FAA Cautions Pilots Against Unauthorized Procedures

[Lawman]

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..."

Unfortunately that sounds like pretty much every military weather forecaster. I don’t even need to call, just know if it’s not a blizzard or a thunderstorm the field is gonna be forecasting whatever my minimal VFR is.

 

[Deleted member 27505]

Nah.

Pilots should know their airborne equipment and limitations.

or, if you're in a more serious mood...

Well it's like this, I've probably shot the special approaches into DUT 100 times and the LDA Z into JNU at least twice as many times. There are no special equipment requirements for either just knowledge of the local terrain. For instance for the one into Dutch you have to be able to identify Amaknak island.

I'll have to look this up. Please tell me this is "identify after getting visual". I mean, the whole point of instrument approaches is you can't identify stuff visually. Or am I missing something?

 

[ShortField]

I'll have to look this up. Please tell me this is "identify after getting visual". I mean, the whole point of instrument approaches is you can't identify stuff visually. Or am I missing something?

“Fly last three miles visually”. Or some such nonsense. You can’t see the runway because it’s Tucked in behind Ballyhoo, so seeing the island that it’s mounted on will suffice. But what happens when you’re going around the back door at 700’ and suddenly can’t see anything? Better have that VFR sectional memorized.

 

[ricecakecm]

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.

Maybe I’m showing my age and thinking of the old paper Jepp days. Or maybe I’m just imagining it altogether.

 

[Deleted member 27505]

“Fly last three miles visually”. Or some such nonsense. You can’t see the runway because it’s Tucked in behind Ballyhoo, so seeing the island that it’s mounted on will suffice. But what happens when you’re going around the back door at 700’ and suddenly can’t see anything? Better have that VFR sectional memorized.

Yeah, that sounds about right. Maybe it's just me but a bunch of the "fly visual" (last) segment approaches really make me go "hmm". The missed point is typically before or at the initiation point of the the "fly visual" segment. So your point is spot on, except... I don't think a VFR chart is going to do Richard when you find yourself boxed in, several hundred feet AGL, several thousand feet from a runway.

 

[gotWXdagain]

Yeah, that sounds about right. Maybe it's just me but a bunch of the "fly visual" (last) segment approaches really make me go "hmm". The missed point is typically before or at the initiation point of the the "fly visual" segment. So your point is spot on, except... I don't think a VFR chart is going to do Richard when you find yourself boxed in, several hundred feet AGL, several thousand feet from a runway.

You hope your cockpit has a box that knows enough magic tricks to show you a terrain readout, meanwhile shoving all the power levers you have into the firewall and sucking the yoke through your belly button?

 

[Deleted member 27505]

You hope your cockpit has a box that knows enough magic tricks to show you a terrain readout, meanwhile shoving all the power levers you have into the firewall and sucking the yoke through your belly button?

Garmin is a helluva box. And Crack is a helluva drug.

 

[Cptnchia]

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

It’s considered proprietary information. When Delta first started flying into JNU, they wanted to use Alaska’s RNAV approach. AS refused to share it, so DL built and certified their own approach. Took a few months and $$$ too.

 

[z987k]

Yeah, that sounds about right. Maybe it's just me but a bunch of the "fly visual" (last) segment approaches really make me go "hmm". The missed point is typically before or at the initiation point of the the "fly visual" segment. So your point is spot on, except... I don't think a VFR chart is going to do Richard when you find yourself boxed in, several hundred feet AGL, several thousand feet from a runway.

If you know exactly where you are, and are doing these approaches, you'll have your own escape maneuver. If you read the plates they say that terrain separation isn't assured after the MAP, but that is to the terps standards. In such a situation just not hitting the rocks is sufficient. You don't need to clear them be 500 or 1000ft.

 

[Deleted member 27505]

It’s considered proprietary information. When Delta first started flying into JNU, they wanted to use Alaska’s RNAV approach. AS refused to share it, so DL built and certified their own approach. Took a few months and $$$ too.

Designing a path to an airport that maintains separation and prevents one from hitting stuff? What fancy equipment did they have to purchase? A few maps and a pencil????

