Re: IA to Class E

[Sydney Hoeltzli]

Roy Smith wrote:
> In fact, working the numbers, I don't see how those takeoff minimums are
> possibly within TERPS limits. The 1008' tower is 4000 feet from the
> departure end of the runway, 1000 feet off the extended centerline, and
> 550 feet above the airport elevation. I make that a 550 ft/nm climb
> gradient. To put that in perspective, at 76 KIAS (Vy in an Archer or
> 172), you'd need a 980 ft/min climb rate to clear the tower (OK, you do
> a little better at Vx). How can this be legal?

Roy: perhaps this is an oversight, with the minimums predating the
tower? Have you considered calling someone to enquire about
this?

Just a suggestion,
Sydney

[Stan Gosnell]

Sydney Hoeltzli > wrote in
:

> Question is: is AF/D data available in a form which could
> be downloaded to a Palm from some source on the web?

A quick google search for 'a/fd palm' turned up several. Plus,
AOPA has similar data available, with Palm sync capability.

--
Regards,

Stan

[Stan Gosnell]

Stan Gosnell > wrote in
:

> Sydney Hoeltzli > wrote in
> :
>
>> Question is: is AF/D data available in a form which could
>> be downloaded to a Palm from some source on the web?
>
> A quick google search for 'a/fd palm' turned up several.
> Plus, AOPA has similar data available, with Palm sync
> capability.
>

BTW, you do have Copilot on the Palm, don't you?

--
Regards,

Stan

[Stan Gosnell]

Sydney Hoeltzli > wrote in
:

> Similar but not the same. For example, it doesn't indicate
> if a given airport is class G or class E, far's I can tell.
>
> Plus of course it doesn't have the other AF/D stuff --
> preferred routes, restrictions on navaid service volume
> etc.

Did you look at the others in addition to AOPA? I haven't
looked in detail, because it isn't that important to me, (my
employer supplies an A/FD and a place to keep it) but they claim
to have the full A/FD. For a price, but then everything has its
price, doesn't it?

--
Regards,

Stan

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, Sydney Hoeltzli > said:
>Similar but not the same. For example, it doesn't indicate
>if a given airport is class G or class E, far's I can tell.

What operational difference does that make? They're both uncontrolled,
right?



--
Paul Tomblin >, not speaking for anybody
Or, to put it another way, if you see a long line of rats streaming off of
a ship, the correct assumption is *not* "gosh, I bet that's a real nice
boat now that those rats are gone". - Mike Sphar

[Sydney Hoeltzli]

Paul Tomblin wrote:
> In a previous article, Sydney Hoeltzli > said:
>
>>Similar but not the same. For example, it doesn't indicate
>>if a given airport is class G or class E, far's I can tell.
>
>
> What operational difference does that make? They're both uncontrolled,
> right?

I thought you just got your IR, Paul. Shouldn't you tell me? :)

If the airport is Class G, you can cancel IFR once you're clear
of clouds and have 1 mile vis below 700 AGL. This often means
you can contact ATC in the air, and they can release another aircraft
for the approach.

If the airport is a Class E surface zone, that would be a violation.
You need "152" cloud clearance and 3 miles vis, which might mean
you need to land and find a phone to cancel and meanwhile someone
else is spinning.

Of course, there might be operational reasons why you wouldn't
wish to cancel until you're on the ground regardless, but if
you're comfortable cancelling in the air, that's the operational
difference.

Cheers,
Sydney

[Roy Smith]

In article >,
(Paul Tomblin) wrote:

> In a previous article, Sydney Hoeltzli > said:
> >Similar but not the same. For example, it doesn't indicate
> >if a given airport is class G or class E, far's I can tell.
>
> What operational difference does that make? They're both uncontrolled,
> right?
>

No, they are both untowered(*). Class E is controlled airspace, Class G
is not. From an IFR point of view, it's possible to be on an IFR
clearance in a Class E Surface Area (CESA). From a VFR point of view,
that means 1000/500/2000/3sm weather minima apply.

Operationally, that means if you're shooting an approach at the CESA
airport in IFR conditions, you're guaranteed (if everybody is playing by
the rules) that you won't find any other aircraft in flight when you
break out. If you're part-91, that may or may not matter to you (it's a
PIC decision whether you want to take the risk landing there). If
you're part-135 or 121, your op-specs may require you to be on an IFR
clearance at all times, which would preclude you from using an airport
without controlled airspace to the surface.

(*) Yes, I know, it's technically possible to have a tower at such an
airport, but it's a rare and rather strange exception.