Ron Rosenfeld
December 20th 06, 01:00 PM
On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 11:50:26 +0000, Peter > wrote:
>This is the reg which prevents flying instrument approaches unless it
>is a published one.
>
>In the UK, this is not illegal (on G-reg aircraft). But then we don't
>get the radar services here, etc.
>
>In the USA, there are GPS approaches, and there are many more
>instrument approaches anyway.
>
>At the *practical* level, I am curious to what extent the FAA enforces
>this regulation. I suppose this question is relevant only in the
>context of airports which don't have a published IAP - I don't know
>what % this is in the USA.
I don't know about how vigorously violations of the rule are sought out.
But I believe that if a violation came to the attention of the FAA, it
would be pursued. 91.175, of course, is concerned with many more issues
than just the existence of a published IAP. And it does allow the use of
private IAP's under certain circumstances.
I'm surprised that you can devise your own IAP's in GB without oversight.
>Pilots tend to fly descents using a GPS, etc.
I generally use changes in power, airspeed and a/c configuration to fly a
descent <g>. I've not found any GPS control that accomplishes this.
In the US, there is always a minimum altitude to which you can descend
under IFR, even without an IAP. It may be as low as 1000' AGL. This can be
useful in landing at airports with no published IAP.
Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)
>This is the reg which prevents flying instrument approaches unless it
>is a published one.
>
>In the UK, this is not illegal (on G-reg aircraft). But then we don't
>get the radar services here, etc.
>
>In the USA, there are GPS approaches, and there are many more
>instrument approaches anyway.
>
>At the *practical* level, I am curious to what extent the FAA enforces
>this regulation. I suppose this question is relevant only in the
>context of airports which don't have a published IAP - I don't know
>what % this is in the USA.
I don't know about how vigorously violations of the rule are sought out.
But I believe that if a violation came to the attention of the FAA, it
would be pursued. 91.175, of course, is concerned with many more issues
than just the existence of a published IAP. And it does allow the use of
private IAP's under certain circumstances.
I'm surprised that you can devise your own IAP's in GB without oversight.
>Pilots tend to fly descents using a GPS, etc.
I generally use changes in power, airspeed and a/c configuration to fly a
descent <g>. I've not found any GPS control that accomplishes this.
In the US, there is always a minimum altitude to which you can descend
under IFR, even without an IAP. It may be as low as 1000' AGL. This can be
useful in landing at airports with no published IAP.
Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)