On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 13:05:42 GMT, Larry Dighera
wrote:


It would be for _PRACTICE_ IFR approaches, but not actual IFR
approaches.

and would not be conveying their position to all pilots.


I understand your concern. But if the VFR pilot on downwind hears an
aircraft report being inbound on a practice approach, he should know
that the pilot broadcasting that is about five miles out on a
straight-in, regardless of the name of the FAF.

Not necessiarily straight in for a runway. Here when you hit the FAF
on the VOR-A you are still talking to ATC at a different airport. You
drop from 2400, to 1160 MSL and some where in there get to change
frequencies and anounce your position. Be it practice or for real IFR
giving the fix , approach and position from the airport (unless it's
so bad there is no traffic in the pattern) as you will be coming in on
a heading of 137 to a circle to land on 18, 36, 06, or 24 at half the
pattern altitude. So you have the two GPS approaches with VNAV for 06
and 24 with the FAF just over 5 NM out which would e straight in plus
the VOR-A which doesn't line up with anything.

I doubt many VFR pilots flying cross country even bother to know where
and what the IFR approaches are for most of the airports they fly into
let alone the ones they pass. We had one plane load fly in to one of
our pancake breakfasts that flew right across the center of KMBS at no
more than a 1000 AGL which required an airliner to break off an
approach and go-around. (There were people waiting to talk with the
pilot when he landed here) :-))

Of course there was the day the pres was due in town and we heard
"Ahhhh... MBS approach, this is cherokee *** about 5 miles South.
There's an F-16 off my wingtip. What's going on? The TFR had been
published for some time.