 

[Deleted member 27505]

If you know exactly where you are, and are doing these approaches, you'll have your own escape maneuver. If you read the plates they say that terrain separation isn't assured after the MAP, but that is to the terps standards. In such a situation just not hitting the rocks is sufficient. You don't need to clear them be 500 or 1000ft.

I always know exactly where I am when I ascend back into IMC. ... I'm psychic like that!

 

[Cptnchia]

Designing a path to an airport that maintains separation and prevents one from hitting stuff? What fancy equipment did they have to purchase? A few maps and a pencil????

You’ve obviously never dealt with the FAA when it comes to building an approach or an OpSpecs manual. It’s all about dealing with the lawyers to get everything signed off.

 

[Deleted member 27505]

You’ve obviously never dealt with the FAA when it comes to building an approach or an OpSpecs manual. It’s all about dealing with the lawyers to get everything signed off.

Oh, no worries, boyo. I get it. My point really is that the FAA would do their special thang either way ... whether the approved approach was commandeered, leased, or purchased from AK or whether Delta made up their own.

 

[Pilot Fighter]

It’s considered proprietary information. When Delta first started flying into JNU, they wanted to use Alaska’s RNAV approach. AS refused to share it, so DL built and certified their own approach. Took a few months and $$$ too.

Considered proprietary by whom?

There might be de facto exclusivity because approval only has been granted to one applicant.

I'm not sure if the FAA can even deny an FOIA request.

Airline A can ask Airline B to share a procedure by agreement, avoiding the application and approval process.

That said, the FAA will consider each application on its merits. I do not believe the FAA can reject a proposed procedure because it duplicates that granted to another applicant.

 

[Roger Roger]

Yeah, that sounds about right. Maybe it's just me but a bunch of the "fly visual" (last) segment approaches really make me go "hmm". The missed point is typically before or at the initiation point of the the "fly visual" segment. So your point is spot on, except... I don't think a VFR chart is going to do Richard when you find yourself boxed in, several hundred feet AGL, several thousand feet from a runway.

I don’t know PADU, but the places I go with special approaches ending in “fly visual x.x miles to runway xx” all have pretty obvious “outs” if something does go pear-shaped inside the MAP. Know your escape route and keep the flight path vector above the synthetic vision terrain and all will be good.

 

[ShortField]

Considered proprietary by whom?.

The airline that actually developed them. Alaska went out and made a bunch of RNP approaches to make their route structure in Southeast Alaska work. Cost them a ton of money to do it.

 

[adk]

The airline that actually developed them. Alaska went out and made a bunch of RNP approaches to make their route structure in Southeast Alaska work. Cost them a ton of money to do it.

And instead of licensing those approaches to Delta for a hefty fee they made Delta go create their own for an even heftier fee, costing both airlines more than they needed to spend?

 

[alaskadrifter]

I don’t know PADU, but the places I go with special approaches ending in “fly visual x.x miles to runway xx” all have pretty obvious “outs” if something does go pear-shaped inside the MAP. Know your escape route and keep the flight path vector above the synthetic vision terrain and all will be good.

Synthetic vision must be nice. I haven’t been into DUT when the fecal matter hits the bed after the MAP but have talked to some CAs who have. Always have a plan b. I imagine SE Ak flying is similar.

 

[Roger Roger]

And instead of licensing those approaches to Delta for a hefty fee they made Delta go create their own for an even heftier fee, costing both airlines more than they needed to spend?

This is fun, but we better stop before seggle-hoff shows up and displays both his ignorance and his unrequited crush on Delta.

 

[Pilot Fighter]

The airline that actually developed them. Alaska went out and made a bunch of RNP approaches to make their route structure in Southeast Alaska work. Cost them a ton of money to do it.

I understand. I am challenging the use of the word "proprietary", which suggests ownership.

They might be the only carrier authorized to use those procedures but they don't own them and they aren't guaranteed exclusivity by the FAA.

I think the exclusivity comes from the cost of pursuing an approval and a marked up chart is probably a minor part of the application process.