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 |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Circle to Land @ KRBG
Jim Macklin wrote:
The FAA will establish controlled airspace as part of the authorization of an IAP. The FAA must have control of airspace in order to issue a clearance, Class G does not meet that requirement. We seem to have a problem, my experience is just what I've said... 8,000 hours;FAR 141 former chief flight instructor, FAR 135 Director of Operations, single-pilot IFR in all models King Air 90 ,200 and 300 and other ASEL/AMEL Beech aircraft. Gold Seal CFI ASMEI. No violations. What do you have? What do you think I'm fibbing about? I've met a lot (too many, actually) pilots who have similar such credentials and, alas, who never really mastered some of the finer points of airspace. EVERY IAP at a CLass E airport (excepting those with Class E surface areas) that has a MDA or DA with a HAT (or HAA for circling) of less than 700 feet has some portion of the final approach and missed approach segments in Glass G airspace. You are correct in that ATC cannot issue IFR clearances in Class G airspace. But, when you are cleared for an approach to an airport with an MDA or DA well below Class E airspace, you are not yet in Class G airspace, thus the clearance is proper. It is up to you to not descend below the floor of Class E airspace in the final approach segment, if you choose to remain in Class E airspace. That is not a concern for ATC. OTOH, if you are issued a departure clearance from such an airport, it will contain the caveat "...upon entering controlled airspace.." because you are in Class G airspace when issued the departure clearance. |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Circle to Land @ KRBG
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Jose" wrote in message t... I'm just curious - have you ever learned from these discussions? Probably. I engage in a lot of discussions here so chances are I've learned something I hadn't known before through them but I can't recall any specific example off the top of my head. I have the same problem. I like to think I am perfect but I carry the baggage of knowing I was wrong one time in my life; that was the time I thought I was wrong when actually I was right. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Circle to Land @ KRBG
Roy Smith wrote:
Sam Spade wrote: Gary Drescher wrote: So seeing and avoiding during an instrument approach does not amount to some sort of IFR-VFR hybrid. Rather, it is just IFR. --Gary Then, there is a TCAS RA during IMC. The IFR track, whether it be a route or a terminal procedure, must be compromised to the extent necessary to resolve the RA. Yikes! I hope the TCAS processors are terrain aware. Does TCAS give track instructions? I though all RA's were either "climb now" or "descend now". The TCAS processors certainly aren't terrain aware, but the TAWS is. On an instrument approach or departure procedure, descent is not an option. With an aircraft in approach or landing configuration the only option might be to turn away from the conflict. No doubt, it can get a bit ugly. Hopefully, if it's IMC the alert won't occur during a departure or approach. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Circle to Land @ KRBG
yep
"Sam Spade" wrote in message news:dyP%f.34407$bm6.1633@fed1read04... | Jim Macklin wrote: | The FAA will establish controlled airspace as part of the | authorization of an IAP. The FAA must have control of | airspace in order to issue a clearance, Class G does not | meet that requirement. | | We seem to have a problem, my experience is just what I've | said... | 8,000 hours;FAR 141 former chief flight instructor, FAR 135 | Director of Operations, single-pilot IFR in all models King | Air 90 ,200 and 300 and other ASEL/AMEL Beech aircraft. | Gold Seal CFI ASMEI. No violations. | | What do you have? What do you think I'm fibbing about? | | | I've met a lot (too many, actually) pilots who have similar such | credentials and, alas, who never really mastered some of the finer | points of airspace. | | EVERY IAP at a CLass E airport (excepting those with Class E surface | areas) that has a MDA or DA with a HAT (or HAA for circling) of less | than 700 feet has some portion of the final approach and missed approach | segments in Glass G airspace. | | You are correct in that ATC cannot issue IFR clearances in Class G | airspace. But, when you are cleared for an approach to an airport with | an MDA or DA well below Class E airspace, you are not yet in Class G | airspace, thus the clearance is proper. It is up to you to not descend | below the floor of Class E airspace in the final approach segment, if | you choose to remain in Class E airspace. That is not a concern for ATC. | | OTOH, if you are issued a departure clearance from such an airport, it | will contain the caveat "...upon entering controlled airspace.." because | you are in Class G airspace when issued the departure clearance. |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Circle to Land @ KRBG
"Jose" wrote in message news How is that following IFR (Instrument flight rules) and VFR (visual flight rules) at the same time? I suppose it's not, really. VFR is a set of rules (altitudes, visibilities and cloud clearances) designed around that principle, to make it reasonable to do. You are right, they cannot technically both be followed at the same time. I think what Jim is getting at: If the weather was as good as you say, there is no prohibition on operating under IFR and VFR at the same time is that one can, while remaining on an IFR flight plan, circle to land via a VFR traffic pattern if the weather would permit ordinary VFR traffic to do that. He appears to claim (and I find reasonable) that this would not violate the "circling to the {whatever} prohibited". I suppose the FAA might differ, which raises the question - when you maneuver under an IFR flight plan at the end of an approach that is not straight in, is it always considered "circling" even if the maneuvering is well above the MDA and within the VFR traffic pattern? Any cases to support supporting the prohibition? Jose -- The price of freedom is... well... freedom. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. Well said, Jose. Al |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Circle to Land @ KRBG
Roy Smith wrote:
In article kUM%f.29991$bm6.27382@fed1read04, Sam Spade wrote: Jim Macklin wrote: 5-4-24. Contact Approach 2. The reported ground visibility at the destination airport is at least 1 statute mile. Reported ground visibility is what matters to ATC. Even then ATC is under no obligation to grant your request for a contact approach. It depends upon the overall traffic picture and controller workload. Does it depend on whether the controller has dimples on his butt? The gentleman makes it sound like a contact approach is a given if the pilot wants it. What part of that don't you understand? |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Circle to Land @ KRBG
"Jose" wrote in message news I suppose it's not, really. VFR is a set of rules (altitudes, visibilities and cloud clearances) designed around that principle, to make it reasonable to do. You are right, they cannot technically both be followed at the same time. Well, they cannot both be followed while on approach, that's why I made the distinction. But there is one situation where they can be followed simultaneously. If you're on a VFR-on-top clearance FAR 91.179, an Instrument Flight Rule, requires compliance with FAR 91.159, a Visual Flight Rule. I think what Jim is getting at: If the weather was as good as you say, there is no prohibition on operating under IFR and VFR at the same time is that one can, while remaining on an IFR flight plan, circle to land via a VFR traffic pattern if the weather would permit ordinary VFR traffic to do that. He appears to claim (and I find reasonable) that this would not violate the "circling to the {whatever} prohibited". I suppose the FAA might differ, which raises the question - when you maneuver under an IFR flight plan at the end of an approach that is not straight in, is it always considered "circling" even if the maneuvering is well above the MDA and within the VFR traffic pattern? Any cases to support supporting the prohibition? None that I'm aware of. I don't see how it could become an issue. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Circle to land question | A Lieberman | Instrument Flight Rules | 33 | May 24th 05 04:22 AM |
Confused about great circle navigation | xerj | Piloting | 7 | July 10th 04 05:38 PM |
R in a Circle (Airport Surveillance Radar) on VFR charts | Jeff Saylor | Piloting | 66 | May 12th 04 04:05 PM |
Defensive circle | Dave Eadsforth | Military Aviation | 23 | October 9th 03 06:13 PM |
NACO charts - why have a reference circle? | Bob Gardner | Instrument Flight Rules | 5 | September 6th 03 01:15 PM |