IFR Alternate Requirement

To my knowledge, in the US one must file an alternate IFR airport
regardless of the weather if the destination airport does not have an
IFR approach. Can someone please quote me the FAA regulation where
this is actually spelled out? Thanks!

Gerd

On 11 May 2005 08:15:28 -0700, "gwengler"
wrote:

To my knowledge, in the US one must file an alternate IFR airport
regardless of the weather if the destination airport does not have an
IFR approach. Can someone please quote me the FAA regulation where
this is actually spelled out? Thanks!

Gerd


Sec. 91.169 IFR flight plan: Information required.

(a) Information required. Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, each
person
filing an IFR flight plan shall include in it the following
information:
(1) Information required under Sec. 91.153(a).
(2) An alternate airport, except as provided in paragraph (b) of
this
section.
(b) Exceptions to applicability of paragraph (a)(2) of this
section.
Paragraph (a)(2) of this section does not apply if part 97 of this
chapter
prescribes a standard instrument approach procedure for the first
airport of
intended landing and, for at least 1 hour before and 1 hour after
the
estimated time of arrival, the weather reports or forecasts, or any
combination of them, indicate--
(1) The ceiling will be at least 2,000 feet above the airport
elevation;
and
(2) The visibility will be at least 3 statute miles.
(c) IFR alternate airport weather minimums.


etc,,,

In article .com,
gwengler wrote:
To my knowledge, in the US one must file an alternate IFR airport
regardless of the weather if the destination airport does not have an
IFR approach. Can someone please quote me the FAA regulation where
this is actually spelled out? Thanks!

91.169(b). It's a little confusing, since it's worded as an
exception. If your destination does not have an SIAP, it doesn't meet
the requirements of the exception clause.

Actually, I just noticed a detail I never saw before. It says:

"... a standard instrument approach procedure to [...] the FIRST
AIRPORT OF INTENDED LANDING" (my emphasis).

So, it seems like I could file "HPN -D- BDR D/010 -D- BOS",
i.e. "White Plains, direct Bridgeport, ten minute delay (not sure if I
got the flight plan symbol right for that), direct Boston" and as long
as BDR doesn't doesn't require an alternate, I don't have to file one
for the BOS leg either, since BDR is my "first airport of intended
landing".

This seems rather stupid, but if you read the reg literally, that's
what it says.

gwengler wrote:
To my knowledge, in the US one must file an alternate IFR airport
regardless of the weather if the destination airport does not have an
IFR approach. Can someone please quote me the FAA regulation where
this is actually spelled out? Thanks!

Gerd


It's in the section on required information on a flight plan: 91.169(2)
says you need an alternate airport, unless there's a published approach
and the weather is good enough.

On 11 May 2005 12:02:49 -0400, (Roy Smith) wrote:

91.169(b). It's a little confusing, since it's worded as an
exception. If your destination does not have an SIAP, it doesn't meet
the requirements of the exception clause.


What's confusing about it?

It simply says that if there is no published IAP AND (min weather
requirements), that you must file an alternate.


You must meet both conditions (published approach AND weather mins)
in order to to be excluded from the requirement for an alternate.

On Wed, 11 May 2005 16:16:42 GMT, wrote:

On 11 May 2005 12:02:49 -0400, (Roy Smith) wrote:

91.169(b). It's a little confusing, since it's worded as an
exception. If your destination does not have an SIAP, it doesn't meet
the requirements of the exception clause.


What's confusing about it?

It simply says that if there is no published IAP AND (min weather
requirements), that you must file an alternate.


You must meet both conditions (published approach AND weather mins)
in order to to be excluded from the requirement for an alternate.


Bad wording in paragraph 2. AND should be OR.

Maybe it's confusling after all.

Why are you trying to get out of filing an alternate? Is there some
reason that this is difficult to do for you?

I would suggest that you always file an alternate and forget about
having to memorize when, where, why and how. Much easier and
eventually may save you some confusing during a time of quick decision
making.

Greg


Roy Smith wrote:

So, it seems like I could file "HPN -D- BDR D/010 -D- BOS",
i.e. "White Plains, direct Bridgeport, ten minute delay (not sure if
I
got the flight plan symbol right for that), direct Boston" and as
long
as BDR doesn't doesn't require an alternate, I don't have to file one
for the BOS leg either, since BDR is my "first airport of intended
landing".

"gregscheetah" wrote in
ups.com:

Why are you trying to get out of filing an alternate? Is there some
reason that this is difficult to do for you?

I would suggest that you always file an alternate and forget about
having to memorize when, where, why and how. Much easier and
eventually may save you some confusing during a time of quick decision
making.

Filing an alternate shouldn't have any effect on your decision making at
the destination. Alternate requirements are for fuel planning only. As
soon as you take off, the alternate you filed becomes immaterial. ATC
doesn't know what alternate you filed, or if you filed one. When you get
to your destination and miss, then you need to make a decision on where
to go. You should have been keeping up on the weather at your
destination, your alternate, and other possible diversions. The
alternate you filed may not be the best place to go, for both weather and
personal convenience. Once you miss and decide to go somewhere else,
you're free to go anywhere you have the fuel to get to, and ATC will ask
you your intentions when you miss, having no idea where you want to go.
You now have to decide. If you want to blindly go to your filed
alternate without even thinking any further, you can, but make sure you
check the current weather first. I often file an alternate with no
intention whatsoever of ever going there.

--
Regards,

Stan

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." B. Franklin

Pilots do too many stupid things already that get themselves killed.
Requiring an alternate is nothing more than a simple attempt to make pilots
do something that they should plan for anyway. Even when I file an
alternate, I always like to have plates for another "personal" alternate so
that I have one more choice if weather goes bad at my destination.
I don't see why this reg should bother anyone enough to even bring it up
for discussion.

MJC

"Stan Gosnell" wrote in message
...
"gregscheetah" wrote in
ups.com:

Why are you trying to get out of filing an alternate? Is there some
reason that this is difficult to do for you?

I would suggest that you always file an alternate and forget about
having to memorize when, where, why and how. Much easier and
eventually may save you some confusing during a time of quick decision
making.

Filing an alternate shouldn't have any effect on your decision making at
the destination. Alternate requirements are for fuel planning only. As
soon as you take off, the alternate you filed becomes immaterial. ATC
doesn't know what alternate you filed, or if you filed one. When you get
to your destination and miss, then you need to make a decision on where
to go. You should have been keeping up on the weather at your
destination, your alternate, and other possible diversions. The
alternate you filed may not be the best place to go, for both weather and
personal convenience. Once you miss and decide to go somewhere else,
you're free to go anywhere you have the fuel to get to, and ATC will ask
you your intentions when you miss, having no idea where you want to go.
You now have to decide. If you want to blindly go to your filed
alternate without even thinking any further, you can, but make sure you
check the current weather first. I often file an alternate with no
intention whatsoever of ever going there.

--
Regards,

Stan

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." B. Franklin

On Fri, 13 May 2005 08:47:48 -0500, "MJC" wrote:

I always like to have plates for another "personal" alternate so
that I have one more choice if weather goes bad at my destination.


You don't need plates to have another choice.

If need be, ask ATC to read the approach. I'm not suggesting a
cavalier attitude about having plates, but no one should ever choose
to accept a less desirable alternative because plates are not
available, for whatever reason. ATC has all the information necessary
to follow an approach procedure, and they will provide it to you if
required.