instrument approach procedure unless a different altitude is assigned by ATC. After the aircraft is so established, published altitudes apply to descent within each succeeding route or approach segment unless a different altitude is assigned by ATC. Upon reaching the final approach course or fix, the pilot may either complete the instrument approach in accordance with a procedure approved for the facility or continue a surveillance or precision radar approach to a landing. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
In a previous article, said:
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:45:57 -0700, Newps wrote: wrote: Once a clearance for an approach is issued, the pilot is bound by the appropriate segments of the approach (Part 97) and the applicable parts of 91.175. Any "short cut" with either a contact, visual, or cancellation is a ^^^^^^^^^^^^ legal no-no. Baloney. Once I'm in a position to fly visually to the airport/runway I can do just that. that's not what this says, I don't think: (a) Instrument approaches to civil airports. 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. I don't see anything there that prohibits you from cancelling IFR when you have sufficient visibility and cloud clearance to operate under VFR. -- Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/ I would like to shake the hand of the man who first decided that e-mail clients should run arbitrary programs. Then I'd like to stir, blend and puree his hand. -- J. D. Baldwin |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
GPS approach question | Matt Whiting | Instrument Flight Rules | 30 | August 29th 08 03:54 AM |
GPS approach question | Matt Whiting | Instrument Flight Rules | 8 | November 1st 04 10:51 PM |
VOR/DME Approach Question | Chip Jones | Instrument Flight Rules | 47 | August 29th 04 05:03 AM |
Canadian holding procedures | Derrick Early | Instrument Flight Rules | 24 | July 22nd 04 04:03 PM |
Established on the approach - Checkride question | endre | Instrument Flight Rules | 59 | October 6th 03 04:36 PM |