A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Instrument Flight Rules
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Completing the Non-precision approach as a Visual Approach



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 18th 03, 04:16 AM
John Clonts
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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


  #2  
Old November 18th 03, 04:40 AM
Bob Gardner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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




  #3  
Old November 18th 03, 02:23 PM
JimBob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Bob Gardner" wrote in message news:[email protected]_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.
  #4  
Old November 18th 03, 06:02 PM
John Clonts
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"JimBob" wrote in message
om...
"Bob Gardner" wrote in message

news:[email protected]_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


  #5  
Old November 18th 03, 06:56 PM
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"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.


  #6  
Old November 18th 03, 04:28 PM
Newps
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



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?

  #7  
Old November 18th 03, 05:03 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



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****."


  #8  
Old November 18th 03, 07:02 PM
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


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?


  #9  
Old November 18th 03, 07:18 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



"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?


  #10  
Old November 18th 03, 07:21 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



"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.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Question to the IFR Pilots Out There Cecil E. Chapman Instrument Flight Rules 90 November 21st 03 03:47 PM
DME req'd on ILS (not ILS-DME) approach? Don Faulkner Instrument Flight Rules 13 October 7th 03 03:54 AM
Which of these approaches is loggable? Paul Tomblin Instrument Flight Rules 26 August 16th 03 05:22 PM
Terminology of New WAAS, VNAV, LPV approach types Tarver Engineering Instrument Flight Rules 2 August 5th 03 03:50 AM
IR checkride story! Guy Elden Jr. Instrument Flight Rules 16 August 1st 03 09:03 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2023 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.