FAA Cautions Pilots Against Unauthorized Procedures

gotWXdagain said:
I thought you couldn’t clear a part 135 or 121 flight for an approach where visibility is below minimums?
Click to expand...

News to me. They may not be authorized to do an approach when vis is below min, but if they want it I'll clear them all day. That's why MAP's exist.
 
gotWXdagain said:
I thought you couldn’t clear a part 135 or 121 flight for an approach where visibility is below minimums?
Click to expand...

In fact, paragraph 4-8-1a11 states:

There are some systems, for example, Enhanced Flight Vision System (EFVS), which allow pilots to conduct Instrument Approach Procedures (IAP) when the reported weather is below minimums prescribed on the IAP to be flown.​

There is no way I could be expected to know that the aircraft doesn't have that equipment.
 
RDoug said:
In fact, paragraph 4-8-1a11 states:

There are some systems, for example, Enhanced Flight Vision System (EFVS), which allow pilots to conduct Instrument Approach Procedures (IAP) when the reported weather is below minimums prescribed on the IAP to be flown.​

There is no way I could be expected to know that the aircraft doesn't have that equipment.
Click to expand...

A combination of "don't ask, don't tell" and "no blood, no foul".
 
Cptnchia said:
Back in the day when ASAs E120s could only go down to 1800RVR, Delta would be flying CATIIs to 1600-1200 RVR in Atlanta. As we would be driving up to the final approach fix, RVR would suddenly be “reporting” 1800, then would be back down to 1600 for the following Delta.

Funny how that worked out. First 1600 RVR approach at SJI, the captain asked me what I thought of it. “Eh, looked like 1800 to me.”
Click to expand...
Arcata, every time.

"Say your RVR requirement, Buzzsaw 5455."
"RVR 1800, Buzzsaw 5455."
"Alright, Buzzsaw 5455, the Runway 32 RVR is 1800, cleared for the ILS..."
 
knot4u said:
Honest question, outside of 121, if an approach is in the data base is there anything that would alert the crew that they aren't authorized to use it? Is it something that's covered in 135 check ride training for each operator/aircraft? What about 91 guys with an FMS, how would they know?
Click to expand...
In theory, its supposed to be “if you’re approved, you’ll know”. Sort of “if you have to ask, the answer is no” deal. In operations I’ve worked at, the approved specials are listed in the ops spec and divided out by fleet type, plus both initial and recurring training on them.
 
Roger Roger said:
In theory, its supposed to be “if you’re approved, you’ll know”. Sort of “if you have to ask, the answer is no” deal. In operations I’ve worked at, the approved specials are listed in the ops spec and divided out by fleet type, plus both initial and recurring training on them.
Click to expand...
In the case of the above mentioned RNAV (RNP) procedures, they might be in the FMC database, but they'll be conspicuously absent from the EFB.
 
NovemberEcho said:
Actually see it a lot at MMU cause the RNAV 5 mins are pretty high and when the wind is too strong for ILS 23 a lot of guys will take it right to mins and go missed. Although somehow they always make it in the second try
Click to expand...

They had to see how bad it really was first.
 
Autothrust Blue said:
In the case of the above mentioned RNAV (RNP) procedures, they might be in the FMC database, but they'll be conspicuously absent from the EFB.
Click to expand...
There are a lot of folks out there flying without EFBs. Some of the lower end air ambulance service providers, running Lears or Citations, come to mind.
 
Another aspect to GPS approaches is some approaches require different spacing requirements. For example the RNAV to 28L in PDX when equipped to perform that approach to LNAV mins, you can't perform simultaneous approaches with 28R. At my last job I had to remind ATC of that when performing at approach.
 
T/O w/FSII said:
Huh?

I get all these awesome RNP charts on my jepp app that I can't use. Jepp (usually) doesn't provide special downloads per operator
Click to expand...

We get things removed from our subscription all the time. But the company has to know that it needs to be removed for that to happen. It isn’t automatic.
 
T/O w/FSII said:
Huh?

I get all these awesome RNP charts on my jepp app that I can't use. Jepp (usually) doesn't provide special downloads per operator
Click to expand...

The InFO was directed towards people flying non-part 97 instrument approaches or Special IAPs (vs Standard IAPs promulgated under Part 97). Big difference between that and an RNP AR approach, which could be standard or special, but still requires special training and authorization.

A Special is authorized by OpSpec or LoA C081 for airplanes. There’s a seperate authorization for helicopters, H122, I believe. Specials can be developed and maintained privately or publicly. Some start private and become public.

If you aren’t authorized for a Special approach, you’re not supposed to have the chart. They’re not published with the rest of the normal approaches out there. You generally get them from Jeppesen or other vendors after showing them the proper paperwork. The problem has been that it’s easier for those charts to get out now, so unauthorized users are flying he approaches. Jeppesen does do special downloads by operator and that operator pays for it. A 737 pilot at American probably has a different download from a 737 pilot at United or even different download from an MD 80 pilot at American.

This is problematic for publicly developed approaches that have special performance and/or training requirements (the ASE approach) because of the safety issues involved. It also pisses off the people who have paid to have them developed privately because they’re not cheap to build and someone is getting something for nothing.

Bottom line, when it comes to Specials or RNP AR or any other AR approach, if you’re not authorized, don’t fly it. You may not know why it’s a special and could end up getting hurt. RNP AR has a long approval process due to the tolerances involved and if you don’t know what you’re doing, especially when things start to go wrong, you could get hurt.
 
ricecakecm said:
A 737 pilot at American probably has a different download from an MD 80 pilot at American.
.
Click to expand...
You’d think that, but no. At least at Delta. All EFBs have the same info as far as Jepps. The only differentiation is in the loaded aircraft specific and performance manuals. I have access to all loaded RNAV(GPS) and (RNP) approaches, yet am not authorized to fly them.
 
ricecakecm said:
It also pisses off the people who have paid to have them developed privately because they’re not cheap...
Click to expand...

I can't imagine this being covered by patent or copyright law.

Submit a same-as-dat procedure and I don't think the FAA cares that it's a copy and paste effort.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top