Rogue IFR

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
k.net...
Don't they fly IFR in IMC without radar separation in the UK all the time?

Without *any* ATC separation, in uncontrolled (class G) airspace. Yes, we
do, though it's worth bearing in mind that it's usually only done when there
is no ATC service or advisory service available.

The issue with flight in IMC is supposedly that you can't see and avoid
other traffic. The converse assumption that underpins the concept of class
E airspace is that in VMC you *will* see and avoid other traffic, even
without help from ATC or TCAS. Success in that game has been shown by both
accident reports and scientific research to be very much less than perfect,
perhaps even less than 50%. Given that the density of uncontrolled traffic
in IMC is likely to be much lower than in VMC, the relative levels of risk
are not obvious.

Julian Scarfe

"David Megginson" wrote in message
...
David Gunter writes:

If this pilot were to call in to request a landing would the
controller be obligated to report this? I know where to find the
regs governing pilots but don't think my AIM/FAR manual has the
controller's regs.

I think that they'd simply deny the VFR aircraft clearance to enter
the control zone.

I think that a controller would be very reluctant to deny an SVFR clearance
into the zone. (Unless the weather at the field was below IFR minimums.)
Maybe a controller here can comment.

le moo

In article , Roger Long wrote:

It occurs to me that this guy would never have been doing this if the GPS
hadn't been invented. He just watches the gauges and follows the little
pointer until he see the airport.

This has been going on long before GPS. Check out this sad story:

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...14X43777&key=1

And that's just one example.

David Megginson writes:

I don't think people are usually worried about being a mile or two off
course enroute.

It's pretty easy to be off by that when using VOR navigation, unless one
is careful. The further away the VOR station, the easier it becomes.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

"Happy Dog" writes:

I think that they'd simply deny the VFR aircraft clearance to enter
the control zone.

I think that a controller would be very reluctant to deny an SVFR
clearance into the zone. (Unless the weather at the field was below
IFR minimums.) Maybe a controller here can comment.

That's what I had understood as the original question -- what would
happen when the rouge IFR tried to land at a towered airport in IMC.


All the best,


David

Mxsmanic writes:

I don't think people are usually worried about being a mile or two off
course enroute.

It's pretty easy to be off by that when using VOR navigation, unless one
is careful. The further away the VOR station, the easier it becomes.

Exactly my point -- the reason for RAIM enroute is not to find out if
you're a mile or two off course, but to have assurance that the GPS is
working. If you have some other means of navigation (looking out the
window, VOR, ADF, etc.) then it's not a big concern; if the GPS is
sole means, you want some way to be sure it's working.


All the best,


David

On 2003-10-25 06:21:05 -0700, (null) said:

If this pilot were to call in to request a landing would the controller
be obligated to report this? I know where to find the regs governing
pilots but don't think my AIM/FAR manual has the controller's regs.

The controller will handle it in accordance with the usual rules for the conditions that exist - VFR or SFVR. It's up to the pilot to adhere to the minimum visibility and cloud clearance requirements. Controllers are not cops.

David Gunter wrote:

I do have a question: What would happen if this rogue pilot who is
flying VFR in solid IMC were to land at a towered airport such as we
have in Santa Fe?

Without talking to the tower? Sounds like the tower controller will
have some paperwork to do.


SAF has no radar but the controller is in front of the
windows and knows for certain what the weather is like around the airport.

Around the airport is irrelavant. At the airport is the only thing that
matters.



If this pilot were to call in to request a landing would the controller
be obligated to report this?

The controller would say "the field is IFR say intentions." This is the
pilots warning that you can't land VFR, in case you somehow didn't get
the weather. If he comes back and says "I want to land." then I get to
treat him like the idiot he is. He will not get a landing clearance.
He will have to ask for either a SVFR or an instrument clearance. I have
never seen this situation happen at a towered field because these guys
know this is what happens. So they stick to the uncontrolled fields.

Happy Dog wrote:


I think that they'd simply deny the VFR aircraft clearance to enter
the control zone.


I think that a controller would be very reluctant to deny an SVFR clearance
into the zone. (Unless the weather at the field was below IFR minimums.)
Maybe a controller here can comment.

You have to have a mile viz to get a SVFR. Class D's normally do not
have radar so you have to get your SVFR from whoever runs the approach
control, although I have gotten SVFR's from class D towers immediately
upon request so I could tell they had some kind of agreement with the
approach control. A controller wouldn't hesitate to deny a SVFR
clearance if traffic won't permit it. The minimums for any instrument
approach do not factor into the equation.

David Megginson wrote:



That's what I had understood as the original question -- what would
happen when the rouge IFR tried to land at a towered airport in IMC.

He wouldn't get a clearance.